# Rubber versus Leather soles...



## Royal_Elegance (May 8, 2006)

I was talking to a high-end shoe shop owner about my preference on leather soles and he provided some interesting information:

1) Rubber soles can actually cost more than leather soles. He didn't specify why but I'm guessing he was referring to the cost of the raw rubber, the molds, the finishing, the handling, etc.
2) Rubber soles have a much better traction.
3) Rubber soles are waterproof. Comparatively, leather is not.
4) Rubber soles are more discreet - they don't make this solid impact sound when you walk.
5) Rubber soles are more comfortable for walking because they absorb the footstrike impacts better. 

This guy got me thinking. For all practical purposes, rubber soles seem to be the clear winner. Are there any reasons/benefits for choosing leather over rubber after all?


----------



## Henrik RS (Jan 10, 2006)

Leather is much more comfortable indoors. It is also more comfortable outdoors in the summer. Unlike rubber, leather breathes.

Rubber has no character at all. It may be practical and economical, but that's all.

As for the price, a good full leather shoe must be more expensive than one with a rubber sole. A fine leather heel is a work of art and so is a channelled sole. A rubber sole is made in a form (most likely by a machine). 

Personally, I also like the sound of leather sole and heel when walking indoors. But that's I.


/Henrik


----------



## Holdfast (Oct 30, 2005)

Leather looks nicer and makes a nice clicking sound when you walk. That's enough for me to choose it over rubber.


----------



## Will (Jun 15, 2004)

In my personal opinion, the only advantage of rubber is improved traction in the wet. You need a pair for rainy days on stone streets in Italy. 

Besides its unattractiveness, rubber retains heat. Leather soles keep your feet cooler.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Rubber does not require the death of an animal.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

As I remarked when still working as a substance abuse counselor and brand new to this forum, I often had to chase people. Leather soles are no good for that kind of work.

But for the aesthetics of the shoe, the foot, the wearer, the whole darn universe, you can't go clumping around in rubber soles.

Rubber soles are like automatic transmissions, microwave ovens, and cable television: superficially superior, but ultimately it is revealed that such "conveniences:" or "improvements" really serve only to make us sneaky, fat and addled.

23 Skiddoo.


----------



## Brian13 (Aug 9, 2006)

I like rubber soled shoes for bad weather, but for regular times, a good leather soled shoe is more elegant, beautiful, striking and more authoritative.
Lot of high end dress shoes emphasis and trump card is their custom leather sole: lot of them are works of art that just I cannot make myself walk on concrete with them on.

rubber will crack first before a decent quality leather sole will do.
the rubber does not have any fibers that keep the material intact upon stress like leather does at the molecular level.

for those who have bone problems and problems from feet jarring and impacting the floor, rubber sole may be a better solution but not always.


----------



## Brian13 (Aug 9, 2006)

also another thing,
i dont consider a rubber soled shoe no matter how good it looks, a "real " shoe. something about the leather sole makes it a true dress shoe.

just like a watch, i dont deem quartz watches as "real " watches anymore.
yes, they may be more practical, but the aesthetics, the handwork, the engineering, the complications , etc of a mechanical movement watch just allures to me more, i like them over quartz watches.


----------



## Royal_Elegance (May 8, 2006)

I most certainly agree a leather sole looks much better, although I do have a few pairs of rubber soled shoes that's hard for a third person to tell they are rubber. I think it depends on the shape/thickness/color/style of the sole. 

This guy in the shoe business also questioned the belief that leather soles keep the foot cooler. He said that there are so many layers of leather, insole material and occasional glue / paint / conditioners or other fillers in the sole that makes it really hard for the sole to "breath" or dissipate the heat any better. In fact, it is much more critical to have the upper part of the shoe made of good quality leather, if breathability is the customer's concern. Finally, let's not forget the effect of the sock on how well the foot is breathing. Also, rubber soles can be perforated to allow for a better air circulation. 

Regardless of all the objective benefits of rubber soles, I still prefer leather only because I find it more elegant. This is a case where the heart wins over the brain...


----------



## jml90 (Dec 7, 2005)

Holdfast said:


> Leather looks nicer and makes a nice clicking sound when you walk. That's enough for me to choose it over rubber.


Agreed. I love the clicking.


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

TPapakostas said:


> I was talking to a high-end shoe shop owner about my preference on leather soles and he provided some interesting information:
> 
> 1) Rubber soles can actually cost more than leather soles. He didn't specify why but I'm guessing he was referring to the cost of the raw rubber, the molds, the finishing, the handling, etc.
> 2) Rubber soles have a much better traction.
> ...


All true (well, I don't know about #1 either, so I can't comment on that one). Still, for aesthetics and refinement, nice leather is hard to beat. Plus, when you open a box of new shoes or get your newly resoled footwear back, that smell of vegetable-tanned leather can be _positively intoxicating_.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

Other than the stuff already mentioned, I think leather soles also do a better job of molding to your feet and the way you walk so that they are eventually more comfortable than rubber soles.


----------



## Bertie Wooster (Feb 11, 2006)

Holdfast said:


> Leather looks nicer and makes a nice clicking sound when you walk. That's enough for me to choose it over rubber.





jml90 said:


> Agreed. I love the clicking.


I make 3 ! I especially like the clicking sound made by the Blakey's I get fitted to most of my leather soles. Very authoritative ! Oh my, the shrinks will have a field day with that one .....:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Notik (Jul 3, 2005)

Rubber is heavier per unit volume than leather. Also, as noted above, it doesn't breathe. For vacations where you are doing lots of walking outdoors, rubber soles have their virtues -- traction and shock absorption. Otherwise, they are less comfortable to wear in a typical setting and look worse and certainly less formal. A good pair of leather shoes can be very comfortable, providing excellent support and, also as noted above, molding to the foot. Ultimately, of course, to each his own...


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

I much prefer the traction rubber provides on hospital corridors and smooth floors in general. And quieter is often better. This is a case of form coming in second to function. I just hate busting my rear end on slick spots. I try to wear my leather soles where I know there will be dry floors and carpeting.
My feet hurt all the time (bunions, metal plates, screws) even when unshod and I don't notice much difference with leather.


----------



## Will (Jun 15, 2004)

cdavant said:


> I much prefer the traction rubber provides on hospital corridors and smooth floors in general. And quieter is often better. This is a case of form coming in second to function. I just hate busting my rear end on slick spots. I try to wear my leather soles where I know there will be dry floors and carpeting.
> My feet hurt all the time (bunions, metal plates, screws) even when unshod and I don't notice much difference with leather.


On duty in a hospital you're wearing specialized work clothing and it should be the most effective you can find. Traction is more important than style when people's lives are at stake.

Heck, you could probably wear a stethoscope instead of a necktie and not be criticised by AAAC members until you got out to the sidewalk.


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

Will said:


> On duty in a hospital you're wearing specialized work clothing and it should be the most effective you can find. Traction is more important than style when people's lives are at stake.
> 
> I'm comfortable with lives in my hands--It's my butt I worry about any time I'm wearing leather soles, even away from work.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

These threads come up fairly often. In fact, I believe my debut thread on the Andy Forum was devoted to this very topic. 

My "good shoe" wardrobe is almost equally divided between rubber- and leather-soled shoes, with leather having a slight edge. All my "not-so-good" shoes are rubber soled. I am inclined to believe a lot of the differences are exaggerated.

The one hands-down advantage either possesses is rubber's traction on wet surfaces. I remember being somewhere is some almost new leather-soled shoes and being caught in surprise rainstorm. Traversing some slick pavement in these shoes was positively hazardous. 

On the other hand, here is a story forum member pmccloskey told me. His brother Kevin was recently promoted to sergeant in the LA Horbor Police and started to wear a suit on duty. At Patrick's suggestion, he bought a pair of leather soled A-Es. His first day in plainclothes, wearing the new leather soled A-Es, he had to run down and overpower a fleeing suspect and later had to climb a rope ladder onto a ship. The A-Es did just fine and came through unscathed.

For normal city wear, I find negligible difference in comfort between a leather soled and a rubber-soled shoe. On a 10-mile hike, I'd choose rubber, of course.

I definitely find leather-soled shoes cooler, sometimes to the point where it is a drawback in cold weather (even here in Southern California).

Elegance: This is sort of a subjective matter. Knowing what I now know, I would not wear rubber-soled shoes with a suit except in foul weather. As you go down the formality continuum, I think rubber-soled shoes become more appropriate. Today I am wearing my "California tuxedo" (my old blue blazer and khakis) and my A-E rubber-soled merlot Ashtons. I don't think I am guilty of a sartorial incongruity, notwithstanding Manton's dictum in his recent book that it is never appropriate to wear a tie with rubber-soled shoes (except for white bucks). As a general matter, I prefer to wear leather-soled shoes with a tie, rubber-soled tie-less. I find many leather-soled lace-ups (and I mean bluchers, not bals, here) can start to look a little incongruous as the apparel becomes more casual. For all the talk about about the superior elegance of leather soles, most people are not going to be in a position to notice your soles. I was talking clothes with a female co-worker who has been on the staff of both Harper's Bazaar and GQ. I was wearing one of my dressier rubber-soled A-Es (Berglands, I think) and apologizing for my lack of elegance in wearing rubber soles. She replied that she couldn't even tell that they were rubber while I was standing on them and wouldn't have noticed in any event had I not pointed out the fact to her.

Set me down in the camp that likes the noise of leather soles.


----------



## Georgia Boy (Feb 15, 2006)

I was so glad to see this particular thread. I agree with all the aesthetic arguments in favor of leather. However, realistically, some of us may have to compromise in certain sartorial areas due to tactical situations. I can certainly be sporting the sharpest gray wool suit, but I need the rubber soles for the practical reasons mentioned, especially the quietness, comfort, and traction.


----------



## jml90 (Dec 7, 2005)

Georgia Boy said:


> I was so glad to see this particular thread. I agree with all the aesthetic arguments in favor of leather. However, realistically, some of us may have to compromise in certain sartorial areas due to tactical situations. I can certainly be sporting the sharpest gray wool suit, but I need the rubber soles for the practical reasons mentioned, especially the quietness, comfort, and traction.


Are you an assassin?


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

JLibourel said:


> These threads come up fairly often. In fact, I believe my debut thread on the Andy Forum was devoted to this very topic.
> 
> My "good shoe" wardrobe is almost equally divided between rubber- and leather-soled shoes, with leather having a slight edge. All my "not-so-good" shoes are rubber soled. I am inclined to believe a lot of the differences are exaggerated.
> 
> ...


All excellent observations, Jan. I share your experience with temperature. Just late last week, I had a late-night meeting with a client for whom I'm doing some commercials (side gig). It was pretty cool outside, but not bitterly cold. We would up standing on the sidewalk talking for about twenty minutes, and the leather soles of my AE Cambridges -- obviously damp from the day's perspiration -- became uncomfortably cold.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

A high compliment coming from someone as "shoe-phisticated" as yourself, Teach!


----------



## darck (Sep 1, 2005)

Leather soles are impossible on snow. Where I live (Sweden) we have snow at least four months of the year. I use rubber overshoes (galoshes) during the winter, but I've recently had my cobbler put on thin rubber Topy's on a pair of leather soled shoes. So far, I'm very pleased with the result but then I haven't tried it in winter weather yet. From the side it is impossible to tell that there is a thin layer of rubber on the soles. The shoes got slightly heavier and I think the feet get a little bit warmer with them on, but other than that I can't really feel the difference. I'm anxious to see how well they work on snow.


----------



## NH102.22 (Oct 25, 2012)

Royal_Elegance said:


> This guy in the shoe business also questioned the belief that leather soles keep the foot cooler. *He said that there are so many layers of leather, insole material and occasional glue / paint / conditioners or other fillers in the sole that makes it really hard for the sole to "breath" or dissipate the heat any better. In fact, it is much more critical to have the upper part of the shoe made of good quality leather, if breathability is the customer's concern. Finally, let's not forget the effect of the sock on how well the foot is breathing.* Also, rubber soles can be perforated to allow for a better air circulation.


There are many threads on this subject, but these factors don't seem to get a mention very often, and while they may not explain everything, I think they are significant.

When wearing a thin, single leather sole, I am far more conscious of the temperature of the ground on which I am walking. On a hot day, the heat of a sun-baked pavement comes straight through the sole and into my foot. If the ground is cold, I can feel that, too, and yes, my feet stay cooler. That seems to me more a matter of thermal conductivity than "breathing" in the true sense, with rubber being more of an insulator. To describe this action as "breathing", it suggests the wicking away of moisture, which while it may occur to some extent (and I'd say a very limited extent) also sounds like something that would degrade the various components (leather, cork, glue etc) through which the moisture passes / with which it comes into contact.

Good quality welted shoes with a rubber sole still have a leather insole, just like a leather-soled shoe. Every part of the shoe with which the foot comes into direct contact and into which perspiration can be absorbed etc is the same as a leather-soled shoe. Beneath that leather insole is glue, cork filler, etc., only the bottom layer is different. Am I right? Also, if sweat can degrade the internal components of a leather-soled shoe, presumably it would have a similar effect on one with a Dainite rubber sole, although not the sole itself.

When it comes to Topys, I have them on several shoes and they don't seem to make any difference to the temperature or sweatiness of my feet compared to plain leather soles, so if the leather soles are wicking away moist, sweaty air to keep my feet cool, well, hmmmmmm... I don't know about that. I don't think it's total BS due to the apparent difference in thermal conductivity, but it definitely sounds exaggerated, and many people who compare leather to rubber aren't comparing the same type of shoe.

Today, I walked over a mile in Hanover L.B. Sheppard brogue Derby shoes in Horween crup leather with leather sole. The ambient temperature was about 87 degrees F, the ground was warm and my feet got pretty hot, although not particularly uncomfortable. The Horween crup is almost certainly hotter than calfskin, and I'd say the upper has more to do with foot temperature than the sole, which in this case was leather anyway.



Royal_Elegance said:


> Regardless of all the objective benefits of rubber soles, I still prefer leather only because I find it more elegant. This is a case where the heart wins over the brain...


With a few exceptions, I am inclined to feel that "heart over brain" is the key driving factor.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

There is a similar thread here: https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?149830-Dress-shoes-are-too-SLIPPERY!!! discussing similar issues.


----------



## David J. Cooper (Apr 26, 2010)

I love walking. In Vancouver it has to be rubber/Vibram. I have AE Wilberts, Bentons, Yumas, and Sedonas as well as various boat shoes and a pair of Red Wing Heritage boots. All with rubber soles. I wish AE made golf shoes with rubber soles.


----------



## TsAr (Mar 21, 2013)

Issue has been discussed several times....for me its a personal choice....Yes rubber has an advantage in snowing or wet conditions otherwise it leather for me...


----------



## ilikeyourstyle (Apr 24, 2007)

The only thing about rubber soles that annoys me is that they are typically too thick. The thinner rubber soles keep a shoe as sleek as a leather soled shoe, and they provide better performance in inclement weather.

Yes, you can buy leather shoes and put a thin layer of rubber on the bottom, but that requires more money, doesn't seal out the water, and doesn't really solve the real issue: manufacturers make their rubber soles too clunky.


----------



## Fatman (May 7, 2013)

ilikeyourstyle said:


> The only thing about rubber soles that annoys me is that they are typically too thick. The thinner rubber soles keep a shoe as sleek as a leather soled shoe, and they provide better performance in inclement weather.
> 
> Yes, you can buy leather shoes and put a thin layer of rubber on the bottom, but that requires more money, doesn't seal out the water, and doesn't really solve the real issue: manufacturers make their rubber soles too clunky.


I have both.

I have the Grafton and Diplomat in Danite sole and others in leather sole. On rainy days, I go to the Dainite, and on sunny days, I go to the leather soled shoes. I hope to slow down any impact of wet/salty roads and sidewalks on the leather soled shoes by using Lexol neatsfoot on the soles, and wiping them down with a paper towel when I arrive in the office and at home. At home, I brush them gently, put them into a cedar shoe tree, and back into the box. I have come to using the boxes after seeing what 6 months of dust gathered on the boxes while in the closet. We heat by wood, so there is more dust particles in the air, and I want (and enjoy taking care) the shoes to be in the best condition.

I have enough rotation that I don't think I will need re-soling for many years.


----------



## NH102.22 (Oct 25, 2012)

TsAr said:


> Issue has been discussed several times....


It sure has, but a lot of the discussion is pretty shallow, if you know what I mean, e.g. anecdotes and aesthetics, and rubber always cops a beating from conservatives, and from several people I know whose outdoor walking consists of going from their front door to their car, then from the carpark to their carpeted office every day. The reason I revived this thread is because it seems to present a better argument in defence of rubber than most, apparently with the opinion of a cobbler to add to the mix.

Leather versus rubber is not an issue that will go away, especially when the vast majority of people only wear rubber or synthetic soles and couldn't give a damn about the sartorial superiority of leather.



TsAr said:


> for me its a personal choice....


I'd say that's true for almost everyone.

Yesterday, I walked over 5 miles in Allen Edmonds Jeffersons with a plain leather sole (which was very slippery for a long time), but I didn't slip or need a knee replacement afterwards, and yes they sounded great, although I wouldn't do it every day. In the past I've spent whole days trudging about the rough gravel streets of Karachi slums in English oak bark-tanned single leather soles, which survived, but were left looking somewhat worse for wear! :tongue2: Despite the majority of my shoes having leather soles, I am still all for a good quality, thin rubber sole like Dainite, for virtually all ordinary occasions. I think quality is the key, and most rubber soled shoes out there are poor quality cemented products made by impoverished wage slaves, but the small minority that are good quality are worthy of serious consideration and/or acceptance.


----------



## TsAr (Mar 21, 2013)

NH102.22 said:


> It sure has, but a lot of the discussion is pretty shallow, if you know what I mean, e.g. anecdotes and aesthetics, and rubber always cops a beating from conservatives, and people I know, whose outdoor walking consists of going from their front door to their car, then from the carpark to their carpeted office every day. The reason I revived this one is because it seems to present a better argument in defence of rubber than most, apparently with the opinion of a cobbler to add to the mix.
> 
> Leather versus rubber is not an issue that will go away, especially when the vast majority of people only wear rubber or synthetic soles and couldn't give a damn about the sartorial superiority of leather.
> 
> ...


Karachi slums hmm.... so are you still living in karachi or moved out....Its not easy getting english oak bark tanned shoes in this part of world:frown:...I agree that one should have rubber soles along with leather sole shoes....


----------



## NH102.22 (Oct 25, 2012)

TsAr said:


> Karachi slums hmm.... so are you still living in karachi or moved out....Its not easy getting english oak bark tanned shoes in this part of world:frown:...I agree that one should have rubber soles along with leather sole shoes....


Hehe No, I was only visiting and took the boots with me. They really stood out against the chappals and not necessarily in a good way. Next time I think the Barker soles can stay at home, and I'll take some nineteenth century-style Goodyear-welted shoes with nineteenth century-style Dainite rubber soles... and pick up some chappals from the local "cordwainer".


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

While i prefer the look, click and elegance of leather soles, there is a another reason towear them that trumps the dangers of slips, falls and cold. My wife goes absolutely bonkers when I walk throught he house with rubber soles. It leaves black scuff marks on the wood and stone floors. i am required to go barefoot as if in a Japanese house or face the wrath of the cleaning godess.


----------



## TsAr (Mar 21, 2013)

NH102.22 said:


> Hehe No, I was only visiting and took the boots with me. They really stood out against the chappals and not necessarily in a good way. Next time I think the Barker soles can stay at home, and I'll take some nineteenth century-style Goodyear-welted shoes with nineteenth century-style Dainite rubber soles... and pick up some chappals from the local "cordwainer".


Well if u happen to come to karachi, do come to lahore and give me a buzz....


----------



## NH102.22 (Oct 25, 2012)

TsAr said:


> Well if u happen to come to karachi, do come to lahore and give me a buzz....


Done deal 



nh102.22 - 11 Oct 13 said:


> Yesterday, I walked over 5 miles in Allen Edmonds Jeffersons with a plain leather sole (which was very slippery for a long time), but I didn't slip or need a knee replacement afterwards, and yes they sounded great, although I wouldn't do it every day.


And here they are:

*Allen Edmonds Jefferson*
The soles are starting to look trashy, but not as well worn as those on the Hanover L.B. Sheppards I wore three days ago.

Just did the same 5.5 mile walk, but this time in Carmina 80092 Balmoral boots with a Dainite single rubber sole. Hazards encountered _en route_ included large puddles of soapy water from people washing their cars, construction sites with broken concrete and thousands of juicy berries with large seeds squashed all over the footpath that had to be walked on. Dainite is very hard rubber, but there is a difference. I can't "feel" my joints like I can after doing it in leather soles. Could definitely do this again tomorrow.


----------



## TsAr (Mar 21, 2013)

NH102.22 said:


> Done deal
> 
> Just did the same 5.5 mile walk, but this time in Carmina 80092 Balmoral boots with a Dainite single rubber sole. Hazards encountered en route included large puddles of soapy water from people washing their cars, construction sites with broken concrete and thousands of juicy berries with large seeds squashed all over the footpath that had to be walked on. Dainite is very hard rubber, but there is a difference. I can't "feel" my joints like I can after doing it in leather soles. Could definitely do this again tomorrow.


Walking from karachi slums to construction sites , what do you do man? 5.5 mile is to much man...


----------



## NH102.22 (Oct 25, 2012)

TsAr said:


> Walking from karachi slums to construction sites , what do you do man? 5.5 mile is to much man...


The things a man has to do when he finds himself without his car... He moves his arse and loses weight, that's what!
















*Carmina 80092 boots* after the 5.5 mile walk, showing the wrinkled burgundy Horween and low profile of the Dainite single rubber sole. Just because it's rubber, doesn't mean it's big, chunky and ugly. It's hard to tell the difference between this and the single leather soles on my other pairs.


----------



## NH102.22 (Oct 25, 2012)

Dainite single rubber sole with traces of squashed berry.



nh102.22 - 9 Oct 13 said:


> Today, I walked over a mile in Hanover L.B. Sheppard brogue Derby shoes in Horween crup leather with leather sole. The ambient temperature was about 87 degrees F, the ground was warm and my feet got pretty hot, although not particularly uncomfortable. The Horween crup is almost certainly hotter than calfskin, and I'd say the upper has more to do with foot temperature than the sole, which in this case was leather anyway.


And here they are:








*Hanover L.B. Sheppard Longwing Derby in Horween "shell Cordovan"
*The well worn soles and Neolite rubber heels still have a bit of life left in them; maybe it's time to get a Topy, but it may not be worth it. The uppers could probably do with some TLC, but I couldn't be bothered. It feels like the cork footbed is slowly rotting away.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Those are some sweet boots, dude. I have them in suede and love them much.


----------



## TsAr (Mar 21, 2013)

Nice shoes you have *NH102.22*


----------



## NH102.22 (Oct 25, 2012)

TsAr said:


> Nice shoes you have *NH102.22*





nh102.22 - 8 Oct 13 said:


> Five hours ago I walked 3 miles in my Alden 974s (double leather soles, Topy) and I'm still wearing them. My feet and legs feel pretty good.


*Alden 974 Horween no. 8 / purple

*









Bloody nice shoes, actually.

*Topy* rubber - the compromise for those who can't bear the thought of having full rubber soles.

The Topys are holding up well. As a bonus, they cover the shoddy work Alden made of the sole, something with which I wasn't particularly impressed given the ~$600 price tag. Also, there was a gap between two layers of the sole when I got them out of the box, no doubt allowing ingress of moisture etc.

Soooooooo.... yeah.... I do a fair bit of walking in my leather-soled shoes.... but the winner for 'long distance' walking is Dainite.


----------



## godan (Feb 10, 2010)

As per NH102.22, "Just because it's rubber, doesn't mean it's big, chunky and ugly." For those who approach this issue with their heads, rather than their hearts, I think this is the essential point.


----------



## NH102.22 (Oct 25, 2012)

Here's another twist on the matter of rubber versus leather - the *York combination sole*.

Today I gave these Carmina 80092 Skoaktiebolaget specials a 5.5 mile trip. The York combination rubber/leather sole is somewhat like having extra thick and grippy Topys but the heel is also rubber. It appears to be slightly thicker than the Dainite single rubber sole, and ever so slightly less comfortable for a longer walk. It is my view (so far) that the York combination and Dainite rubber sole are almost interchangeable - almost, because part of the York is still leather and therefore probably somewhat less suitable for wet conditions etc. Being calf and suede as opposed to Horween crup, and with speed hooks, the overall experience is somewhat different. The speed hooks and suede seem to make it much easier to tighten the laces for extra ankle support if necessary, and perhaps also to overtighten the boots. Wearing warm socks, I didn't really notice any difference in temperature between the calf hide and horse arse, although the latter is generally considered warmer.


The Carmina 80092 black/black Skoaktiebolaget special boots immediately after today's 5.5 mile walk.


Side view showing the slightly thicker York sole profile.


The York combination sole, also with traces of squashed berry.


----------



## Serenus (Jun 19, 2009)

I used to wear almost exclusively leather, but that was back when I lived in the high desert...in central New York it's useful to have a few pairs of rubber soled shoes on account of the climate. Fortunately AE has a number of attractive options.


----------

