Year Of The Shoe (for me)

[AimlessWanderer]

The last group of shoes, are probably the ones I wear the most often. Comfortable ones around the house. Stopping over somewhere for a few days? Travel in the mile clockers, and switch to these when I get there. As such, you could say it's the area where I could rationalise spending the most money, as I can really milk the most value from them.

In reality though, it's the area where I can dial my miserly behaviour up to Jedi level

They'll never let me down miles from home, because I'll not stray far in them. Even if I am miles from home, I'm not far from a different pair of shoes. They don't need to be waterproof. I might only be nipping out for a smoke, taking the rubbish out, or nipping to the end of the street for a pint of milk. Comfortable shoes, lazy shoes, relaxing shoes. Shoes I don't mind spilling stuff on in the kitchen, or when cleaning. Shoes I can fall asleep in on the bad health days, and continue through the next day with them still on. Sacrificial shoes.

Starting out this year, I had the old pair of Nike trainers I wore to destruction, plus a pair of uber cheapy lace up plimsols.

You don't get much more comfortable and sacrificial than those

A couple of the shoes are capable of straying a little further in. Though still not too far. Maybe the pharmacy or post office, about a half mile round trip. I can do that fairly comfortably in my sandals or leather slip-ons, depending on the weather.

I really ought to have taken another picture of those slip-ons. That was taken after a coat of neutral wax, that didn't quite "take". I worked it in further with some conditioner afterwards, and they look a lot better now. They're the primary shoe I take if stopping anywhere that's non-smoking, as I can easily kick them on and off, to nip outside for a quick nicotine fix.

My only other casual shoe at the start of the year, was a pair of black and brown leather deck shoes that had never been worn. I hadn't worn them, purely because I was trying to kill off the Nike trainers.

They've started seeing use now though. Great shoes, which are very versatile in respect of weather, and what they can be worn with. A nice fall back if the feet aren't up to a day in brogues for any reason. Actually, the slip-ons have served that purpose a few times too.

None of these were spendy. I think they were all under £25, and I have no doubts they'll last until I eventually wear the soles right out.

I got even cheaper ones this year though.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

The country boots are my favorite (of the boots).

Thanks again

 

[AimlessWanderer]

I think the rest of this year's acquisitions cost me under £40 total for all three pairs They look cheap. They are cheap. Yet they're perfect for the task, and I'm very sure I'll get full value from them.

Cupsole trainers and deck shoes have long been my "default setting" for comfortable shoes. These three offerings are like slippers that I can leave the house in.

I did once make the mistake of doing the mile+ trips in the canvas cupsole trainer. Big mistake. The feet were fine, but not so much the knees and lower back. They were calling me an idiot.

These might possibly need a blob of glue after a few months wear, if the sole piece comes adrift. No bother. Aside from that, I either expect to wear the soles through, or spill something on them that wrecks them, and make me glad they were only cheap

Much like with "proper" shoes, having a few pairs to swap between, might actually help them last longer than they normally do. Or at least, have the insole and lining in better condition through the latter days of the sole's life. I have lost a few pairs of these cheapos that way, when there was still life left on the outer, but the inner was trashed. I still got my money's worth though. As I said, Jedi level skinflintery

 

[Rhody]

Interesting thread. I enjoy your writing style and vocabulary.
I will say this about inexpensive “shoes” and I put that in quotes because are crocs shoes? Anyway I bought a dirt cheap knockoff pair from Amazon last year. I wore them for about a month or more seemingly without incident. Taking walks around the neighborhood etc until blamo I got a major right foot problem. Almost like a foot cramp. I stopped using the shoes. It’s gotten better but has not resolved. I attribute it to those shoes the only charge in my situation.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

I think that's the lot! Barring the rubber wellies that are there in case of really dire circumstances.

I'm still looking though, but only in the bargain basement end of the spectrum. Reverse snobbery warning again - I don't think there's any area that I really need to open the wallet wider for. All the brogues and derbies are occasional use shoes, not daily office wear. The home use stuff is all pretty sacrificial, and the modestly priced walking gear has been serving me well for at least two decades.

Maybe the presentable mile clockers. Possibly an upgrade to the new Padders when they wear out, or the Navy and Brown brogue boots (I have confidence on the outer on those, but the inner might be a bit "fast fashion"). Aside from that, I'm not convinced that I personally will benefit from higher price tags. I'll wreck stuff about the house, and not wear dress shoes enough to reap the rewards. Heck, I might never wear out what I've already got in that group.

I am of course open to suggestions though. Even if I don't agree with them. I'll not be spending more than my usual cut off point just for the sake of it. I might try some of the other stuff though, again at the low price points. If the right monk shoe or chukka boot shows up, or maybe a woven leather shoe. Chelsea boots are unlikely, but I might see another budget slip-on I like.

I appreciate my penchant for value shoes might seem alien to many here. It's worked well for me though, for decades. But then, there's Arko fanatics mingling happily with the artisan soap users here, so I don't think I'll upset anyone's sensibilities too much

 

[AimlessWanderer]

Interesting thread. I enjoy your writing style and vocabulary.
I will say this about inexpensive “shoes” and I put that in quotes because are crocs shoes? Anyway I bought a dirt cheap knockoff pair from Amazon last year. I wore them for about a month or more seemingly without incident. Taking walks around the neighborhood etc until blamo I got a major right foot problem. Almost like a foot cramp. I stopped using the shoes. It’s gotten better but has not resolved. I attribute it to those shoes the only charge in my situation.

Thanks Rhody

It could be a lack of internal support on those shoes. Possibly. I've never owned any. I have had simpler shoes give me foot cramps when I've tried to go too far in them though. Particularly plimsol or espadrilles, where the insole is essentially flat, and there's no heel rise to speak of.

Might be a "right tool for the right job" issue, more than a "cheap shoe" issue.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

The Padders Lunar breezed its first half mile stroll today. Just a quick errand to the pharmacy to collect regular meds, which is slightly uphil on the way there. No comfort issues whatsoever, and that's with only maybe 20 minutes previously spent on testing them out and breaking them in indoors. Very confident they will clock up miles with ease.

The Base London Lime (navy and brown brogue boots) certainly look a little better after a wipe down and coat of neutral poilish, but I'm really stuggling to get a finish with the Kiwi Neutral. It just doesn't seem to want to polish up, and retails the streakiness of application. I'll try another coat with wax and water, to try to bull them up a bit. Failing that, I'll see if I can get a tin of the Neutral Parade Gloss, which is supposedly a lot easier to work with.

It's tedious trying to polish each colour separately, to avoid any colour bleed, but that's the downside of two tone boots I suppose.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

It's "pay day" next week. These are among the current tempters...

There are others, but those two are ones I keep going back and looking at.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

Bah! That weave is "weave effect" (embossed?), so that's off the list.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

As I mentioned previously in a different thread, one reason for the current exploration of shoes, is a kind of "self- discovery", after a loss of identity from a fairly sudden onset disability. New lifestyle, new life chapter, new me. It's going to take quite some time to understand and adapt to.

I wasn't quite sure whether boots would suit the new me or not, but they do. More specifically, I'm quite surprised with how happy I feel about the ones I've got. As a reminder, these are the four that's here.




I've been breaking in the two new leather pairs of boots (top two) over the last couple of days, and the urge for more has gone... for now. The two tone ones look a lot more blue in natural light, and are quickly acclimatising to my feet. I get the feeling we're going to get along just fine.

The other new leather pair are still some way off being broken in, but have revealed quite a nice characteristic. The darker colour which comes from the conditioning cream, rubs off really easily. This is going to give them a "lived in" look quite quickly, as though we've been around the world twice together, even though they're essentially unblemished... and every time I recondition them, that'll get reset and start all over again. I quite like the thought of that, as I can wear them with a "well travelled" look or a smarter look.

As to quelling the hunger for other boots, my interest in Chelsea boots has pretty much evaporated. I don't mind a casual slip-on shoe, but the thought of having something as heavy as a boot, that's not held secure to my feet with laces, doesn't particularly appeal anymore. I think I'd tire of that quite quickly.

I did still have some lingering interest in desert boots or chukkas, but that itch is already half scratched with the black boots shown above. I think with the hiking boots too, these four pairs pretty much take care off all my needs... for the time being at least. I had actually seen a cheap pair to try out, but after spending some time with these over the last couple of days, the desert boots are no longer beckoning as strongly as before.

I'm still not feeling fully settled with shoes yet, but as far as boots go, I'm feeling quite satisfied with my options. I think there's a reasonable chance of more additions over the next few weeks, but I don't think there'll be anything higher cut than a regular shoe.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

Shoe shine day today.

My brown slip-ons were almost looking like they had eczema after I gave them a coat of Kiwi Neutral wax.

For whatever reason, that wax really didn't take well at all. Saphir to the rescue. I gave them a good going over with Saphir Creme Universelle, which helped break down the wax and get it into the leather, then finished off with a coat of Timpsons Cobblers Cream.

Much better!

I didn't stop there though. The new pair of Padders seemed to me like they might benefit from a little treatment before I exposed them to the elements. Huge colour change!

My phone isn't generally very good at capturing true colours, but the taupe colour is quite accurate in this first picture. Light, matt, and largely uninteresting. Two coats of Creme Universelle and a coat of Cobblers Cream made a big difference.

They're now a mid-brown colour with a decent lustre to them. In fact they are actually a slightly darker brown than this picture shows, but this is as close as my photo editing jiggery pokery could get me, without the whole picture looking under exposed.

To reiterate, that colour change is purely with neutral colour products!

 

[AimlessWanderer]

A side note on buying cheap shoes...

I've mentioned in this thread, that by and large, I have had reasonable success buying cheap shoes. Where I have had shoes fail prematurely (before they have properly worn out), it has nearly always been the sole splitting, and I've gotten quite good at avoiding the shoes that are prone to this. When I see a shoe I like, I always check the sole before anything else. Seeing a sole that I know will likely split prematurely, on an otherwise good looking shoe, always frustrates me. Too many times, I've had to leave good looking shoes on the rack and leaves the store empty handed, because I didn't trust the sole. On the rare occasion I've decided to take the gamble, I've always ended up disappointed.

Luckily, they're quite easy to see and avoid. They have deep horizontal grooves at the ball of the foot, and instead of the sole curving as the foot flexes, the sole almost hinges in one spot. All the flex hits the same spot, step after step, and then one rainy day you suddenly discover that one of your shoes is lapping up surface water like a dog at its water bowl.

Here's a few examples of what I mean, all taken from sales listings of low cost shoes.



These first two, I wouldn't entertain at all. I'd have co confidence that these would last me until the soles were even half worn out.



These two I would also be wary of. The first one particularly. I had some suede slip-ons a few years ago that I really liked. A great casual shoe. Good grip, extremely comfortable, and only about £20 a pair. I actually went back to the store and bought another pair, just in case the model had been discontinued when the first pair wore out. Never got anywhere close to wearing them out though, as the sloes split on each pair - in exactly the same place - after about 10-12 weeks. The tread pattern was very similar to that shown in this first pic, a near horizontal zigzag that spanned the full width. The second pair I might have a little bit more confidence in, if I could handle them instore and give them a test flex, but still wouldn't risk buying online with that sole pattern.

I now look for interrupted grooves, or more sporadic sole patterns.



I'd be far more confident buying either of these last two. Both of them will allow a more gradual flex curve to the sole, and don't have a sweet spot at the main flex point to focus all the tensile stresses. They were both listed at less than £20, and I'd have more confidence in buying those, than I would a £50 shoe that had the stress focussing horizontal grooves. I've even seen them on the likes of Clarks and maybe even Sketchers, and still given them a wide berth. Assuming the tops looked of reasonable construction, I'd expect to be able to wear those soles down till I could feel the texture of the pavement through them. (I haven't bought them though - ugly shoes - but the soles made for decent example pics)

I mention all this, because I've just placed an order for another pair of UK made shoes (not Padders this time though), again listed at less than half price. No pictures of the soles on the website. Everything else looks great, but not being able to look at the sole pattern always gives me a little knot in my stomach.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

Sticking with the splitting soles...

For whatever reason, these shoes bucked the sole splitting trend, despite being a tread pattern that I would nowadays possibly avoid.

The other reason for coming back to these shoes, was to better answer this post, after rereading this thread again.

i notice a lot of guys wearing shoes (regardless of price) that have worn out the heel on one side. I always wondered if they felt that and i guess i just answered that question, since i see it all the time.

This shoe has sufficient wear on sole and heel to shoe the extent of heel wear that I typically get. The soles are worn, and I don't know how much life is life, as the most worn "button" looks like it either might be hollow, or on the verge of breaking through to a less wear resistant, or more perishable, material.

Yet despite that, heel wear is fairly modest. I do now heel strike heavier than when most of the wear was put on this shoe, but the shoes I've worn most since getting ill and becoming less aerodynamic, haven't shown any significant change in this respect - or at least, I haven't noticed any.

Pretty negligible, really.

I’m intrigued by this thread. I have kind of hard to fit feet. I wonder if the US based retail inexpensive shoes are much different than where you are at. my experience abroad 20 years ago (now) showed a very different footwear experience than i was used to in the US.

What were the major changes that you encountered? Where was that?

After coming back to this post, it struck me that I might have overlooked the extent of the differences you experienced. Just how different can buying low cost imports be? I'd imagine we both see imports from the far east, but we may see more from South Asia (India particularly - including the Derbies shown in this post), and you may see more from South America perhaps?

 

[global_dev]

That picture of the heel looks still fine.

i was in the far east part of russia near china, north korea, and japan. I’m pretty sure lots of cheaper shoes were from china but china can make nice things too, but i am sure that i cant 100% trust the “made in” stampings, although the european import biz was huge there.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

i am sure that i cant 100% trust the “made in” stampings

One of the quirks about country of origin, or certainly as far as UK law goes, is that last operation applies. So an upper and sole can be imported, and the "made in ..." stamp is valid from simply stitching or glueing the two together. Although, I don't pay much attention to the origin stamps on my shoes anyway.

I know two pairs of mine were made in the UK (though again, I don't know to what extent), and the rest are probably Chinese, Malaysian, Indian, or from some other country nearby. However, they're either good enough for me, or they're not, irrspective of where they were made, and I won't boycott an entire country just because I made a bad purchasing decision.

 

[Doc4]

One of the quirks about country of origin, or certainly as far as UK law goes, is that last operation applies. So an upper and sole can be imported, and the "made in ..." stamp is valid from simply stitching or glueing the two together. Although, I don't pay much attention to the origin stamps on my shoes anyway.

I believe that's a common problem not just with "UK" manufacture. I believe "made in Italy" on clothing can suffer from the same problem, and no doubt it's not limited there either.

If one is purchasing a "Made in XXX" product in the belief that Country XXX is a place where stuff is made better, IMHO just picking the country probably isn't good enough. You need to pick a good company/artisan who actually makes good stuff. Not every English shoemaker is up to the standards of Crockett & Jones for example.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

Not every English shoemaker is up to the standards of Crockett & Jones for example.

Nor needs to be. Depending on what you want from a shoe.

When I was working in engineering, my safety shoes got worn 40-60 hours every week. Even in an oil soaked factory, with turnings attacking the soles, I usually got a year from each ~£35 pair. Away from work, I'd wear the same two or three pairs of shoes/trainers most of the time, and often get two or three years from them, depending on tread depth. Less for cupsole trainers, maybe, and much longer for occasional use shoes, such as the black leather shoes on the first page of this thread. No shoe trees, no rotation systems, negligible care (except for the black leather - that's the only shoe polish I ever owned before this year), and all low cost purchases. The slip-ons in post #31 above, have got to have been worn well over 150 times (probably a lot more) in the last few years, and were probably £25-ish. There's still bags of life in them.

I don't have the faintest clue where any of them were made.
(Correction: I just checked the slip-ons, and they're Indian made)

Most of my cheapo shoe purchases probably stand me at less than £0.10/day by the time they're done. I probably couldn't get that kind of value from a replacement sole for a pair of Crockett & Jones, even if I got the shoes for free! Yes, there's an added value simply in knowing you're walking around in expensive shoes, and the lottery odds of getting a bad shoe that flakes out early is probably far less. Maybe 20% of my cheapies fail to make it to fully worn out sole (sheer guess). However, a pair of Crockett & Jones Derbies, would buy me 10-15 pairs of the shoes I normally buy, of which 80% would last until the soles wear out. That's a heck of a lot to compete with.

Again, as per my first line in this post, it depends on what you want from a shoe. Neither option, basic or premium, is wrong if it suits your needs (both physical and emotional).

I have looked at a few premium brands since my recent shoe enthusiasm, wondering if I should save for a pair, instead of binge buying the cheapos like I have been doing. I've even looked at preowned too. I can't do it. I just have an emotional block on outlaying that kind of cash, when I know what value I'm used to getting. I'm absolutely sure there'll be many more people here that feel completely the opposite, and have that same kind of block on buying a cheap pair, because they know how much they love what they are used to buying/wearing.

Ultimately, we are both right We're all keeping people in jobs, be they skilled or not, working to our own budgets, and wearing shoes that make us happy

 

[Doc4]

Again, as per my first line in this post, it depends on what you want from a shoe. Neither option, basic or premium, is wrong if it suits your needs (both physical and emotional).

I don't want to seem dismissive of inexpensive options. If I could rephrase my original point, it would be that the name on the "made by ..." label is far more important than the name on the "made in ... " label.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

I don't want to seem dismissive of inexpensive options. If I could rephrase my original point, it would be that the name on the "made by ..." label is far more important than the name on the "made in ... " label.

To a point, but I think even reputable brands have their hits and misses too, and multiple extents of in-house production - Grenson for example, although they are far more honest than most about how much of each product is made on their benches.

I went through a phase of buying the same brand of suede cupsole trainers a few years back. I think it was Puma. I had two or three pairs easily go 18 months with regular wear, and one that completely wore out in maybe 4 or 5 months. Same lifestyle, typical use, etc. The upper seemed exactly the same quality as previous, but the sole just didn't have anywhere near the same durability. My next was from a different brand, and I was back to 18 months and above again. Sadly, I've not seen them at the stupidly cheap prices for a while. It used to be an item I could rely on finding in the sales for under £20 in some colour or other, but not so much these days.

 

[steveclarkus]

L. L. Bean Hunting Shoe. 30+ years old. Wonderful boots.