Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

During this sale, I'm wondering if the AE Independence Line is a True Upgrade

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    They also dug out some old walnut Warwicks on the 201, for $199. Those are great, if you like single monks.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by facelessghost View Post
      On a related note, has anyone played the seconds game recently? I'm in the market for black cap toes, and I'd love to get the Parkinson, but not for $500+. Seconds are about $230 in the current sale, but the restocking fee is always a concern.
      I just purchased my 3rd pair of 2nds and am 3-for-3 in the happy customer dept

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by evanparker View Post
        the leather on that collection is a substantial step up to something you might find on a higher end shoe like, say, an Alden. Very worth it IMO.

        The JR soles the shoes come with are also a big upgrade. They even last longer.

        I don't think i'd pay the supposed going rate for them, but i'd pay the sale price you mentioned all day.
        Originally posted by Loafer28 View Post
        I am pretty confident that they ARE NOT JR soles. My Shell have JR soles and it had the logo on the bottom, while the Independence Line does not.

        I forgot to mention the lamb skin lining. Huge upgrade in comfort!
        Now I can see why there is some confusion.

        Some AE come with JR soles, for example, this cordovan Park Avenue:

        https://www.allenedmonds.com/shoes/m...0aAqvwEALw_wcB
        WHY ARE THE GUYS IN SUITS HERE? HAS SOMETHING GONE WRONG?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by mebejoseph View Post
          Now I can see why there is some confusion.

          Some AE come with JR soles, for example, this cordovan Park Avenue:

          https://www.allenedmonds.com/shoes/m...0aAqvwEALw_wcB
          All of their Shell Cordovan come with JR soles. Those are the only ones that I know of that do, but I am not an expert.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Slubby Linen View Post
            That's what I'm noticing. It seems a smidge sleeker than the 65. Has a slight chisel and a little less bulbous.

            Also one of the comments about the Jefferson stands out. He says that for him the 201 lets the laces come together whereas the 65 has laces spread apart. I've noticed tons of shoe selfies on the various style forums with 65 last AEs straining into an open V shape. If the 201 solves this problem, that is a good feature.
            If the laces are spread apart, if means you're wearing the wrong width size and need to go up 1 in width. The 65 runs one width size small, so of you're a 10D on a brannock, you need a 10E for a proper fit in the 65 pretty much.

            Comment


            • #21
              Got the shoes, AE Jefferson 2.0, and true to what seems to have become AE standard practice in regard to what they ship me, these shoes should be seconds.

              The edges of the soles where not properly stained/dressed black, but have exposed brown areas in several places (my wife noticed before I did). The leather has what appear to be blemishes or scars--they are small and on the of the upper. On top of the that, the shoe box was moderately damaged. Which bugs me because I like to store my shoes in the box.

              Also, I think it's a cheap-out upgrade to supply just one shoe bag for two shoes--a shoe bag that is only large enough for one shoe. If I weren't going to store the shoes in the box, what good does one dust bag do?

              But I will keep them. I got them for the price of a factory second, about $290, they fit very well, the leather is quite nice, and touching up the missing black stain on the edge of the sole is no big deal. Also, the small blemishes will not be noticeable, especially after a coat or two of shoe cream.

              BTW, while the leather is quite nice and soft, I think the Horween Dublin leather on my AE Stirling boots is just as nice. Those were seconds and I don't notice any difference in the quality at all. Indeed, that box came with slight damage as well and the leather was a tad bit creased.
              Last edited by mebejoseph; January 23rd, 2020, 10:06 AM.
              WHY ARE THE GUYS IN SUITS HERE? HAS SOMETHING GONE WRONG?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Hebrew Barrister View Post
                If the laces are spread apart, if means you're wearing the wrong width size and need to go up 1 in width. The 65 runs one width size small, so of you're a 10D on a brannock, you need a 10E for a proper fit in the 65 pretty much.
                I can believe this. I just checked my one pair of 65 last AEs. They're E width and fit well in the laces with no spread. I don't have an official brannock measurement but I think my feet are of pretty average width. It's been years since I've worn or thought about these shoes. I had forgotten they were Es.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Slubby Linen View Post
                  I can believe this. I just checked my one pair of 65 last AEs. They're E width and fit well in the laces with no spread. I don't have an official brannock measurement but I think my feet are of pretty average width. It's been years since I've worn or thought about these shoes. I had forgotten they were Es.
                  Not sure exactly how much spread you’re seeing, but for most people (not everyone’s feet are the same), having a bit of a spread or v shape in the lacing is proper fit. If you look at the eyelet placing, they actually get a tiny bit closer together as you go upward to account for a proper v. If the facings are touching and there’s no v at all then chances are it’s too wide across the instep.
                  Instagram: WoofOrWeft

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by mebejoseph View Post
                    Got the shoes, AE Jefferson 2.0, and true to what seems to have become AE standard practice in regard to what they ship me, these shoes should be seconds.

                    The edges of the soles where not properly stained/dressed black, but have exposed brown areas in several places (my wife noticed before I did). The leather has what appear to be blemishes or scars--they are small and on the of the upper. On top of the that, the shoe box was moderately damaged. Which bugs me because I like to store my shoes in the box.

                    Also, I think it's a cheap-out upgrade to supply just one shoe bag for two shoes--a shoe bag that is only large enough for one shoe. If I weren't going to store the shoes in the box, what good does one dust bag do?

                    But I will keep them. I got them for the price of a factory second, about $290, they fit very well, the leather is quite nice, and touching up the missing black stain on the edge of the sole is no big deal. Also, the small blemishes will not be noticeable, especially after a coat or two of shoe cream.

                    BTW, while the leather is quite nice and soft, I think the Horween Dublin leather on my AE Stirling boots is just as nice. Those were seconds and I don't notice any difference in the quality at all. Indeed, that box came with slight damage as well and the leather was a tad bit creased.
                    I had the same shoe bag thought when I received a new pair just last week. I mean.... I suppose that it's possible to get both shoes in there but it certainly doesn't seem that it's meant for both. While I haven't had any quality issues myself (aside from the claim that they had to make my custom pair from the trunk show 3 times - which I still haven't received! - because the first two runs didn't pass muster), the AE service lately has been extremely disappointing. Really not sure what's up with them.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Token View Post
                      Not sure exactly how much spread you’re seeing, but for most people (not everyone’s feet are the same), having a bit of a spread or v shape in the lacing is proper fit. If you look at the eyelet placing, they actually get a tiny bit closer together as you go upward to account for a proper v. If the facings are touching and there’s no v at all then chances are it’s too wide across the instep.
                      When these are well cinched there's about a 1/8" gap at the top of the V. I agree the sides shouldn't touch but I disagree that a V shape is correct. I think the ideal is for the sides to come very close and run nearly parallel. As for the eyelets being spaced closer as you go up, I'm not seeing that. These eyelets seem to be a uniform distance from the edge of the opening.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I think we’re probably talking about the same thing. There should be a slight gap or V, nothing too extreme. Something like the below. If you look at the eyelets you can see that the bottom most eyelets are further apart and it gets closer together as you go up, that’s meant to account for the desired slight V in the facings.

                        Instagram: WoofOrWeft

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by JohnR View Post
                          I had the same shoe bag thought when I received a new pair just last week. I mean.... I suppose that it's possible to get both shoes in there but it certainly doesn't seem that it's meant for both. While I haven't had any quality issues myself (aside from the claim that they had to make my custom pair from the trunk show 3 times - which I still haven't received! - because the first two runs didn't pass muster), the AE service lately has been extremely disappointing. Really not sure what's up with them.
                          Fortunately, the shoe bags are very inexpensive at $2.00. I just ordered five of them. One for missing one and four others for two other pairs of shoes. It's just a minor annoyance that I could have save the $9 shipping fee if I had ordered them with the shoes.

                          Wow, I'm getting cranky in my old age.

                          Also, what new shoes did you get?

                          How do you like them?
                          WHY ARE THE GUYS IN SUITS HERE? HAS SOMETHING GONE WRONG?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Token View Post
                            I think weÂ’re probably talking about the same thing. There should be a slight gap or V, nothing too extreme. Something like the below. If you look at the eyelets you can see that the bottom most eyelets are further apart and it gets closer together as you go up, thatÂ’s meant to account for the desired slight V in the facings.

                            To me that's at the outer limit of an acceptable V. I would want less gap at the top. But I've seen much wider Vs than that, to the point of looking pretty weird, usually in shoe selfies of 65 last AEs.

                            I do see what you mean about the eyelet spacing. Those definitely are spaced closer towards the top. In fact the change is so pronounced that I'd guess the tapering effect is more of a style feature in its own right than a compensation for a V. But of course I could be wrong.

                            The eyelets on this pair of AE 5th Avenues I'm looking at are nothing like that. They are uniformly spaced. I can't help but think they were placed to give neat looking parallel rows which would be achieved when there is very little spread.

                            What kind of shoes are those in your pic?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Slubby Linen View Post
                              To me that's at the outer limit of an acceptable V. I would want less gap at the top. But I've seen much wider Vs than that, to the point of looking pretty weird, usually in shoe selfies of 65 last AEs.

                              I do see what you mean about the eyelet spacing. Those definitely are spaced closer towards the top. In fact the change is so pronounced that I'd guess the tapering effect is more of a style feature in its own right than a compensation for a V. But of course I could be wrong.

                              The eyelets on this pair of AE 5th Avenues I'm looking at are nothing like that. They are uniformly spaced. I can't help but think they were placed to give neat looking parallel rows which would be achieved when there is very little spread.

                              What kind of shoes are those in your pic?
                              Those are Carminas, it might be a European thing but overwhelming majority of my oxfords have the narrowing eyelets as you go up. I can’t remember the source but there was either an article or video interviewing a maker where they explained that it was to accommodate a slight v in the facing.
                              Instagram: WoofOrWeft

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Token View Post
                                Those are Carminas, it might be a European thing but overwhelming majority of my oxfords have the narrowing eyelets as you go up. I can’t remember the source but there was either an article or video interviewing a maker where they explained that it was to accommodate a slight v in the facing.
                                I was just about to ask what model of AEs those are, because the shape of that last/toebox is SUPERB. Infinitely more elegant than pretty much anything AE offers...of course.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X