One of the things to look for in a quality shoe is usually the presence of full grain leather and a welted sole. It seems that most welted shoes (which almost always have full grain leather with them) come in at the $250+ mark (without sales). However, one can often find full grain leather shoes at the $100-$150 mark but with glued soles.
Of course a glued sole is not as durable as a welted sole...but is it really that much of a difference? I recently had one of my glued sole shoe come apart from the glue separating after years of service. Darn I thought, should have gone with a shoe that had a welted sole! However, I brought them to my cobbler who simply reattached and updated the glued sole for a measly 8 dollars...now the shoe is ready again for more years of service. This got me thinking that while full grain leather is definitely important, perhaps the added cost of having a welted shoe might not be worth it for some people. Thoughts?
EDIT: Another factor to add into this is the longevity of a glued sole vs a welted sole. Greg_S has a comment that makes the argument much closer than what one may think:
Of course a glued sole is not as durable as a welted sole...but is it really that much of a difference? I recently had one of my glued sole shoe come apart from the glue separating after years of service. Darn I thought, should have gone with a shoe that had a welted sole! However, I brought them to my cobbler who simply reattached and updated the glued sole for a measly 8 dollars...now the shoe is ready again for more years of service. This got me thinking that while full grain leather is definitely important, perhaps the added cost of having a welted shoe might not be worth it for some people. Thoughts?
EDIT: Another factor to add into this is the longevity of a glued sole vs a welted sole. Greg_S has a comment that makes the argument much closer than what one may think:
Originally posted by greg_s
View Post
Comment