Question:
Guys, I have size 13 dogs. I have the Weymouth, and while I love the look, they can look very, very long on my narrow sticks. Do you think this last is too narrow and elongated for guys with big feet? If so, which last would you go with at C&J?
As always, thanks.
Mark
Answer:
Nothing you do will make your feet look like they are 11s. and 13 is not even that big anymore, wear them and be proud.
Answer:
I'm no longer a big fan of the proportions of the 337 last. I have two pair in sizes under 8.5 and they still look a little off. If you're still considering them, you should at least try them on in person before deciding to shell out the cash for them.
Answer:
I think details (stitching, brogueing) help to break up the look of a shoe. In particular, I think having a (straight?) toe-cap makes the shoe look a bit shorter.
As such, if you like the 337 last, I would suggest sticking to cap-toe oxfords like the Belgrave and Welbeck and staying away from plain-toe models like the Aintree and Savile.
Answer:
That comment about them looking just a little off strikes a chord with me. I really do like my Weymouths, but when I look down at them, they sometimes look funny to me. Off is a good description of it. For the sake of comparison, I have a pair of EG and a pair of Tramezzas, and I like their profiles so much more.
I really can't bring myself to pay full freight for the Lobb/EG level, and I am struggling to find an alternative to the handgrades.
How about the other C&J lasts as alternatives?
Answer:
This would be true, except that in my experience, C&J often places the toe cap too far back on its larger sizes, accentuating the length rather than diminishing it.
Answer:
I agree that elongated lasts don't work well with my size 12 feet. I try to stick with shoes having some type of toe decoration (my only pair of shoes on the C&J 337 last is a pair of suede wingtip bluchers). I can't suggest a good C&J last for you, but I'm unhappy with the look of C&J's 348 last on my feet. The 348 is even more elongated, and elongating, than the 337.
Answer:
I know what you mean, and this is the main reason why I don't like the Audley so much - the toe cap looks too big to my eye. I suggested the Belgrave and Welbeck because the line of brogueing on the edge of the toe cap makes it look a little bit shorter.
Answer:
I have the Belgrave, and I agree it looks better. I'm tempted to try the Whitehall instead, but would like to see one in person first. I have the Connaught on the 236 (IIRC), which looks OK.
Answer:
i would love to have bigger feet. you get more shoe for your money.
Answer:
:crackup: Good one dior..., eh shoe :)
Answer:
yes SHOE. that's it.
let's please eradicate 'dior~'
this will have to be a community effort. ..please.
Answer:
Until you get to the point where manufacturers don't even make shoes in your size.
Answer:
whutchoo want a G&G for anyway? :lol:
Answer:
I have both the Belgrave and the Sandown (chukka boot) in the UK 11E. I think the Sandown with its completely plain toe looks better. Somehow, the Belgrave seems just a bit clunky (though it may be because my insteps are too high for an oxford). I also have a C&J Cleveland, a blucher on the elongated round-toed 350 last. To my eye, it looks fine.
Like anything else, feet don't appear overly large or small without context. If you're 6'3" and don't wear particularly narrow pants, wearing a size 13 337 last will be fine. If you're 5'6" and like to wear pegged pants, maybe a different last would be a good idea.
