• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

bengal-stripe

Distinguished Member
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Mar 23, 2002
Messages
4,627
Reaction score
1,295
The 33 last is maybe 1/4 size smaller than the 202. Slightly shorter and also a bit tighter across the vamp.

Don't take my word or it: contact EG and ask if they agree with my analysis.
 

PhiloVance

Distinguished Member
Joined
May 28, 2005
Messages
1,787
Reaction score
248
Yes, what bengal said. I think the 33 is generally narrower and shorter in the toe box than the 202. I'm not sure going up in size would help - if anything, you'd want to get a wider width. That being said, its certainly wearable in your normal size. Its just that after 8 hours or so, you'll feel a little soreness in your outer toes. In my opinion.

Cole Haan apparently used to swear by the 33 - that's the only last that I've seen EGs made on for the company.

If it helps, there are photos on my EG last evolution post that might allow you to see the differences better:

http://uptowndandy.blogspot.com/2012/03/evolution-of-last-edward-green-from-to.html
 
Last edited:

Arethusa406

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
81
Reaction score
0

sevenfoldtieguy

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
4,292
Reaction score
452

Yes, what bengal said. I think the 33 is generally narrower and shorter in the toe box than the 202. I'm not sure going up in size would help - if anything, you'd want to get a wider width. That being said, its certainly wearable in your normal size. Its just that after 8 hours or so, you'll feel a little soreness in your outer toes. In my opinion.

Cole Haan apparently used to swear by the 33 - that's the only last that I've seen EGs made on for the company.

If it helps, there are photos on my EG last evolution post that might allow you to see the differences better:

http://uptowndandy.blogspot.com/2012/03/evolution-of-last-edward-green-from-to.html


Thanks.
 

barky

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
230
Reaction score
21
Hi guys, besides woodlore's epic trees, may I know which other 3rd party trees are a good fit for EG 888? Thanks!
 

Renton

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
547
Reaction score
28

As far as I can work out, the problems with lining the Galway stem from its pattern and origins as a field boot. It was (and still is, on the 64 last) a veldtschoen boot, the construction of which makes it, in its original form, one of the most 'waterproof' forms of leather shoemaking known. The boot has essentially two uppers, the lower upper being the whole-cut piece that is turned out and stitched down to the midsole, and the 'top' upper being welted underneath the stitched-down upper as normal. Basically, the leg of the boot is part of that second upper and therefore also functions as the lining when you move down to the whole-cut 'outer' upper that forms the body of the boot. If you were to then actually line the leg, then you'd have three layers of leather around the heel of the boot. This would obviously cause some bulk, especially when the original versions of the boots would have been made of zug grain (like the one posted above) or the variations of country calf that I and others on here own. To get the Galway lined, I think (and this is where someone more knowledgeable than me can chime in), you'd have to make some fundamental changes to the pattern, no? So would it still actually be a Galway as such? With the shearling-lined Galways, the shearling itself only goes down as far as the outer upper, as I've tried to show here: It's not just the EG veldt pattern that is similar - look at C&J's Snowdon, which is very similar and also unlined in the leg. I've just commissioned a special order Snowdon from C&J and they stipulated that the leg of the boot would have to be made of a sturdy leather, presumably so that it didn't just flop due to the lack of lining. The earlier veldt boots by the legendary Lotus and later Tecnic and George Webb are all built like battleships, and never lined in their main patterns. The only lined veldt boots I've seen have been Cheaney's versions like the Pennine, Fiennes and Mallory boots and also Alfred Sargent's Kelso and Selkirk models which they used to make before going all lah-dee-dah on us. All of these use or used a different pattern to the 'classic' field boot which can accommodate this and, as a result, look different in their own ways.
Does any of that make any sense?
It makes fairly good sense and thanks for the very informative post. That being said, when my mto comes in from George Bass, I'll have to ask them again about lined galways. They claimed that EG will make it for them, but I'm not so sure.
 

S K M

Distinguished Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
1,036
Reaction score
669
What does the price of a factory refurbishment run?

I've been quoted 195 pounds plus shipping. Initially they suggested picking the shoes up at my place (I live in Denmark) and the door-to-door price would be a whopping 275 pounds. So, cheap as I am, I just sent the boots off on my own which was a lot cheaper.

Dainite is sleeker but Medway better on wet or icy pavements. I'd take the Medway any day as I don't rate the studded Dainite sole highly, but I walk a lot so my priorities might be different to yours...I'd also not lose the storm welt if you might want to wear these outside.

I think I'll actually go for the Dainite, since I won't use these as field boots (I have my C&J Islays for that, though unfortunately they are Dainite – I'll like them replaced with Medway or Ridgeway next time they'll need a resole). The storm welt question will probably solve itself since they most likely can't replace it with a regular welt. But we'll see.

Post pics when they come back.

Don't worry, when they come back you can forget all about spoiler alerts, it will be all like this.

Cheers,
SKM
 

barky

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
230
Reaction score
21
Thanks Namor but those are approx. the same price as EG, which I intend to get when EG goes on sale at the end of the year. In the meantime, I need a lower cost alternative. Any idea on the saphir trees?
 

Odd I/O

Distinguished Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
1,112
Reaction score
85

^^^ One of my fave EG models.  I was trying on that exact shoe at the local EG retailer, but the 82 last didn't work for me.  I'm happy they worked for you - beautiful shoes indeed.  No go find your camera and take some real pics. :)


Small timer question here but would you know if that retailer has sales on their Edward Greens and when?
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 101 36.7%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 99 36.0%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 35 12.7%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 44 16.0%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 41 14.9%

Forum statistics

Threads
507,760
Messages
10,598,163
Members
224,504
Latest member
itsjohndoe7838
Top