Kiton vs. John Lobb

[Mecnun]

Would forum members find it justifiable to pay up £400 to "upgrade from John Lobb RTW to Kiton hand-made shoes (priced at £1,200). The MTM Kiton's are £1,500.

 

[Artisan Fan]

Versus RTW Lobb I do feel Kiton is a step up based on what I have seen. But at the price of Kiton these days one has some bespoke options.

 

[itsstillmatt]

Originally Posted by Artisan Fan

Versus RTW Lobb I do feel Kiton is a step up based on what I have seen. But at the price of Kiton these days one has some bespoke options.
Agree, although it would be more fair to say half a step up. Kiton does some of the work the traditional way, but they are not like Vass. Lobb beautifull finishes a shoe that is pretty much Northhampton standard. FWIW, I think that nowadays both Kiton and Lobb specialize in ugly shoes. That was not always the case for Lobb. There are not only bespoke makers near the same price, but some RTW shoes that are more attractive for lower prices like EG (never thought I would say that), G&G and C&J Handgrade.

 

[Soph]

Kiton shoes overpower suit ensembles, I can't say I care for them.

 

[FidelCashflow]

You have to decide if you want more buttoned down Northampton designs or more flambouyant Italian designs. Once you decide that, everything else it easy.

 

[itsstillmatt]

Originally Posted by Soph

Kiton shoes overpower suit ensembles, I can't say I care for them.
I've seen some pretty conservative ones, but by and large I agree. I get the feeling that a lot of people by shoes only based on what they look like alone, and give little thought to actually wearing them with clothing. If this were not the case, we would see a lot fewer massively antiqued shoes that stand out like a beacon of light next to a suit.

 

[Connemara]

Originally Posted by iammatt

FWIW, I think that nowadays both Kiton and Lobb specialize in ugly shoes. That was not always the case for Lobb. There are not only bespoke makers near the same price, but some RTW shoes that are more attractive for lower prices like EG (never thought I would say that), G&G and C&J Handgrade.
+1. Lobb's designs are becoming more and more bizarre/ugly.

 

[JayJay]

Originally Posted by Connemara

+1. Lobb's designs are becoming more and more bizarre/ugly.
I agree. Many of the recent designs don't appeal to me.

 

[FidelCashflow]

Originally Posted by Connemara

+1. Lobb's designs are becoming more and more bizarre/ugly.

Example?

 

[lasbar]

I used to be a great fan of Lobb and i must admit that i will certainly never buy their shoes again...

After the beautiful vintage 2004 ,Luffield,Garnier and so many others classic lasts ,the late models are very disappointing...

The vintage 2006 and especially 2007 were rubbish...

For £1500 ,go bespoke for a few hundreds pounds more...

 

[Merckx]

Originally Posted by FidelCashflow

Example?
The Brampton. http://img479.imageshack.us/img479/5476/0010bt.jpg Also, Lavendon, Houghton, Everdon, and Grafton.

 

[FidelCashflow]

Originally Posted by Merckx

The Brampton.

http://img479.imageshack.us/img479/5476/0010bt.jpg

What's so bad about that? I'm not big on the triple stitching and the overall style is pretty plain. But other than that, it's a pretty decent looking shoe. Is your complaint that the designs are too contemporary, or too stuffy, or something else altogether?

The punched designs on some of the other ones you mentioned make them look like bowling shoes, and the weird lines on one aren't my thing. But how many variations of the same old loafers, oxfords, derbys, and monkstraps can you make?

As long as they keep the classic styles on contemporary lasts (like the Luffield

) , I really don't care what they produce to keep each season looking fresh. They could make museum calf crocs for all I care.

 

[Merckx]

Originally Posted by FidelCashflow

What's so bad about that? I'm not big on the triple stitching and the overall style is pretty plain. But other than that, it's a pretty decent looking shoe. Is your complaint that the designs are too contemporary, or too stuffy, or something else altogether?

The seam running down only one side of the shoe looks unattractive and makes the shoe look off kilter in my opinion.

 

[DocHolliday]

Much of Lobb's newer stuff is too self-conciously quirky for my tastes. I look at the Brampton and wonder why a shoe should look like that. The lines don't follow the form, or flow in any sort of pleasing fashion.

It seems like Lobb's chief interest these days is creating designs that are distinctively Lobb. That can be OK, when done right, but too often the results are just gaudy messes.

 

[Merckx]

Originally Posted by FidelCashflow

What's so bad about that? I'm not big on the triple stitching and the overall style is pretty plain. But other than that, it's a pretty decent looking shoe. Is your complaint that the designs are too contemporary, or too stuffy, or something else altogether?

The punched designs on some of the other ones you mentioned make them look like bowling shoes, and the weird lines on one aren't my thing. But how many variations of the same old loafers, oxfords, derbys, and monkstraps can you make?

As long as they keep the classic styles on contemporary lasts (like the Luffield

) , I really don't care what they produce to keep each season looking fresh. They could make museum calf crocs for all I care.

OOoooo.... I'll agree with you on the Luffield.