Vintage Dress shoe appreciation, tips, maintenance and advice

[DWFII]



This is rubbish. Anyone who seriously wears vintage shoes knows what they are doing re hygiene etc. Most shoes are barely worn.

Do me a favour and don't trash the thread. Stick to your own thread please. Your comments are unnecessary.

When I was in my early 20's ...almost 50 years ago now... and before I became a full time shoemaker, I picked up a pair of used moccasins and wore them happily when I was at home lounging around. In direct consequence, I contracted a toenail fungus that is with me to this day despite various regimens of medication and so forth.

When you contract a fungus, in many cases--most, from what the doctors tell me--it never goes away, no matter what. It gets in your system and can reside there, dormant, without any obvious symptoms for many years.

The very fact that there are products...including the ultraviolet emitters...that are designed to address these problems, suggests that the problems are very real. The spray products and alcohol washes are identical in purpose to washing your underwear. Which most of us do without a second thought. The problem is that like the fungus in your body the bacteria and fungal spores in the shoe are not just on the surface...and no remedy that doesn't address that issue can be 100% effective.

When a good quality shoe is worn for any length of time, the insole takes an imprint of the foot. The insole particularly on older shoes where the insole has not been conditioned regularly, dries out and gets hard. Even brand new, a leather insole is harder than your foot unless you make a habit of walking barefoot in the wilds...in which case you don't need shoes.

The imprint in the insole is as unique as a fingerprint. The chances of another foot fitting that imprint are slim to none.

So, because the insole has an imprint, because the insole is harder than the foot, the foot must accommodate itself to the original owner's footshape and footprint/footbed. It cannot happen the other way around.

As far as the rest is concerned....does another perspective (one that is informed by nearly 50 years of experience with feet, leather and shoes) make you so uncomfortable that you need a "safe space?"

 

[smfdoc]

Now that both sides of the issue have had their say regarding the potential health issues, I suggest we can draw this to a close. As previously mentioned, this is an appreciation thread where we can share information and pictures. Those who wish to continue the discussion of possible fit and health issues are welcome to continue it on another thread or start their own where the topic can be fully explored. This is not directed at any specific commenter, but simply a way of getting back to the purpose of this specific thread. Thank you and have a happy Thanksgiving.

 

[DWFII]



Now that both sides of the issue have had their say regarding the potential health issues, I suggest we can draw this to a close. As previously mentioned, this is an appreciation thread where we can share information and pictures. Those who wish to continue the discussion of possible fit and health issues are welcome to continue it on another thread or start their own where the topic can be fully explored. This is not directed at any specific commenter, but simply a way of getting back to the purpose of this specific thread. Thank you and have a happy Thanksgiving.

I agree. I have very few posts in this thread...I mostly just look...and appreciate. In this case, I just responded to another person who raised the issue.

Believe me, I appreciate Vintage shoes...perhaps more than most simply because I can look at them from a maker's perspective and see the subtle details and the finesse (or lack thereof) that many who are not makers miss. The details that inexorably add up to the very things that make some Vintage shoes exceptional or special.

But I also appreciate that ignorance...esp. willful ignorance...can come back to bite you.

In any case, unless someone wants to call me out (again) for expressing a word of caution, I'm fine with going back to appreciating.

 

[meister]



When I was in my early 20's ...almost 50 years ago now... and before I became a full time shoemaker, I picked up a pair of used moccasins and wore them happily when I was at home lounging around. In direct consequence, I contracted a toenail fungus that is with me to this day despite various regimens of medication and so forth.

When you contract a fungus, in many cases--most, from what the doctors tell me--it never goes away, no matter what. It gets in your system and can reside there, dormant, without any obvious symptoms for many years.

The very fact that there are products...including the ultraviolet emitters...that are designed to address these problems, suggests that the problems are very real. The spray products and alcohol washes are identical in purpose to washing your underwear. Which most of us do without a second thought. The problem is that like the fungus in your body the bacteria and fungal spores in the shoe are not just on the surface...and no remedy that doesn't address that issue can be 100% effective.

When a good quality shoe is worn for any length of time, the insole takes an imprint of the foot. The insole particularly on older shoes where the insole has not been conditioned regularly, dries out and gets hard. Even brand new, a leather insole is harder than your foot unless you make a habit of walking barefoot in the wilds...in which case you don't need shoes.

The imprint in the insole is as unique as a fingerprint. The chances of another foot fitting that imprint are slim to none.

So, because the insole has an imprint, because the insole is harder than the foot, the foot must accommodate itself to the original owner's footshape and footprint/footbed. It cannot happen the other way around.

As far as the rest is concerned....does another perspective (one that is informed by nearly 50 years of experience with feet, leather and shoes) make you so uncomfortable that you need a "safe space?"

I repeat... don't pontificate. Please save you comments for your own thread. This is for vintage shoe tragics who don't need your advice.

Is that clear enough?

 

[DWFII]



I repeat... don't pontificate. Please save you comments for your own thread. This is for vintage shoe tragics who don't need your advice.

Is that clear enough?

That's odd, I don't remember anyone making you a moderator or giving you any kind of authority to dictate where people post or don't.

What you're saying with your vitriolic little tantrum is clear enough, what is not clear is the reason for it.

Here's a suggestion: Why don't you confine yourself to threads you've started? Since that seems to be what you're advocating for others.

 

[meister]



That's odd, I don't remember anyone making you a moderator or giving you any kind of authority to dictate where people post or don't.

What you're saying with your vitriolic little tantrum is clear enough, what is not clear is the reason for it.

Here's a suggestion: Why don't you confine yourself to threads you've started? Since that seems to be what you're advocating for others.

You've made your point. I've made mine.

 

[starro]

I've always been half-hearted about old used shoes, but just saw one that may be worth dipping in the market.

Does anybody have information on WINGFOOT GOODYEAR? Google has given me bupkus.

I'm looking at these Black shell LWB from the 60s.

• Is this even shell cordovan? I'm at 50 50.
• Overall condition: is it worth purchasing? Would you? for how much?
• And while we are on the topic, can anyone explain why nobody's biting on this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Shell-Cordo...C-A-Vtg-Johnston-and-Murphy-563/272450913885? Been listed for months

Your help is much appreciated. And I wont be stingy with pictures once (if) shoes are in my hands.

 

[smfdoc]

I've always been half-hearted about old used shoes, but just saw one that may be worth dipping in the market.

Does anybody have information on WINGFOOT GOODYEAR? Google has given me bupkus.

I'm looking at these Black shell LWB from the 60s.

• Is this even shell cordovan? I'm at 50 50.
• Overall condition: is it worth purchasing? Would you? for how much?
• And while we are on the topic, can anyone explain why nobody's biting on this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Shell-Cordo...C-A-Vtg-Johnston-and-Murphy-563/272450913885? Been listed for months

Your help is much appreciated. And I wont be stingy with pictures once (if) shoes are in my hands.

What a great way to start off Black Friday that does not involve involve fighting 6 people at Best Buy for a discounted flat screen. Let's start with the first shoe. The Wingfoot Goodyear label is the make of the heel and not the shoe. You will see this error occur regularly on Ebay when the seller cant find anything else to read.The final picture you gave shows a very well worn picture of the insole that tells the story. It says Custom Imperial Spiegel. For those old enough to recall, Spiegel was a fashion catalog that included footwear.



Spiegel, like other large retailers, would contract manufacturers to create products and then brand them under the Spiegel name. Yes, this apparently included men's wingtip shoes. Here is the inner label from one such shoe on Ebay.



In my opinion, these are calf shoes. Looking at the vamp areas there are tiny cracks inside the waves. Shell does not develop the tiny cracks. As for condition, these shoes are pretty much shot. There are multiple cracks and breaks in the piping around the throat and I see a resole in their future. In short, this is a shoe I would personally avoid and, if I had to pay something for it, it would be $10 at Goodwill. Its far easier to find much better shoes.

The Johnston and Murphy shoe has been sitting for months for a reason. Despite the sellers label of shell cordovan, I think these are polished cobbler. J&M made a shell tassel loafer with a style number of 58528, and this one appears to be 28794. The tassels are all askew, and the uppers have clearly never been maintained. J & M made some better shoes in the US in the past and then their reputation went south when they went off shore. Hard to work up a bidding war on a shoe like this.

PM me your size and I will point out something for you if I run across something.

 

[starro]

What a great way to start off Black Friday that does not involve involve fighting 6 people at Best Buy for a discounted flat screen. Let's start with the first shoe. The Wingfoot Goodyear label is the make of the heel and not the shoe. You will see this error occur regularly on Ebay when the seller cant find anything else to read.The final picture you gave shows a very well worn picture of the insole that tells the story. It says Custom Imperial Spiegel. For those old enough to recall, Spiegel was a fashion catalog that included footwear.



Spiegel, like other large retailers, would contract manufacturers to create products and then brand them under the Spiegel name. Yes, this apparently included men's wingtip shoes. Here is the inner label from one such shoe on Ebay.



In my opinion, these are calf shoes. Looking at the vamp areas there are tiny cracks inside the waves. Shell does not develop the tiny cracks. As for condition, these shoes are pretty much shot. There are multiple cracks and breaks in the piping around the throat and I see a resole in their future. In short, this is a shoe I would personally avoid and, if I had to pay something for it, it would be $10 at Goodwill. Its far easier to find much better shoes.

The Johnston and Murphy shoe has been sitting for months for a reason. Despite the sellers label of shell cordovan, I think these are polished cobbler. J&M made a shell tassel loafer with a style number of 58528, and this one appears to be 28794. The tassels are all askew, and the uppers have clearly never been maintained. J & M made some better shoes in the US in the past and then their reputation went south when they went off shore. Hard to work up a bidding war on a shoe like this.

PM me your size and I will point out something for you if I run across something.

Thank you very much! The creases looked off to me, but I only have experience with new factrory condition shell, not 50+ years old with little/no care.

Your advice is sound and will be followed. I just pm'ed you to take you up on your generous offer. May your Black Friday be fillled with unexpected bargains

ADDENDUM:
What are the tricks you use to tell shell from corrected, in the case of the J&M?

 

[smfdoc]

Heading out for some thrifting in Florsheim 96302.

 

[coolarrow]

Quote: Bend the leather inward in an inconspicuous area like the throat/back heel area. Corrected grain will usually show microcreasing.

 

[smfdoc]

1950s ad for the City Club brand of shoes, made in the USA. Apparently Ms. Monroe was a big fan.




Cap toe oxford with 360 degree Goodyear welt, and contrasting double welt stitching for 270 degrees. City Club shoes still appear occasionally on Ebay.

 

[smfdoc]

PSA. If you wanted a pair of Florsheim 93605 shell long wings in really good condition for $92, the time is here. Provided you are a 10.5 C. (I have no connection with these shoes.) Click here for the Ebay listing.

 

[smfdoc]

Fashion conscious guys on the style forum are particular about their shoes. We brush, condition, use shoe trees and do not need to be inspired to provide proper shoe care. Well, guys in the 1950's were apparently not so inclined and had to be motivated to pull out the rags and brushes. The good people at Griffin Microsheen developed an entire advertising campaign around cleavage and convincing guys that women were easily seduced by a man with a microsheen shine. I'll bet they can cook too.

 

[smfdoc]

I am ever on the lookout for vintage shoes and I encountered this Ebay listing for a "Florsheim Imperial Worthmore" for a hefty asking price.



Hummm. I have not heard of the Worthmore and the medallion pattern was different than my other Florsheims. In fact, it is identical to the one used on my Hanover shell shoes.



In fact, this shoe also has the same seam in the long wing and at the rear of the vamp as my Hanover. The long wing also stops short of the rear and turns upwards like my Hanover.



I was sure that this was a Hanover and the owner just assumed it was a Florsheim, because some people assume Florsheim was the only maker of wingtips in those days. So I asked for pictures of the insole to check on style numbers and any label in the insole.



This image was originally horizontal so I could read the text, which was not a Florsheim code. At first glance in this position I thought this was a Florsheim label in the insole. But it stated Worthmore. Well, after digging around some and asking Dave at Vcleat.com (Terrific site and it should be must reading if you are in to vintage) I learned that Worthmore was the "value label" for Florsheim, which is why the logos are so similar. The Worthmore was a lower cost option for younger buyers that ran into trouble when other shoes dropped in price. The athletic shoes made big competition for Florsheim's traditional younger buyer, the young man who would work up to Florsheim through the lower-priced Worthmore brand, following in his father's footsteps, you might say. "What was good for Dad was good for me," the spirit once was. Things were freer flowing then, and Florsheim, which had not got where it was by ignoring such matters, and to some extent went with the flow. The company still made its traditional pitch to business men: "Men who work their way to the top rarely settle for second best," an ad said. "If you're the kind of man who always strives for the top, you know you can't afford anything less." By 1990 the change in the market caused Florsheim to drop stores and downsize existing locations. Florsheim started to move their shoes into the stores of other retailers. A note in a Chicago paper stated, "As previously reported, Florsheim recently completed test-marketing of its Worthmore line in selected Sears, Roebuck & Co. stores, a test that may be expanded to other retailers shortly."

Ok, case closed. Worthmores' are the cheaper end of the Florsheim spectrum and I will avoid them. Right? Not so fast. I then discovered some shell cordovan shoes were produced under the Worthmore line. Perhaps this occurred after the line made their way into some retailers who also wanted a higher end shoe in their line, but did not want to sell the Florsheim Imperials. I found this example of a shell Worthmore on Ebay. The other photos of this shoe showed that the different seams in the long wing and at the rear of the vamp were now missing and the medallion was the same used in other Florsheim shoes. So keep your eyes open for the Worthmore shell options and do not be pulled into an ad that claims the calf Worthmore is the equal of the Florsheim Imperial shoes of the same era.