Shoes that look better with age...

[Projectp]

I'm only speaking from personal experience. My White's were rebuilt twice within the first 2 months of ownership due to poor initial construction. Even then they were still so screwed up that I returned them. I've been wearing this pair of Wesco for a couple weeks now and they have a more solid feel. White's arch support was hands down more comfortable, but they didn't feel as stout as these Wesco boots.

[dylanbooth78]

I just had these re-soled...

 

 

 

... I think they are beginning to improve with age!

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 9, 2015 by hoggreaser

[mpukas]

I agree, Hoggy. Now I'm gonna up on my soap box, LOL. 

 

The whole concept of arch support is one of my big pet peeves. It's an industry created idea, in part, perpetuated by "some" medical experts, namely podiatrists (whom I think are complete quacks). I'm a big proponent of the minimalist/barefoot shoe idea, primarily for fitness shoes. 

 

It's completely contrary to think that putting a a support under the arch of your foot will correct alignment/pain problems in ankles, knees, thighs, hips, etc. as is commonly sold to us by foot wear and insole companies. It works the other way around - our feet provide a stable platform for our bodies, and they react and adapt to whats going on up above. Flat arches and knocked knees are the result of poor postural alignment, and arch support won't correct that. We ALL have postural alignment issues (that's been the root of my back and sciatica pain for the past 15 years, and I'm finally getting it corrected).

 

Our feet need to move and work freely. The arches of our feet are like an arch of a bridge spanning a river - support at the ends. Feet arches aren't supposed to have "support" under them. They don't touch the ground for a reason. Bone spurs, flat arches, etc. are all corrected when the upper body and the feet are working together in harmony. 

 

I think Otto White's concept of arch support and a high heel was a marketing tool he came up with 100+ years ago and sold as a "novel" idea. It still persuades people today. His whole thing about the "natural phenomenon about how your foot is angled when relaxed and your knees are crossed is complete Snake oil. 

 

More and more people in different industries, including law enforcement and military, are moving towards minimalist and zero-drop footwear.  I have an addiction to nice shoes and boots, and having a heel and arch support is part of that game. 

 

I'm done, rant over. Carry on... LOL!  

[mpukas]

@projectp - great boots, noice score on those Wesco 2nd's!!! 

[dylanbooth78]

I agree to a certain point, I used to run in minimalist off road running shoes (innov8 talons) but just picked up too many ankle and knee injuries, I now run in Salomon s-lab off road shoes (they only have minimal support but still a bit more than the innov8's!) and I am pretty much injury free. I must add though that I weigh 93kg so that probably makes a big difference in impact.

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 9, 2015 by hoggreaser

[dylanbooth78]

ha ha, they need to be that low profile to allow for the extreme swagger!!

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 9, 2015 by hoggreaser

[mpukas]

@dylan - I too have Salomon S-lab Sense (red & white jobs). Amazing shoes. I also have Inov-8, several pairs. I do agree that I like some amount of cushioning, not completely barefoot. But I really like zero drop and no arch. I'm not much of a long distance runner, just short bursts during fitness training. 

 

@hoggy - I'm no running expert, but in barefoot running / minimalist running shoes you land on the forefoot, and your heel barely kisses the ground. It's a shorter forward reach with your leading foot and a longer stretch back with your trailing foot. Since we've been accustomed to running with heavily padded shoes with a large heel-to-toe drop (20mm or more) and strike with the heel first, it takes a LONG time to start running naturally (forefoot first). The muscles and tendons have to be re-trained and develop the proper strength. Just running your first 1/4 mile this way may leave you limping and hobbling for days - it did me, LOL! 

 

Just watch young children run barefoot and observe what they do naturally, without being told anything. Or, try running in flip-flops (but be careful!). In order to do so you have land forefoot first. 

[mpukas]

Shoe wise, I've just picked up a pair of our lad Gallagher's desert boots -   

 

??? 

 

I've been thinking of a little project - getting a pair of Clark's desert boots and having them resoled with a flat sole, no heel, and taking the footbed out and replacing it with a cheap-ass flat Spenco job from the grocery store. It would be relatively cheap project, and I'm sure they'd look like s$!t. 

Edited March 28, 2015 by mpukas

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 9, 2015 by hoggreaser

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 9, 2015 by hoggreaser

[Rob060]

red wing 3140

[Mr. Blue]

Florsheim Imperial

[tod]

Regarding arch support:  I will just say that it makes a HUGE difference for me.  Without it, my feet for years felt sore and my back hurt if I stood for more than an hour or so a day, or had to walk much.  I just figured that was life for many years, but then at some point started getting some arch support insoles, and it made my life much better.  I used them in all my boots.  And then I found White's, and it was the first pair of boots that I could wear all day without an insole and still feel good.  Honestly, it's like a miracle dudes!

 

Now, I have learned in recent years that I have not only hight arches but also very flexible feet (so that mash down when I walk to use the technical term), so it may be that I am an ideal candidate for White's. But i know it helps others as well. For those that don't need the support, I can only say you are very lucky.  You can wear totally flat but cool-looking Iron Rangers (which would kill me).  But for those who do, White's is the shit.

[mattbernier]

As a former trail worker who put in several 9-12 mile days in Baxter State Park and Deboullie Public Land unit in both White's with a higher than normal heel, and in Red Wings with a normal height heel, I'll chime in with my own input. The White's are indeed heavy and the heels slightly more difficult on rocky downhills where you can't kick the heel into the dirt to form a step. But they're the only boot or shoe I've worn where my feet came out of the boot every day feeling exactly like they did when I put them in. (Although they often looked different- during river crossings or rain storms the boots would dye my feet orange.) The Red Wings are lighter and more "athletic", but are less protective, and make my feet feel more tired and used at the end of a day. Where the Red Wings ended up being preferable during long hikes, I really missed them when I had to stand for extended periods on hard ground, and when I had to lift heavy things. The White's made both activities much easier.

 

Here's what my White's looked like after their trail seasons:

[onehundy]

whites semi dress the most comfortable boot I owned with a leather sole

[Aries]

Great, informative posts on this page from all, very interesting reading. Thanks guys!

[bradl]

Agree Matt, I could wear my whites all day long and my feet feel better than when I wake up. I also wore a pair of 875 for awhile and my feet would throb at the end of the day, but not sure if it was from the sole they have on them.

[canucklehead]

My new Viberg Engineers. They're breaking in nicely.

 

[mpukas]

@canucklehead - those look great. nice boots. 

[mpukas]

with no intentions to start a debate, some fun stuff; 

 

Otzi's shoes

 

Tarahumara

[splash pitman]

Toes UP!!! Spring cleaning & conditioning the boots that got me through winter:

 

Tricker's Malton C-Shade Gorse

&

Viberg Loden Green Service Boots

 

Do you still wear those " Dayton drivers " in your rotation ?

I seen them in your photos in the last submission thread and thought it bad form to ask you about them in that thread .

[BOPOHA-KAP-KAP]

RW Postman 101 & RW Beckman 9014 (1 year, full album: http://imgur.com/a/lpqEJ)

 

 

 

[canucklehead]

Here's a shot couple more shots, showing the entire boot and the toe profile, which I really like.

 

 

 

My new Viberg Engineers. They're breaking in nicely.

 

[givemefive]

Here's a shot couple more shots, showing the entire boot and the toe profile, which I really like.

 

 

 

Really like these boots.  What's the leg opening on those jeans?

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 9, 2015 by hoggreaser

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 9, 2015 by hoggreaser

[Noodle36]

Florsheim Imperial

Where did you find these? I posted a couple shots of my father's imperial brogues awhile back. He bought them in 65 for around $60.00. A lot of money at the time for a pair of shoes. They have been re-soled a couple of times and some repairs have been done to the lining.