Jump to content
Flash

The Sneakers we wear with our jeans

Recommended Posts

No problem, sorry I can't help with the Warehouse. I just haven't found that any high-end canvas sneakers have really separated themselves much from '70s chucks. I can feel and see the differences in some when handled at Self Edge and other retailers, but I can't find $140 of additional value in them. That's not to say others shouldn't find that value in 'em, just where I'm at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally get it, I'll probably just get another pair of 70's Cons for 80 bucks and call it a day.
They have lots of colors and very low commitment at the price.

The Warehouse ones should hold up a little better considering they're suede (and the same price as the Wakouwa).
Just wish they made a 12 so I felt more confident in the sizing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 70s Chucks are the sweet spot for heritage-style sneakers. They feel as nice to me as Japanese sneakers I've handled, and are made from excellent materials, but way cheaper. Obviously, I was there was a more ethically-manufactured version available

My biggest issue with the 70s Chuck is the fit, the heel seems way too big to me. A snugger-heeled 70s Chuck would be just about perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck 70 are great and a good price. Warehouse sneaks are as good /value if you don't pay London prices....

@Broark what size are you in 70's highs? I take the same size in the warhorse as my 70's high tops. 

I size down a half in 70's low 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Geeman the last pair of 70's I bought years ago were an 11.5, black high tops. I got rid of them when I last moved because they were so beat up.
Warehouse be a tad too snug then. :dry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Jared_Lee said:

No problem, sorry I can't help with the Warehouse. I just haven't found that any high-end canvas sneakers have really separated themselves much from '70s chucks. I can feel and see the differences in some when handled at Self Edge and other retailers, but I can't find $140 of additional value in them. That's not to say others shouldn't find that value in 'em, just where I'm at.

Oh yes, completely agree, at their price point they can't be beaten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Double 0 Soul said:

Nope!

:angry:

:sad:

I always have my doubts about this type of thing - still, it doesn’t make it any less shit when they’re not up to the task

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^I have a white '70s Goretex pair that I wear when cycling. They do the trick for light rain and ground moisture (most of the rain water that soaks during moderate rain comes up from the ground and over the collar of the shoe when cycling). In heavy rain, they do not work at all. I have the other version of water proof Chuck's that I wear when it's really storming and matched with a long length Patagonia H2No pant, they keep my feet completely dry. They look like shit though.

157459C_A_107X1.jpg?sw=964

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check these l'ill beauties out @Geeman my kids new 'back to school' shoes in size 6

IMG_9493

..he actually asked me for these B)

IMG_9493

..in other news i watched 80 Blocks from Tiffany's during lockdown, ive not seen it for years, it's up on youtube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They look the bollocks! 

I feel a Google rabbit hole forming.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm adding these in support of Pumas. 
Never got round to wearing them properly. 
Limited edition from the original Foot Patrol when I was first working in SoHo  


GV Special Hot Pack - Black/Sundance/ Poison Green. 

Jealous of the back to school pair your son has, I was forced to wear the dullest plain shoes you could imagine. 

 

BC8DA0CB-C80D-406D-AEBE-B9447100C139.JPG

Edited by UkeNo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Geeman said:

They look the bollocks! 

I feel a Google rabbit hole forming.....

£40 from Size down from £76

@UkeNo most of the schools in S11 have a strict no uniform policy so the kids can wear what'evs.. saying that i never had to wera a school uniform either B) only downside to this... i'm embarrassed to say that i'm a 40something yr old man who is incapable of tying a tie because ive never worn one.. never wore a suit or a smart shirt either..:blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I still have to look up youtube every. single. time when I need to tie a tie. Bit embarrassing when my son mastered it on the second day of having to wear one for high school this year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I suspect that you can both tie a tie. If you can master  simple knots for your outdoor pursuits @Double 0 Soul then a tie is no different. 

I wore one at school, so learnt a couple of knots when I was young. Most of my mates went to schools that wore sweatshirts instead of shirt and tie. I was always jealous that they looked way more comfortable daily than I did.
At my school you keep a pair of trainers in your bag so you could swap into them on your way home .Tie off trainers on before the bus. Had to do it on the sly to ensure you didn't get caught by the teachers though.

Nowadays tying a tie makes me popular at every wedding I ever go to, as I have to help my friend tie theirs.

Go buy one from a charity shop for a couple of quid and have a go. There's loads of guides on how to tie them and plenty of variations.
A simple knot only has approx 4 stages, and is all you need. More complicated knots are always bulkier and can have the look of a footballer about them. No need for that.

it's quite satisfying in its own way - when you figure out how to do a complicated one. Unnecessary, but satisfying. Like a puzzle. 
 

Edited by UkeNo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I had to wear a tie at school from age 4 to 18 and have worn them on and off for work for about 20 years although not at all in the last 5. Like @UkeNo says, the basic knot is far easier than tying a shoelace and once mastered you can enter the slightly more complicated realms of half Windsor, full Windsor etc if you desire, although yes you may look like an Italian footballer, especially if you sport a baseball cap with your suit.

My son (now 12), had to start wearing one last September after starting a secondary school that is very strict about uniform and coming from standard primary school attire of polo shirt and sweatshirt. He learnt it on the first or second day - @mondo we must have gifted kids :laugh2:

No trainers for him either - sensible black shoes with his uniform! I did get him some adidas Continental 80s (all black version) for his PE shoes though in place of the generic school ones.

Here he is in his Puma Clydes back in 2016, also Barbour and H&M jeans.

62709680-736F-4230-81A7-375981415F08.jpeg

I think those were his H&Ms, these were his Levi’s - check out those combs!

80DBCC7F-A28B-42E2-8F21-8F8E04E5D811.jpeg

Edited by Maynard Friedman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

My companies dress code has relaxed the last couple of years so jeans and chinos are the norm  but I still suit up for client meetings occasionally. Quite enjoy the change sometimes and the wife always gives me appreciating comments (probably sick of me in jeans). For me it's not the knot its the length of the tie that's tricky ....OCD trigger!

https://putthison.com/the-fit-and-proportions-of-a-your-tie-the-fit/

Edited by Geeman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, UkeNo said:

I suspect that you can both tie a tie. If you can master  simple knots for your outdoor pursuits @Double 0 Soul then a tie is no different.

Probably a bad choice of words on my part Michael.. what i should have said is 'ive never tried to tie a tie' rather than 'i can't' ive just never worn one, even when i had the opportunity i got married in a battered old pair of SC-47's (pre-lawsuit obviously) white t-shirt and Chucks instead of a suit..  ive never even been to a job interview B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^...and I can so, too, tie a tie.. just need a little reminder.. in the form of a youtube vid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2020 at 9:22 AM, Double 0 Soul said:

Nope!

:angry:

Hi Neal, have you considered Allbirds? I like their high-tops and Everyday models but their water-resistant high-tops don't look bad either. In addition, they're pretty ethical and have virtually no visual branding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they'll suffer the same fait as the Chucks Martin, surface water is flicking up from the back of the front tyre directly onto my shoes and running between the laces and behind the tongue, compounded by the water running down my legs, ive had a pair of waterproof pants on order from Showers Pass for the last few months, i reckon if i zip the legs over my Chucks + velcro closures it'll improve matters... ive just fitted some mudguards too... Showers Pass are cool to deal with, when my size wasn't in stock they offered me their more expensive models for the same price so i didn't have to wait B)

I didn't take them up on the offer cos they zip off into shorts, i would never wear them as shorts so it's just introducing an unwanted seam into the mix..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you obviously don’t know about Altama OTB maritime assault.

Theyr the Chucks on steroids since 1969 made specifically for navy seals when they realised they were using Chucks instead of regular army boots. Why? Lighter, comfortable and no problems with sand and water. Special insoles that don’t retain water. Once you try them on you never go back to converse all star etc. It’s like wearing Chucks but way more comfortable and better in the water rain humidity etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Duodequinquagesimus said:

you obviously don’t know about Altama OTB maritime assault.

Theyr the Chucks on steroids since 1969 made specifically for navy seals when they realised they were using Chucks instead of regular army boots. Why? Lighter, comfortable and no problems with sand and water. Special insoles that don’t retain water. Once you try them on you never go back to converse all star etc. It’s like wearing Chucks but way more comfortable and better in the water rain humidity etc

They’re not waterproof 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The discussion was about ‘waterproof’ chucks for Double 0 Soul - which sadly turned out to be a lot less water resistant than he hoped. Suggesting an alternative pair of shoes that aren’t waterproof either doesn’t help him much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus they're kinda hideous. Looks like a pair of Converse had a baby with some early 2000's skater shoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mostly wear boots, but when I don’t, I wear shoes that are kinda boots.

cOOBAQe.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

New NB 574 for the little fella

So I joined him in my NB ST33s M1400FZ2, c2007

IMG-20200615-WA0009.jpg

Edited by MJF9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now