Couldn’t put a leather midsole instead of fiberboard, and a leather board heel counter. Very unfortunate, how much would that have added to the cost to do that? I would think a 400 dollar pair of sneakers is enough to have those additions right?
You are correct and the answer is obvious when you think about it he takes 25% or thereabouts so that comes out of the shoe or is added to the price or both.
“Would we rather use a vegitan heel counter? Yes of course, but we are trying to keep these at a price point so people can get them”. This is a great example of where costs are cut so you can take 25% of the sale price.
I'm just not sure what's even the point of spending so much money on shoes that are strictly casual. 30 dollar target sneakers may be garbage, but you'll never need more than that for casual shoes. It should be 3 or 4 years before a casual shoe breaks down from casual use. At that point, the cost-benefit analysis favors the target shoes over the 400 dollar sneakers. If I'm spending that much money on shoes, I'd better be able to use them as way more than just being casual. That, or they'd better be good for specific purposes, like climbing shoes or dress shoes. Conceptually, these shoes can only be casual. Why spend that much money? Get a damn boot at that point. It'll do way more for you.
@arunashamal i dont wear target shoes. I'm just saying that I wouldn't be paying for more than target shoes if it's just for casual shoes. For this price, I'm getting iron rangers, which i did. They're great, and are probably way better than these overpriced casual sneakers. I mean seriously, why would you pay that much just to look casual? That's like trying really hard to look like you're not trying.
Honestly, the prices that these sneakers are going for are boot territory, which makes them redundant and not a good option, as they don't even have leather midsole. Same problem that I have with Crown Northampton. For the price they go for its better to get a pair of full leather shoes. Pricing is very important. Should be like a premium sneaker price but lower than a boot
True, and while these and the full grain leather sneakers seem neat, I also just don't get the point of them from a functional or purpose standpoint. So what is the point of them? What are you spending your money to use these for? They're not boots, so you don't get that ruggedness that comes with good boots, and for that price point, you're better off getting boots. They're not runners, so you're not getting them for their athletic performance. They're not formal, so forget wearing them to a job interview or wedding. So what are they really? They're purposely CASUAL shoes. And I guess that's fine. Nothing from with cheap basic shoes that are just for throwing around at your casual events. But these aren't cheap. They're reaching up into the price range nearing PNW boots. And for what, casual shoes? I cannot imagine the reason for dropping that much money on CASUAL footwear. The way I see it, you spend good money on footwear that is either versatile or specialized. Versatile, as in you can use it for a lot of things, at least more than one purpose. My Iron Rangers are casual boots, but they can also do light hikes, they can be light work boots, and I can even use them as my formal shoes. So that's 4 different purposes for one shoe, and one that is cheaper than these sneakers. In fact, I'd highly recommend Iron Rangers instead of the SMUGS. You will get way more bang for buck with Iron Rangers. They are versatile and look great, and likely way more repairable. I end up using them as my sneakers anyway, as in they're my go-to shoes now for if I'm too lazy to lace up my JK boots and I'm not doing anything special anyway. Specialized, as in it really only does one thing, but it does that one thing VERY well. And that one thing is specific. Examples include climbing shoes, snow boots, or even dress shoes. These are specific. They really only do the one thing well, and you probably don't want to be using them for anything other than that one thing. But it makes sense to spend good money on such shoes, because you really want them to perform their one purpose very well. You don't really want snow boots that aren't the best at being snow boots. That's called getting frostbite. And while I don't care for dress shoes myself, I can understand spending good money on shoes that you wear for formal events. But where do the SMUGS fit in? They do neither. They're not versatile, as in you can't really be using them for much else other than being casual shoes. Sure, you can take them on light hikes, but that's about it. And they're definitely not specialized. So you're spending 400 dollars on shoes that aren't good for very much, that don't do anything special. I guess if your identity is strongly dependent on you being the casual man, these can make sense, stylistically speaking. But then, there's just far cheaper options for that. Thursdays makes the same style of sneaker for a fraction of the cost. I see no reason why you wouldn't just go for those.
Yeah, good points there. I bought their sneakers, the Mellor II in horsebutt Maryam TPR, before they increased prices with inflation and such. Yes, they were not cheap, but still were priced a bit higher than some Nike shoes but using premium horsebutt leather and having an overall nice aesthetic. I have been using them very regularly for a bit more than one year, but now the soles are starting to wear out. I can resole them, which living in the UK would cost me £70 plus around £6 for shipping. But that's where my other problem comes in. The soles will only last me 1 year if I wear them regularly in the weekends. Some boot soles like Dr Sole can last me even longer than 1 year. So now I'm facing this conundrum of what to do. I still want a pair of black leather sneakers but I don't know where to put my money on. Or if it is better to go for some boots instead
@amBullseye Try to find some really nice boots or durable footwear in the same cost category or even higher. Then compare the math on cost of a re-sole and see if it makes sense for your situation.
Nice add, I'll stick to skating in my 7 times cheaper suede shoes. They're supposed to be disposable, because the grip will tear trough any leather at a similar rate no matter the price and quality.
I was always wondering how C. F. Stead had such an amazing reputation despite producing suede rather than just roughout leather, but it seems that their suede is almost technically a roughout leather due to that thin amount of tighter grain structure
Interesting I would have thought you'd go with CF's Janus suede which is essentially rough-out where the rough-out is silky and suede-like. The feeling of unlined janus-suede loafers on sock-less feet is awesome. I have a pair of Maine-made Easymoc's in a beautiful camel suede but they are also lined with veg tanned leather so its like win win.
This is Repello suede isn't it ? Repello suede has a scotch guard water repellent treatment added during the production process which should last for the life of the product. This makes the suede heavily water resistant though I still add something like Tarrago nano spray to help the water run off. Also, CF Stead do make roughout (Janus suede) and have a whole catalogue of treated suedes like Waxy Commander and Mohawk.
@5:03 So the suede is cheaper than the Full Grain versions by your own admission but somehow these shoe made with CHEAPER MATERIALS are magically more expensive?! Gtfo You can keep your shit leatherboard midsole & counter cover and the thin ass outsoles. $350 for that, you're out you mind! 🙄🤦👎👎
Was in the process of ordering but oh boy... With shipping, some extra taxes they said I have to pay at checkout + some extra fees the price goes up by 50% 🙄 so total 450 euro... Bro thats a bit too heavy...
Love suede sneakers and have 5 pairs of Clark’s, Weavers, Wallabees and Chukka’s all made with CF Stead suede…. Also have other shoes made out of their suede 👍 PS… Ruze shoes has Clark’s Chukkas on sale, some 50% and all made with CF Stead suede…
I appreciate these vids. They're putting their money where their mouth is and making their own shoes to show how they think it should be done, and explaining why they made the choices they did. Also hell no am I ever dropping that kinda money on a sneaker
I was pretty curious why you used suede because I kinda hate how it looks, and it always turns blue lol but I’ve had suede etnies last literal years before
Can you compare the new ahola Tor with leather upper and th glenclyffe urban boot from north face?! They basically look the same but ones a higher boot.
Technically yes, but good luck finding a cobbler who would do this for you. As I understand it, it's the problem with the cup sole. It needs to be exact and it's not like most small cobblers are going to have a selection of them on hand.
I was hoping they would sell the cupsole so you could get it resoled or have a service where you send it in, otherwise what’s the point of getting a sneaker with higher materials as the life of the sole for me is always the limiting factor not the quality of the leather!
@@lunchbox7557 I think cup sole sneakers really shouldn't be a thing once you get past a certain price point and you advertise resoleability. What is wrong with "sneakers" that have a goodyear welt? It would be way more repairable and actually make it more worth that high price point. Sure, you lose a bit of that sneaker look, but that cup sole sneaker look is also part of what keeps it looking like a much cheaper pair of shoes. Why not allow it to look a bit closer to the amount of money you spend on it? If it's just a style thing, then it might just make more sense to stick with Thursday sneakers. They make the same style, and for shoes that are so casual, I see no reason to spend any more money than that. You're not realistically going to get such shoes resoled anyway, so...why pay that price point? A program to send it in for repairs would help. But even then, one of the neat things about repairable footwear is the ability to send it in to any cobbler to get them repaired. Cuz then you don't have to worry about the company sticking around or the program sticking around. You could support your local cobbler, and even shop around for cheaper repair costs and whatnot. It gives you options, and options are great. A company-specific repair program makes sense for specific shoes, but the whole thing with sneakers is that they're not specific, they're casual.
Suede can't rlly be that shitty if most militaries on the planet now use suede boots as standard issue footwear. There's definitely significant advantages in suede footwear, such as reduced break in period, no need to polish/condition (if you have the time it's good to do, but otherwise it won't wreck them) and it's incredibly abrasion resistant.
Also, more breathable and handles getting wet way better than full grain leather. Oh, and it's also cheaper. Suede has its advantages. I like full grain, full leather boots too, but I'm not gonna really want to take them out in a rainstorm if I can help it. I already tried that once, and it was a bad time. My suede desert boots, however, can handle water decently well. They don't take long to dry, and have those drainage holes from the jungle boot design. And as long as the suede is properly backed, they shouldn't fall apart so easily.
@ShadeSlayer1911 I thought leather is wayyyyy better for rain or water than suede if suede gets rained on or wet it basically gets ruined loses its quality look and definitely doesn't feel as nice and soft afterwards. Leather you just wipe it off dry n clean and looks and feels perfectly fine after rainy days.
@@dylanp9211 Leather is porous too. If it's more than a short time in the rain, water will soak into the boots. And if there's enough exposure to water, it will pull all the oils out of the leather, after which you will definitely need to do some serious conditioning, otherwise you get dry leather that becomes brittle and then cracks. You also can't dry leather with any heat either, otherwise you also risk it becoming brittle and cracking. Speaking of drying, soaked leather takes forever to dry. It's one of the reasons why the leather boots during WW1 was a major cause of trenchfoot. Those boots refused to stay dry, refused to dry once wet, and all that moisture was not a good time for feet. And this is despite all the dubbing wax that the soldiers were trained to treat their boots with. It didn't matter in the face of constant wetness. Suede will absorb water more easily, but it also dries way more easily. And decent quality suede will not be hurt by water. I've completely soaked my Garmont desert boots a couple of times now, and they're perfectly fine. In fact, people use these boots for swamping, so I doubt they're bad with water. You can also get suede conditioning that waterproofs the suede. I believe it's silicone-based, and if you apply it correctly, it soaks all the way through the suede and that provides way better waterproofing than any conditioning you do for full-grain leather. It won't be perfect, but it also doesn't need to be. Water getting into these boots isn't the end of the world. It'll dry fast. With full grain leather, it's really not as good against water as you think. I mean if you got leather that is specifically treated for being waterproof/water resistant, that's a different story. Like waxed leather, or weathergaurd leather, or silicone-treated leather. But those either end up making the leather less breathable or wear out after some time. Or they straight up are just water resistant and will let water in with some time. Waxed lather will not stay waterproof for very long. Normal leather definitely isn't waterproof. My thorogoods were decent against water after I conditioned them thoroughly with obenauf's, but that wore off after an all-day rain hike and then proceeded to soak completely through and stay wet for the rest of the week-long camping trip. My iron rangers, I have not treated with obenauf's, and with the factory conditioning, they absorb water even after just a couple of seconds. Like I see dark spots even if I just splash some water on them and don't wipe it off immediately. It's nothing critical, it dries fine and goes back to normal, and it's not even a complaint against those boots. I'm just not going to take them out during heavy rains. I stepped into some pretty deep water in my JKs once. It was a 20 minute walk in a pouring flash-flood rainstorm and then a short full immersion dip in some water. That was enough to soak the boots through. I could feel my socks wet. And no, the water didn't go past the top of the boots. Definitely not waterproof. You're probably fine taking full-grain leather boots out in a light rain, or just walking from place to place on a normal day during a rainstorm. But try them on a full-day hike in the rain, and then get back to me on that. At the end of the day, if you're expecting waterproof boots, leather isn't what you should be looking for. Leather is great stuff, but being waterproof is not one of them.
@@ShadeSlayer1911 yea I guess I was more so talking about walking from place to place business to business or so or to your car in wet rainy or snowy weather conditions. But I suppose that all makes sense. ..
@@dylanp9211 Yeah, if you're just an urban trekker in an area that never has flash flood rains, a normal full grain leather boot is probably never going to fail you. But I've also heard that leather gets brittle in the cold too, so maybe it's not even good for the snow. I guess at the end of the day, what I've learned is that there is not one boot that can handle everything. Every climate and environment, and even your specific activity, is going to need specific designs to perform optimally. I love my full leather JK boots. But I'm not taking them out in heavy rains, and I'm not taking them to the jungle, nor am I taking them swamping. Granted, I don't do any of these things anyway, but if I did, I'd need specific boots for them. Snow boots get tricky too. I have no idea what would be good for that. But if you're not an adventurer like that, then you don't need to worry about any of those things. A solid boot will do you just fine for general purposes. And even for me, my JKs and Iron Rangers serve me just fine for 90 percent of the time. I'm not exacting looking to hike in the rain most of the time. It doesn't snow where I live and if I go to the snow, it's not like I'm getting myself knee deep in the stuff. I have never even visited a jungle. I just think about more of these things because I like doing that.
Bla,bla, bla. No matter how you justify it, yes, suade is beautiful, but cheap! And just look at that midsole. It is not better than a Walmart shoes. Here in Italia, I can buy better-looking boots of the same mediocre quality or a pair of casual ultraboost top-notch technology for around 140 Euros.😊
To the editors, can you please stop using the ghosting effects on letters like at 0:33 . It has a blinding effect on people who are light sensitive like myself. Just another accessibility thing to consider.
Get a new pair of Sneakers Made Using Good Sh*t here - bit.ly/4e8PiQM
Sizing Guide - th-cam.com/video/hf4W2ch1g68/w-d-xo.htmlsi=R8eRZmT4M8M6RlMk
you ever have any extra products that you'd normally throw out, but maybe could give to a poor person on disability?
Yeah leatherboard is a big no when the shoes are 375
He takes a big slice of the sale price too.
375? these are $488!! thats a crazy price for these
@ true plus shipping and import taxes
@@rmcBloody exactly, I bought the original smugs for $357 total, and for that price definitely worth it in my opinion, but almost $500 is insane
Couldn’t put a leather midsole instead of fiberboard, and a leather board heel counter. Very unfortunate, how much would that have added to the cost to do that?
I would think a 400 dollar pair of sneakers is enough to have those additions right?
You are correct and the answer is obvious when you think about it he takes 25% or thereabouts so that comes out of the shoe or is added to the price or both.
“Would we rather use a vegitan heel counter? Yes of course, but we are trying to keep these at a price point so people can get them”.
This is a great example of where costs are cut so you can take 25% of the sale price.
$300 and not even a leather counter? Yikes.
I'm just not sure what's even the point of spending so much money on shoes that are strictly casual. 30 dollar target sneakers may be garbage, but you'll never need more than that for casual shoes. It should be 3 or 4 years before a casual shoe breaks down from casual use. At that point, the cost-benefit analysis favors the target shoes over the 400 dollar sneakers.
If I'm spending that much money on shoes, I'd better be able to use them as way more than just being casual. That, or they'd better be good for specific purposes, like climbing shoes or dress shoes. Conceptually, these shoes can only be casual. Why spend that much money? Get a damn boot at that point. It'll do way more for you.
@arunashamal i dont wear target shoes. I'm just saying that I wouldn't be paying for more than target shoes if it's just for casual shoes. For this price, I'm getting iron rangers, which i did. They're great, and are probably way better than these overpriced casual sneakers. I mean seriously, why would you pay that much just to look casual? That's like trying really hard to look like you're not trying.
@@ShadeSlayer1911 yeah you have a major point.
Ngl it's a hard sell for a footwear collab made with Suede when it opens with "Why is suede shit"
There‘s a difference between real suede and split leather that most label as suede for cheap products.
Pseudo suede. I call it "Suedo."
Exactly.
Honestly, the prices that these sneakers are going for are boot territory, which makes them redundant and not a good option, as they don't even have leather midsole.
Same problem that I have with Crown Northampton. For the price they go for its better to get a pair of full leather shoes.
Pricing is very important. Should be like a premium sneaker price but lower than a boot
True, and while these and the full grain leather sneakers seem neat, I also just don't get the point of them from a functional or purpose standpoint. So what is the point of them? What are you spending your money to use these for? They're not boots, so you don't get that ruggedness that comes with good boots, and for that price point, you're better off getting boots. They're not runners, so you're not getting them for their athletic performance. They're not formal, so forget wearing them to a job interview or wedding. So what are they really? They're purposely CASUAL shoes. And I guess that's fine. Nothing from with cheap basic shoes that are just for throwing around at your casual events. But these aren't cheap. They're reaching up into the price range nearing PNW boots. And for what, casual shoes? I cannot imagine the reason for dropping that much money on CASUAL footwear.
The way I see it, you spend good money on footwear that is either versatile or specialized.
Versatile, as in you can use it for a lot of things, at least more than one purpose. My Iron Rangers are casual boots, but they can also do light hikes, they can be light work boots, and I can even use them as my formal shoes. So that's 4 different purposes for one shoe, and one that is cheaper than these sneakers. In fact, I'd highly recommend Iron Rangers instead of the SMUGS. You will get way more bang for buck with Iron Rangers. They are versatile and look great, and likely way more repairable. I end up using them as my sneakers anyway, as in they're my go-to shoes now for if I'm too lazy to lace up my JK boots and I'm not doing anything special anyway.
Specialized, as in it really only does one thing, but it does that one thing VERY well. And that one thing is specific. Examples include climbing shoes, snow boots, or even dress shoes. These are specific. They really only do the one thing well, and you probably don't want to be using them for anything other than that one thing. But it makes sense to spend good money on such shoes, because you really want them to perform their one purpose very well. You don't really want snow boots that aren't the best at being snow boots. That's called getting frostbite. And while I don't care for dress shoes myself, I can understand spending good money on shoes that you wear for formal events.
But where do the SMUGS fit in? They do neither. They're not versatile, as in you can't really be using them for much else other than being casual shoes. Sure, you can take them on light hikes, but that's about it. And they're definitely not specialized. So you're spending 400 dollars on shoes that aren't good for very much, that don't do anything special. I guess if your identity is strongly dependent on you being the casual man, these can make sense, stylistically speaking. But then, there's just far cheaper options for that. Thursdays makes the same style of sneaker for a fraction of the cost. I see no reason why you wouldn't just go for those.
Yeah, good points there.
I bought their sneakers, the Mellor II in horsebutt Maryam TPR, before they increased prices with inflation and such.
Yes, they were not cheap, but still were priced a bit higher than some Nike shoes but using premium horsebutt leather and having an overall nice aesthetic.
I have been using them very regularly for a bit more than one year, but now the soles are starting to wear out.
I can resole them, which living in the UK would cost me £70 plus around £6 for shipping. But that's where my other problem comes in. The soles will only last me 1 year if I wear them regularly in the weekends.
Some boot soles like Dr Sole can last me even longer than 1 year. So now I'm facing this conundrum of what to do.
I still want a pair of black leather sneakers but I don't know where to put my money on. Or if it is better to go for some boots instead
@ShadeSlayer1911, very nice write-up. Really puts things into perspective. Like the plug of Iron Rangers. Why do you call them "light" work boots?
@amBullseye Try to find some really nice boots or durable footwear in the same cost category or even higher. Then compare the math on cost of a re-sole and see if it makes sense for your situation.
I do like the looks. Green is my favorite. But man, almost 400$ with that awful voids sole... just too much.
Most sneaker outsoles have void sections. Goral has boots with EVA foam wedge sole at cheaper price. Oh...なるほど
Nice add, I'll stick to skating in my 7 times cheaper suede shoes. They're supposed to be disposable, because the grip will tear trough any leather at a similar rate no matter the price and quality.
Mr anti-leatherboard uses leatherboard once he realizes it’s profitable. How curious.
Yeah at this point he has really sold out this channel.
@@somerandomperson8282 Looks like it, unfortunately. A shame
I was always wondering how C. F. Stead had such an amazing reputation despite producing suede rather than just roughout leather, but it seems that their suede is almost technically a roughout leather due to that thin amount of tighter grain structure
Interesting I would have thought you'd go with CF's Janus suede which is essentially rough-out where the rough-out is silky and suede-like. The feeling of unlined janus-suede loafers on sock-less feet is awesome. I have a pair of Maine-made Easymoc's in a beautiful camel suede but they are also lined with veg tanned leather so its like win win.
This is Repello suede isn't it ? Repello suede has a scotch guard water repellent treatment added during the production process which should last for the life of the product.
This makes the suede heavily water resistant though I still add something like Tarrago nano spray to help the water run off.
Also, CF Stead do make roughout (Janus suede) and have a whole catalogue of treated suedes like Waxy Commander and Mohawk.
@5:03 So the suede is cheaper than the Full Grain versions by your own admission but somehow these shoe made with CHEAPER MATERIALS are magically more expensive?! Gtfo You can keep your shit leatherboard midsole & counter cover and the thin ass outsoles. $350 for that, you're out you mind! 🙄🤦👎👎
No blue suede shoes…missed opportunity
They look fantastic, but these seem like they should be cheaper than the original SMUGGS, not more expensive
Was in the process of ordering but oh boy... With shipping, some extra taxes they said I have to pay at checkout + some extra fees the price goes up by 50% 🙄 so total 450 euro... Bro thats a bit too heavy...
Sounds like eruo leather tariffs at work.
for that money you can get two pairs of African Ranger Barefoot and still have some change
Yeah weird, if they're made in the UK, they should be able to sell to Europe from there. Even with Brexit it'll be cheaper.
You can get better trainers from Crown Northampton in the same suede for less money and worldwide shipping is free.
Love suede sneakers and have 5 pairs of Clark’s, Weavers, Wallabees and Chukka’s all made with CF Stead suede…. Also have other shoes made out of their suede 👍 PS… Ruze shoes has Clark’s Chukkas on sale, some 50% and all made with CF Stead suede…
Those voids on the sole look nasty.
Definitely not what one would expect for such a basic shoes costing USD 400.
it's rubber not foam so it doesn't matter
man his style is so good with the dark browns and black
Used to love my blue and white suede pumas
yes my favorite shoe of all time
Yep and they lasted forever
@@need4speed290 they sure did i want to buy some new red ones this time
I have Thursday Captain in suede. It is the same price as the oiled leather version.
Its cheaper leather it should be priced lower.
Why do you cut the laces in half??
These collab videos just feel like ads...
I appreciate these vids. They're putting their money where their mouth is and making their own shoes to show how they think it should be done, and explaining why they made the choices they did. Also hell no am I ever dropping that kinda money on a sneaker
I mean it’s his own shoe…
It's an ad dude that's why
It is an add, but at least it is honest
"Buy my shoes, they're the best!"
Would you consider NUBUCK leather a suede?
It would be great if these boots could come in a "barefoot version" just by adding a wide toe box - That would be a HIT
I was hoping. Bought the wide ones instead.
@@SapperRJMorgan they worked out?
Did you not see the cross section, they're so damn thin they basically are barefoot 🤷
@@TheUncleRuckus but the toe box isn't "wide"
You should definitely make a skate review on the smugs it would be cool to watch
Why wouldn't they make a blue suede?
This channel needs more variety. Something other than heritage boots
What no blue suede shoes?
Timberland has CF collection. The dark blue looks amazing!
Love your content! Do you have any resources for anyone who wants to make quality shoes?
I was pretty curious why you used suede because I kinda hate how it looks, and it always turns blue lol but I’ve had suede etnies last literal years before
Smugs look like an exact copy of sneakers I once had. But at 7x price.
Can you compare the new ahola Tor with leather upper and th glenclyffe urban boot from north face?! They basically look the same but ones a higher boot.
these shoes look as comfortable as cement blocks on my feet
can u do a vid on the reebok classics
I have a pair of the initial run of the SMUGs, are the 2.0s or these any different construction, besides the suede? Thanks!
Nope just suede
@ I mean they do look slick
These sneakers look nice but this time of year my budget is towards Christmas presents, maybe next time, if there is a next time.
Is this how Moctoeber ends?
Do you have a video for Boondocks?
We still getting that Frye moc toe video?
The best pair of American Eagles I ever had. Namastè.
It sounds pointless to sand away the grain of they use it roughout anyway...
But the result looks good. :)
*These suede sneakers are pretty cool!*
*Good suede, good leather board, nice price. They look comfy! "Built like a boot!" I like that aspect!*
fleshout>>> suede.
Are they resoleable?
Technically yes, but good luck finding a cobbler who would do this for you. As I understand it, it's the problem with the cup sole. It needs to be exact and it's not like most small cobblers are going to have a selection of them on hand.
I was hoping they would sell the cupsole so you could get it resoled or have a service where you send it in, otherwise what’s the point of getting a sneaker with higher materials as the life of the sole for me is always the limiting factor not the quality of the leather!
@@lunchbox7557 I think cup sole sneakers really shouldn't be a thing once you get past a certain price point and you advertise resoleability. What is wrong with "sneakers" that have a goodyear welt? It would be way more repairable and actually make it more worth that high price point. Sure, you lose a bit of that sneaker look, but that cup sole sneaker look is also part of what keeps it looking like a much cheaper pair of shoes. Why not allow it to look a bit closer to the amount of money you spend on it?
If it's just a style thing, then it might just make more sense to stick with Thursday sneakers. They make the same style, and for shoes that are so casual, I see no reason to spend any more money than that. You're not realistically going to get such shoes resoled anyway, so...why pay that price point?
A program to send it in for repairs would help. But even then, one of the neat things about repairable footwear is the ability to send it in to any cobbler to get them repaired. Cuz then you don't have to worry about the company sticking around or the program sticking around. You could support your local cobbler, and even shop around for cheaper repair costs and whatnot. It gives you options, and options are great. A company-specific repair program makes sense for specific shoes, but the whole thing with sneakers is that they're not specific, they're casual.
Thanks for the informative video
Need some with black soles
These shoes are actually worth like $140 retail max.
Should go with nubuck or wax commander
Rather good name for a sneaker
Wow somehow I dislike the idea of not taking split for suede.... what a waste of top grain leather, right?
Suede can't rlly be that shitty if most militaries on the planet now use suede boots as standard issue footwear. There's definitely significant advantages in suede footwear, such as reduced break in period, no need to polish/condition (if you have the time it's good to do, but otherwise it won't wreck them) and it's incredibly abrasion resistant.
Also, more breathable and handles getting wet way better than full grain leather. Oh, and it's also cheaper. Suede has its advantages. I like full grain, full leather boots too, but I'm not gonna really want to take them out in a rainstorm if I can help it. I already tried that once, and it was a bad time. My suede desert boots, however, can handle water decently well. They don't take long to dry, and have those drainage holes from the jungle boot design.
And as long as the suede is properly backed, they shouldn't fall apart so easily.
@ShadeSlayer1911 I thought leather is wayyyyy better for rain or water than suede if suede gets rained on or wet it basically gets ruined loses its quality look and definitely doesn't feel as nice and soft afterwards. Leather you just wipe it off dry n clean and looks and feels perfectly fine after rainy days.
@@dylanp9211 Leather is porous too. If it's more than a short time in the rain, water will soak into the boots. And if there's enough exposure to water, it will pull all the oils out of the leather, after which you will definitely need to do some serious conditioning, otherwise you get dry leather that becomes brittle and then cracks. You also can't dry leather with any heat either, otherwise you also risk it becoming brittle and cracking. Speaking of drying, soaked leather takes forever to dry. It's one of the reasons why the leather boots during WW1 was a major cause of trenchfoot. Those boots refused to stay dry, refused to dry once wet, and all that moisture was not a good time for feet. And this is despite all the dubbing wax that the soldiers were trained to treat their boots with. It didn't matter in the face of constant wetness.
Suede will absorb water more easily, but it also dries way more easily. And decent quality suede will not be hurt by water. I've completely soaked my Garmont desert boots a couple of times now, and they're perfectly fine. In fact, people use these boots for swamping, so I doubt they're bad with water. You can also get suede conditioning that waterproofs the suede. I believe it's silicone-based, and if you apply it correctly, it soaks all the way through the suede and that provides way better waterproofing than any conditioning you do for full-grain leather. It won't be perfect, but it also doesn't need to be. Water getting into these boots isn't the end of the world. It'll dry fast.
With full grain leather, it's really not as good against water as you think. I mean if you got leather that is specifically treated for being waterproof/water resistant, that's a different story. Like waxed leather, or weathergaurd leather, or silicone-treated leather. But those either end up making the leather less breathable or wear out after some time. Or they straight up are just water resistant and will let water in with some time. Waxed lather will not stay waterproof for very long. Normal leather definitely isn't waterproof. My thorogoods were decent against water after I conditioned them thoroughly with obenauf's, but that wore off after an all-day rain hike and then proceeded to soak completely through and stay wet for the rest of the week-long camping trip. My iron rangers, I have not treated with obenauf's, and with the factory conditioning, they absorb water even after just a couple of seconds. Like I see dark spots even if I just splash some water on them and don't wipe it off immediately. It's nothing critical, it dries fine and goes back to normal, and it's not even a complaint against those boots. I'm just not going to take them out during heavy rains. I stepped into some pretty deep water in my JKs once. It was a 20 minute walk in a pouring flash-flood rainstorm and then a short full immersion dip in some water. That was enough to soak the boots through. I could feel my socks wet. And no, the water didn't go past the top of the boots. Definitely not waterproof.
You're probably fine taking full-grain leather boots out in a light rain, or just walking from place to place on a normal day during a rainstorm. But try them on a full-day hike in the rain, and then get back to me on that. At the end of the day, if you're expecting waterproof boots, leather isn't what you should be looking for. Leather is great stuff, but being waterproof is not one of them.
@@ShadeSlayer1911 yea I guess I was more so talking about walking from place to place business to business or so or to your car in wet rainy or snowy weather conditions. But I suppose that all makes sense. ..
@@dylanp9211 Yeah, if you're just an urban trekker in an area that never has flash flood rains, a normal full grain leather boot is probably never going to fail you.
But I've also heard that leather gets brittle in the cold too, so maybe it's not even good for the snow.
I guess at the end of the day, what I've learned is that there is not one boot that can handle everything. Every climate and environment, and even your specific activity, is going to need specific designs to perform optimally. I love my full leather JK boots. But I'm not taking them out in heavy rains, and I'm not taking them to the jungle, nor am I taking them swamping. Granted, I don't do any of these things anyway, but if I did, I'd need specific boots for them. Snow boots get tricky too. I have no idea what would be good for that.
But if you're not an adventurer like that, then you don't need to worry about any of those things. A solid boot will do you just fine for general purposes. And even for me, my JKs and Iron Rangers serve me just fine for 90 percent of the time. I'm not exacting looking to hike in the rain most of the time. It doesn't snow where I live and if I go to the snow, it's not like I'm getting myself knee deep in the stuff. I have never even visited a jungle. I just think about more of these things because I like doing that.
My guess is that these would be awesome skate shoes...too bad they don't make 'em to fit my little woman feet :(
Who dafuq is spending almost $400 for Skate shoes?! 🤦
I want to see someone skate these
Paid ad
Man I wish I could get all 4 man
Who is the actor on the thumbnail? Seems familiar.
idk
Steve McQueen?
@@joshgonzalez2885yeah
Bla,bla, bla. No matter how you justify it, yes, suade is beautiful, but cheap! And just look at that midsole. It is not better than a Walmart shoes. Here in Italia, I can buy better-looking boots of the same mediocre quality or a pair of casual ultraboost top-notch technology for around 140 Euros.😊
You'll wear out the sole before you wear out the shoe.
To the editors, can you please stop using the ghosting effects on letters like at 0:33 . It has a blinding effect on people who are light sensitive like myself. Just another accessibility thing to consider.
at 6:27 it has that ghosting effect on the leather layers too.
So just fuck it on moctober huh?
It's November what do you expect
This is painful to watch. The channel has drifted far from its original directive.
Beautiful shoe but that sole is junk no cushion at all for a high price I will pass but its extremely nice
I love Rose Anvil plus he's very handsome
Too bad this channel turned to a sale.
They look ass
1st bb
F*** yeah