Rubber on leather soles

[Guest]

What do you think of the practice of gluing a very thin layer of rubber onto leather soles? It's certainly not ideal, yet it is barely visible and it has functional and economical advantages. Do you reckon it's worth doing such a trade-off?

[Guest]

Your shoes have to breathe, i.e. part of the transpiration of your feet is dissipated through the leather soles. But the thin layer of rubber will make the breathing process less optimal. Moreover, I have heard of some traditional shoe makers which will not accept shoes for refurbishment if the soles have been submitted to the process at issue here.

Marcelo

[Guest]

Barker shoemakers will not repair shoes of their making if stick-on soles have been applied. They also argue that: “the addition of stick-on soles can cause problems with balance and distortion of the shoe.”

http://www.barker-shoes.co.uk/(4ncwkm45 ... fault.aspx (link: Shoe Care and Repair)

Marcelo

[Guest]

RM Williams has a similar policy, but I'm not sure if this argument holds water when you take into account that dainite sole shoes don't seem to have any problems.


pvpatty

[Guest]

I also find the "breathing through the sole" argument hard to swallow. The footbed even of top dress shoes usually includes a formable layer of ground cork imbedded in a mastic that I doubt is very moisture-permeable, and a steel shank. Not to mention the traditional crepe rubber sole (on Alden's country derby, for instance). I'd also think the small change in thickness would make no more difference in balance than the amount of wear on the heel toplift or the sole through normal wear. I noted last summer in London that Edward Green has added a thin dress version of a Vibram-like outsole for some models that is stitched through the welt just like a leather outsole. They claimed customer response had been quite good and mentioned no reported problems of durability or discomfort.

I have heard that the applied rubber soles, or the similar Vibram tap-sole conversion, can if poorly executed allow water and salt or organic matter to become trapped beween the applied material and the sole leather, leading to accelerated deterioration or rot. This seems plausible to me, though I haven't experienced it on Vibram tap soles applied by an expert shoemaker (Perry Ercolino). I also suspect that removing such applied materials in order to resole the shoe would add time and thus cost to the job, which may be another reason makers discourage their use.

[Guest]

^ Couch

[Guest]

Breathability is an issue with leather soled shoes, as one must remember that moisture can pass both ways. When a shoe is worn, the sweat builds up during the day and when taken off, all the leather parts, upper, sole etc wick away the moisture.

The inclusion of trees also helps this, as long as they are not varnished. Avoid varnished trees. They help keep the shape but do not help the drying out process.

Bespoke shoes do not use the ground cork in resin filler, rather sheets of cork or felt, which do alow transpiration of water.

[Guest]

Thanks to the anonymous poster for clarifying that bespoke makers use sheet cork or felt rather than cork composite. I heartily concur that all components of the shoe need access to air and/or absorbent material when off the foot, and I always use unvarnished trees for storage after every use.

But I have followed this regimen for years with my C&J country derbies with storm welts and Dainite soles, and can see no difference in their durability as compared to leather-soled dress shoes, and if anything they see more wet weather.

Most of the breathability arguments against rubber soles that I've heard focus on comfort during wearing--that such soles trap perspiration and lead to clammy feet. As I've said, whether this effect is statistically significant probably depends on how heavily your feet perspire. For me, there's usually no noticeable difference; the leather sock liners and uppers seem to wick moisture away adequately.

- Couch