The EG Shannon II on 88 Last, C Width
Here at last is my newest pair of Shannons. Thanks to Alden who provided me with the courage to order a pair on a last I had never seen or tried in person:
http://thelondonlounge.net/gl/forum/vie ... php?t=6758
They are black box calf with matching black suede uppers.
The end result of going up in size and dropping down to C width is a last which looks a lot like the RLPL 89 last (which is a long nosed derivative of the 88 last), although it is just a faint bit sleeker than the 89 in D width.
I think having a contrasting upper (even if it is only in texture) makes a balmoral boot a lot dressier, as it helps sets it apart from country styled boots with a self upper.
I have also come to feel that a sleek long nosed last is essential for a dressy city boot. Many of the Oxford boots in Edwardian and Victorian era bootmakers' catalogues show somewhat pointed lasts with marked waist suppression.
http://thelondonlounge.net/gl/forum/vie ... php?t=6758
They are black box calf with matching black suede uppers.
The end result of going up in size and dropping down to C width is a last which looks a lot like the RLPL 89 last (which is a long nosed derivative of the 88 last), although it is just a faint bit sleeker than the 89 in D width.
I think having a contrasting upper (even if it is only in texture) makes a balmoral boot a lot dressier, as it helps sets it apart from country styled boots with a self upper.
I have also come to feel that a sleek long nosed last is essential for a dressy city boot. Many of the Oxford boots in Edwardian and Victorian era bootmakers' catalogues show somewhat pointed lasts with marked waist suppression.
Dear Sator
They are lovely boots and the great 88 shines in a C fitting.
Here is a picture of an 1987 vintage EG Cadogan on the 33 last in a D fitting. The 33 is the sister last of the 88 made with a bit more height in the toe box. The 33 is a last that is not very common, so I imagined you might like a view.
Cheers
M Alden
They are lovely boots and the great 88 shines in a C fitting.
Here is a picture of an 1987 vintage EG Cadogan on the 33 last in a D fitting. The 33 is the sister last of the 88 made with a bit more height in the toe box. The 33 is a last that is not very common, so I imagined you might like a view.
Cheers
M Alden
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:26 am
- Location: New York, NY
- Contact:
Alden, those shoes look great. I like that last a lot.
Sator, does EG offer a grey suede or can the uppers only be some shade of brown?
Sator, does EG offer a grey suede or can the uppers only be some shade of brown?
-
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:15 pm
- Contact:
Two weeks ago, it was style forum-member ‘von Rothbart’ who got those EG ‘Ashwood’
made on last 88:
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4696/p1040773jc6.jpg
Now it’s Sator’s turn with those ‘Shannon’ on last 88.
Soon it will be yours truly, posting a pair of ‘Falkirk’, again on last 88. Watch this space.
That last 88. For years nobody looked it, now its get pulled out of storage all the time. Just like good, old Norma Desmond, it knew the good times would roll again:
"All right, Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close-up,"
made on last 88:
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4696/p1040773jc6.jpg
Now it’s Sator’s turn with those ‘Shannon’ on last 88.
Soon it will be yours truly, posting a pair of ‘Falkirk’, again on last 88. Watch this space.
That last 88. For years nobody looked it, now its get pulled out of storage all the time. Just like good, old Norma Desmond, it knew the good times would roll again:
"All right, Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close-up,"
88 is the EG last that has produced the most consistently good results on my feet. I unknowingly came in contact with it first when Wildsmith was rebadging more EGs than anything else. I tried it again as a special order through Saks when the 202, otherwise what I wanted, was a little loose. It's a decent-looking shoe.
Thank you for the kind words Michael. And thanks too for sharing the picture of the Cardogans on the 33 lasts. It is certainly very elegant with plenty of character.
It has also not gone without notice that you once said that the 808 looked very elegant in a D width. I must confess that I am intrigued by the thought of a boot on the 808 in C width.
Of course the 808 was a last once reserved exclusively for the old Top Drawer line:
My understanding is that the 808 is a long nosed derivative of the 88 last. It was apparently the first extended nose last in the EG catalogue. The main reason it has been retired is because they seem to have had some issues with fit, possibly due to the last being a bit narrow. So when Tony Gaziano came along, he created the 888 last which runs a bit wider than 808 (as well as having a more angular square toe).
The RLPL 89 last is basically the 808 last, except it has been made wider to the point that it runs a fraction wider than the currently active lasts (202, 606, 88, 888 or 82). The end result is that it runs bigger than other EGs lasts, meaning that it is both possible - and necessary - to order the stamped US size in the shoe with D width; this letter width being for all practical purposes "medium width" as with most US makers. Perfect for the American market it is intended for.
I find it interesting that the results of going up in size and down on width to C on the 88 last has a somewhat different result to making a derivative long nosed last from the 88 (ie the 89 or 808). Hence I would be fascinated to see what the results were of having an 808 last shoe in C width. The 808 and 89 are only modestly extended lasts, so it should pose relatively few problems with length. In fact, an 89 last shoe a 1/2 size down from my 88C Shannons proved to be only about 4mm shorter. So the 808 in C width would only be a fraction longer and narrower than my 88s in C width. This is a computer altered image of how a C width 808 last shoe might look:
I used to avoid elongated and pointed lasts but I find they work really well with boots. I find anything pointed or too elongated makes a shoe look imbalance and affected, yet the higher vamp on a boot seems to demand a more elongated last to get the aesthetic balance.
Here are some Victorian/Edwardian examples:
In this 1923 photo the pointed last looks thoroughly natural:
It is only when Santoni et al start to add all manner of other affectations to a shoe made on one of their exaggerated pointed toe lasts that the results start to look frightfully gaudy. These historical examples suggest that the pointed toe last is a classical type of last which has latterly fallen out of favour and is further given a bad reputation by its use in tasteless fashion forward shoes:
It has also not gone without notice that you once said that the 808 looked very elegant in a D width. I must confess that I am intrigued by the thought of a boot on the 808 in C width.
Of course the 808 was a last once reserved exclusively for the old Top Drawer line:
My understanding is that the 808 is a long nosed derivative of the 88 last. It was apparently the first extended nose last in the EG catalogue. The main reason it has been retired is because they seem to have had some issues with fit, possibly due to the last being a bit narrow. So when Tony Gaziano came along, he created the 888 last which runs a bit wider than 808 (as well as having a more angular square toe).
The RLPL 89 last is basically the 808 last, except it has been made wider to the point that it runs a fraction wider than the currently active lasts (202, 606, 88, 888 or 82). The end result is that it runs bigger than other EGs lasts, meaning that it is both possible - and necessary - to order the stamped US size in the shoe with D width; this letter width being for all practical purposes "medium width" as with most US makers. Perfect for the American market it is intended for.
I find it interesting that the results of going up in size and down on width to C on the 88 last has a somewhat different result to making a derivative long nosed last from the 88 (ie the 89 or 808). Hence I would be fascinated to see what the results were of having an 808 last shoe in C width. The 808 and 89 are only modestly extended lasts, so it should pose relatively few problems with length. In fact, an 89 last shoe a 1/2 size down from my 88C Shannons proved to be only about 4mm shorter. So the 808 in C width would only be a fraction longer and narrower than my 88s in C width. This is a computer altered image of how a C width 808 last shoe might look:
I used to avoid elongated and pointed lasts but I find they work really well with boots. I find anything pointed or too elongated makes a shoe look imbalance and affected, yet the higher vamp on a boot seems to demand a more elongated last to get the aesthetic balance.
Here are some Victorian/Edwardian examples:
In this 1923 photo the pointed last looks thoroughly natural:
It is only when Santoni et al start to add all manner of other affectations to a shoe made on one of their exaggerated pointed toe lasts that the results start to look frightfully gaudy. These historical examples suggest that the pointed toe last is a classical type of last which has latterly fallen out of favour and is further given a bad reputation by its use in tasteless fashion forward shoes:
Last edited by Sator on Tue Dec 04, 2007 2:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Unfortunately, they do not really offer any grey skins. That's why I went for black (the flash makes it look grey). One way around this to order an upper in Midnight Navy which is already a very dark blue-grey. You can then polish them with black shoe polish to make them even more greyish, although a hint of blue will remain in them.Cantabrigian wrote:Alden, those shoes look great. I like that last a lot.
Sator, does EG offer a grey suede or can the uppers only be some shade of brown?
Suede uppers are also more comfortable, being softer than box calf.
I did not look into the option of grey velvet uppers, which would be even more comfortable than suede (although I fear a bit more fragile too).
Sator -- jealous of the gorgeous shoes and of your being able to obtain a successful 88 last fitting. When I asked EG what they could recommend as appropriate sizes in the 88 and 808 based on my previous orders and their tracing of my foot, they told me to stick with the lasts I have already. Sigh. Gomez got the order instead.
I suspect that part of the reason is that they don't know themselves any more. The people who did are either dead (John Hlustik) or have left (Tony Gaziano).rjman wrote:Sator -- jealous of the gorgeous shoes and of your being able to obtain a successful 88 last fitting. When I asked EG what they could recommend as appropriate sizes in the 88 and 808 based on my previous orders and their tracing of my foot, they told me to stick with the lasts I have already. Sigh. Gomez got the order instead.
Personally, the only thing I had to go on was the information on the "Great 88" Alden had posted here and my knowledge of my fit in the 202 last. I completely put my trust in Alden and ordered without ever having even seen an 88 last shoe in person, let alone having tried it out. Tom Park just said that he had seen my posts on which I had obsessively measured shoes lengths/widths to the millimeter and that in his judgement I sounded like I knew what I was doing and accepted my order.
If that sounds reckless, I should add that Tom is usually cautious about accepting internet orders for EGs from newbies and I am confident he would have been honest and cautioned me against it otherwise, rather than risk having a disappointed customer. So I must certainly thank Tom for putting his faith in me for this transglobal order across several oceans and more time zones than you can poke a stick at. It seems something of a miracle that it all worked out so well. But then again I always knew it would.
So for anyone interested in the Great 88 and Hlustik's legacy at EG I can definitely say you can have full confidence in Alden's recommendations:
Take the size you wear in the 202 last but go up two 1/2 sizes and drop down two letter widths to compensate.
You have to keep in mind the EG list of in stock lasts which only go down to C width for the 88.
http://centipede.web.fc2.com/CATALOG/OR ... ather.html
For example if you wear D widths in the 202 as I do, go up a 1/2 size and down to C width. I would further add that if you take an F width in the 202 last you should NOT hesitate to go up three 1/2 sizes and drop down three letter widths to C width. The reason I say this is because a pair of C&J 360 last shoes in UK 7.5 were significantly longer than my UK/US 8.5/9 88C pair! EG lasts run really short.
I mentioned earlier that I am interested in the 808 and that I wished in retrospect that I had ordered a C width 808 last Shannon.
I should also mention a caveat to anyone thinking of copying me. I think I could only get away with it because I have narrowish feet and because I know now that the 88 in C width is a tiny bit on the relaxed side sideways. If they were a 1/2 letter width narrower, they would still be wearable. This suggests that a notoriously narrow last like the 808 would work for me in C width, while giving the shoe a slightly more elongated nose by about 3-4mm.
In general, I would suggest great caution with ordering shoes blindly on the 808 last on the false assumption that the results will fit like other EG lasts. The results may be an expensive mistake.
I should also mention a caveat to anyone thinking of copying me. I think I could only get away with it because I have narrowish feet and because I know now that the 88 in C width is a tiny bit on the relaxed side sideways. If they were a 1/2 letter width narrower, they would still be wearable. This suggests that a notoriously narrow last like the 808 would work for me in C width, while giving the shoe a slightly more elongated nose by about 3-4mm.
In general, I would suggest great caution with ordering shoes blindly on the 808 last on the false assumption that the results will fit like other EG lasts. The results may be an expensive mistake.
Interesting. I really hadn't done an explicit conversion before.Sator wrote:So for anyone interested in the Great 88 and Hlustik's legacy at EG I can definitely say you can have full confidence in Alden's recommendations:
Take the size you wear in the 202 last but go up two 1/2 sizes and drop down two letter widths to compensate.
My 202s are 10.5/11 F, and the 88s are 11.5/12 E. But the 88s fit closer around the balls of my feet than the 202s.
Are the 33s really just a taller 88? There might be some utility there, if length and proportions are otherwise identical. Now if I could only get a round toe last that fits as well.
-
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:15 pm
- Contact:
I just called in at the EG shop today to check for progress. They phoned the factory and my shoes are about to have their heels attached and should be in Jermyn Street by the middle of next week.bengal-stripe wrote:Soon it will be yours truly, posting a pair of ‘Falkirk’, again on last 88. Watch this space.
Very nice. But are those on the 808 last or did you mean 888? It just looks too angular to be the 808 to me.
Last edited by Sator on Sat Dec 08, 2007 1:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Those are on the 808.
--Andre
--Andre
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 92 guests