Clarks Un.Tudor 2. Florsheim John 3. Rockport Wadison 4. Rockport Margin The Clarks Un.Tudor were not really wider than any of the others, but the toe box does not start to taper in until after my pinky toe ends. This is exactly what someone with a long heel to ball span needs. The collar is about a quarter inch too high, so it digs into my ankle a bit. However, the collar is padded and after wearing them a few times Ia??ve noticed it isna??t digging in as much if at all. The padding on the insole is very unique and has a nice feel to it. The outsole material is spongy and is very comfortable to walk on. Ita??s a much different (more forgiving) feel than a hard rubber or leather. This shoe fit well enough that after ordering one in brown I ordered one in black. If only Logohoo could fix their search engine so that you could find them! The Florsheim John are wide, but not as wide as the Clarks (Ia??m talking a quarter inch here, not much.). However, the edge of the toe box bends out a bit to compensate, which is one of the reasons I kept them (the other in case the Clarks ultimately didna??t fit well enough and also for a change in style). The collar is overly padded so you notice it when you walk. After a few days of wearing them the padding isna??t sticking out as much. The outsole material is spongy and is very comfortable to walk on. Ita??s a much different (more forgiving) feel then a hard rubber or leather. The Rockport Wadison fit well, too. In fact, I wore them one day only to discover that the heel would make a sound like the shoe was coming unglued. I noticed this when I was standing in place and taking the weight off my heel and moving it to the front of my foot. I tried to reorder, but 11.5 wide was not in stock. The Rockport Margin fit ok. I ordered 11.5 wide, but in the 11.5 wide box there was a 12! It was certainly wide enough, but it was too long. So I reordered 11.5 wide (in black instead of chocolate) and it was too narrow. The Allen Edmonds Tribeca was by far the narrowest and because of that the worst fit.
Archive:
-
▼
2010
(355)
-
▼
November
(32)
- shoes-172344
- shoes-172246
- 41-172445
- 41-172341
- 41-172336
- shoes-172332
- 41-172331
- 41-172330
- j-172325
- j-172227
- shoes-172317
- shoes-172314
- 41-172438
- j-172433
- 41-172430
- j-172424
- 41-172417
- j-172412
- shoes-172413
- shoes-172175
- j-172174
- j-172173
- shoes-172080
- 41-172170
- 41-172171
- 41-172076
- shoes-172167
- j-172073
- 41-172074
- shoes-172168
- j-172157
- 41-172063
-
▼
November
(32)
0 comments:
Post a Comment