Insole leather

[jesselee]

Still wondering if I am posting correctly... Anyway. i have noticed that y'all use a totally different innersole technique than I was taught. Who developed it? It looks amazing and I will try it for the first time with my current Hussar based order. I do insoles when stitched with the grain side up, a 3 1/6 feather to half thickness and a slice of about 1/2in to 1/2 thickness, as was 1800's standards (derived from my hand written 1800's Trade book and examining originals and restoring then.

With this technique i can manipulate the design to have the welt showing the stitches, or put them under the last so they do not show. I use the channel, groove and slit method (ie. hiding the stirches.

Also use the slit method re. Hussar boots to hide a hand done chainstitch. Seems easy, but you need that little ring thingie for the cord inside the boot so you can hook the cord. When finished, the sole looks just glued on, no stitches present. My stitches inside the boot are pretty also, and I encourage buyers not to have a glued down innersole cover, so this can be showed off. Doing a pair of Hussar boots now for myself and pics. I will show them to anyone interested.

[firefly]

Jesse,

I would love to see some of your work.

Mark

[jesselee]

hey Mark, I'll send some pics of my 1860's cowboy boots in progress. First time in years I documented making a pair on film.. Doing a Hussar variation for a female friend on lasts I remade also. Then a pair of Hussars for myself. I may of may not put the ribs in 'em. There are 2 techniques for that process that I am aware of. One is as a bookbinding technique using cords glued to the lining and the outer is worked in. This is done on a 'leg board' ie' full shape of the boot from below knee to toe. This is for the officer's style which was lined. Same leg-board is used for the enlisted mans style and has ridges pit on the bend just above the instep and worked with a bone folder (Fek).

[bcb]

DW

Upon reading through the archives where you talked about tallowing insoles I have made this a part of my process. Customers are pleased with the fact that they aren't sweating out their insoles as quickly as before. What's your take on
tallowing the shank cover and the counter? I have
encountered some boots where for a lack of a better word the shank cover is "dry rotting".

[dw]

Blake,

I've never seen that. I suppose that it depends upon what type of leather you choose for shank covers...as well as any number of other factors. But I do not tallow either the counter/heel stiffener or the shank cover.

You might not want to tallow the heel stiffeners because that would increase whatever slippage might be present. I have never seen one of my boots come in where the heel stiffener...untallowed...is cracked or particularly dry.

As for shank covers, some folks cut shank covers from outsole bends or insole shoulders and split and skive them as necessary. Some even use skivings right off the five-in-one to build shank covers. I've done it a number of ways and finally settled on heavy--six to eight ounce--scrap upper leather...most of which is oil or wax stuffed to begin with. But bottom line is that the shank cover is a replaceable piece and I don't worry about it getting dry rot.

And, in passing, I rely on the shank cover to some extent to create a solid foundation for the outsole under the shank of the boot--what technically can be called a "box beam construction.". I want the shank cover to adhere to the outsole when I bottom. If I tallowed it, it would not. And that would encourage squeaks. While there may be any number of ways to address the problem of squeaking, the surest way to get a squeak is to have the outsole and the components under it sliding free of each other.

That's my take...your mileage may vary.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[j1a2g3]

All,

I have now purchased 11-12 iron sole bends from 3 different suppliers and have recieved 3 different types of leather. One was brick hard, like a wooded board, and 3/8 inch thick. Another was rolled up and a good 1/4 inch thick, if not more. Could someone explian what a good piece of Sole Bend is suppose to look like? I could use the help greatly. Thanks in advance, Joel

[dw]

Joel,

It's hard to explain what makes a good soling leather...and almost every maker will have a little different set of criteria, so what I like might not be what you like.

11-12 is a good weight. But 12 iron equals one-quarter inch, no more, no less.

Over the years, I have found that I need to have several different types of outsoling on hand to meet my needs. For outsoles I want something that is dense, with a natural (not painted) surface, and lots of vein shadows on the back. I like a natural pit tanned leather such as Milton-Sokol produces...or a cut sole such as Reddenback or Lyons and Volpi. The Reddenback is valona tanned (acorn caps) and the Milton-sokol and the L-V are tanned with chestnut bark.

Sometimes double rolling a bend helps to compress and to harden the leather. But while a very hard leather might, at first blush, seem desirable, in the environments that we all frequent...with concrete sidewalks and such...the harder material will just wear away faster. And, point/counterpoint...softer leather will get wet, and absorb dirt and grease, and deform faster than a harder leather. So it's a balance--a fine line that some tend to prefer more to one side or the other.

On the other hand, years ago, Keven Leahy, who was at that time with Tarsus Seven, sent me a piece of German leather...recommending I try it for counters. Now, I like my counters to be hard but I also like them to mould to the back of the last--not a simple combination of things to achieve. The leather Kevin sent me was about eight iron and I thought it too thin. It was hard as a rock...I mean you had to use a hacksaw to cut it. But I dropped it into a bucket of warm water and an hour later it might as well have been putty. It was that soft. Yet,when it dried it was hard again!

I've never found anything like that for heel stiffeners again although the Milton-Sokol that I'm using now has similar (if greatly reduced) characteristics. But it does illustrate the temper and expected funtionality that I want for heel stiffeners...and in many cases a bend that is suitable for outsoles, in my mind, is not so suitable for stiffeners.

If you are looking for one bend to make outsoles and heel stiffeners and toe boxes from I'd say the Milton-Sokol would be pretty close. But the idea is to test the leathers and choose one that suits your expectations.

The bottom line is that almost any outsole leather will work for an outsole, although some will wear longer than others,naturally. But only a few tannages and tempers will also work for heel stiffeners and none make good insoles as far as I'm concerned.

Hope that helps...I regret that I can't be more definitive in this regard.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[j1a2g3]

Dw,

What is the benefit of tallowing your insole leather?

Why would you only tallow the grain side? Wouldn't tallowing the flesh side allow the fat to penetrate the leather more?

Thanks in advance, Joel

[dw]

Joel,

I tallow the insole for several reasons...the most important is to create and replenish a reservoir of conditioning so that the wetting and dry of making and wearing won't lead to the insole drying and cracking before its time.

As for tallowing the flesh side...sure it would sink in better but don't try to cement or glue anything to it after you tallow it.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[big_larry]

D.W.,

If I may, ask you for another referal for insole leather. I read your entry dated May 11, 2007 reccomending Steven-Paxton of Texas for the Mexican shoulders. I called and a man named Dave told me that they had closed their other two stores and the only one now open was in California. I purchased a shoulder after explaining what I wanted but it is better suited for heel build-ups than insole.

My friend, I am in no way being critical of you, and I owe you a tremendous debt of gratitude for all the counsel you have freely given me. Please do not emote any harsh feelings toward me for this inquiry. I am asking in the spirit of humble gratitude and respect for you as a truely great "Master Boot Maker, and truely a fine gentleman."

I wish you well, Larry Peterson

[romango]

Larry,

I will jump in uninvited here. I just got a couple of shoulders from Stevenson- Paxton and they are wonderful for insoles. When I first got them, I thought the same thing as you. They seem so thick and stiff.

First of all, you really need to split them down a little thinner for anything but the heaviest of boots. Indeed, we even split it somewhat for the boots I made with DW.

Second, when you put this leather into water, it melts like butter, forms beautifully to the last and is a joy to hole with your awl, compared to some other leathers.

If you don't have a splitter, you are in somewhat of a bind. I don't know if Stevenson-Paxton would split it for you.

I have also used belly but it is much more difficult to work with.

[dw]

Larry,

I have moved your post over here where it is perhaps more appropriate.

Without knowing what you want to see and feel when you select an insole leather, I can't really help much. But I can tell you what I want...

I could tell you that double shoulders are traditionally considered to be the best for insoles. I could tell you that, by universal acclaim, Baker double shoulders are considered some of the best in the world. But outside of Baker I know of no one else (besides Stevenson-Paxton) who deals in shoulders. And almost everything else that I have seen being used for insoles is actually the margins of an outsole bend.

What's wrong with that you ask? And well you might ask...I used belly strips (cut from outsole bends) to make my insoles for years. And a lot of cowboy bootmakers, in particular, use outsole for insoling.

But you have to ask yourself what you want in an insole. You say the leather you got from S-P was good for nothing but but heel stacks. Why do you say that? Because it has fat wrinkles on the grain surface? Because it is loose and long fibered and not as dense as outsole?

For myself...I have come to believe (and I believe the long evolution of boots and shoes supports me in this) that long fibered, loose fibered, leather is what you actually do want for insoles. Shoulder leather conforms to the last and the foot better...by far...than the bend. It is also easier to inseam and will hold the stitches longer and more securely without ripping out than leather from the bend. And because it is not so hard and short fibered it also tends to resist getting brittle and cracking. You will not find any of these characteristics, consistently, in any other part of the hide but the shoulder.

As for the fat wrinkles or other visual "anomalies" that may occur in the shoulder and which you are probably unused to seeing in a bend...they are superficial at worst and will not ever be seen by the customer especially if you prepare and scrape the grain surface of the insoles before you tack them up to the last. And if it comes down to it, you can always place and/or cut around those wrinkles so that they are not an issue...either aesthetically or mechanically.

And as for heel stacks...for myself (once again) I want the densest, most short fibered leather for heel stacks. I don't want something as loose as shoulder--it won't hold up...your heels will compress and distort and absorb water and, frankly, be a mess long before their time.

Finally, I don't know why I would have any "harsh feelings" for you. For one thing, if you don't agree with my definition of what a good insole leather should be like, well, my friend, the last time I looked the world was still 196,950,711 square miles in surface area---seems like there might be enough room for all of us.

Second, I have never been, and will never be, put out at someone who asks a question in a sincere and earnest desire to either learn or at least objectively consider another opinion. I would caution, however, that my opinion--as much as it may or may not correspond with traditional and accepted wisdom--is still just one man's opinion. Insofar as I understand and can explain my reasons for holding that opinion--not just that "granddad did it this way" or "all my friends do it this way"--it may, perhaps, have some validity, but it is not written in stone.

So please, drop that stuff...

Sorry for the long post

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[big_larry]

D.W. and Rick,

Thank you both for your insight. I am glad you clarified that "thick and stiff" was ok. My bend is about an 8 oz. and I will go ahead and follow your suggestions.

D.W., You may not realize just how valuable you'r total knowledge base is and will be for future boot makers. I am still in awe!

Thanks to both of you. Larry Peterson

PS. I purchased a digital camera today and after I figure out how to make it work I plan to put a pic in the gallery, that is if you promise not to laugh!

[admin]

Larry,

It appears that the email address you have listed in the database of members is incorrect. One of the moderators sent an email to you that came back. Without a valid email address the forum cannot continue your registration.

Please contact admin@thehcc.org and let us know your correct email address or go to "user registration/profiles and change it, please.

Emmett

[big_larry]

I AM BACK IN!

Thank you for the help.

Larry

[big_larry]

Today I put the bottom welting on a pair of Stevenson-Paxton shoulder insoles. I am absolutely amazed with the results. No tear outs, easier to cut the channel, takes the spray bottle very well, and is fiberously strong.

My initial assessment of the shoulder was incorrect and I am mighty thankful that Rick and D.W. took the time and had the patience to give me some gentle direction. "Good job men."

It is my intention to cut a strip large enough to make a pair of insoles and take them over to my friend that also makes boots. He has about 10 or 12 years behind him as a boot maker and is a real master at the craft. I hope no one minds me showing off with your knowledge.

Your friend, Larry Peterson

[dw]

Larry,

Just a little worm to wiggle itself into the back of your brain and maybe give you something to wonder about...


...as good as the S-P insole shoulder is (and it's very good...or at least "good enough" ) the Baker is better. Lots better.

Beyond that, I'm glad we could help.


Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[big_larry]

D.W., Thank you for the tip. Your information will be cataloged and put into use.

I was reading about a discussion on adding fat or oil to the onsole on surfaces that at not to be glued. I am sorry that I couldn't locate the discussion today. I was reading a book on saddle making by Dusty Johnson in which he advocated using two or three applications of pure needs foot oil. His rational, as I understand it, is that the leather would probably never be oiled again. In addition, the pure needs foot oil was the only product he was confident recommending and definatly was not in favor of petrolium additives.

I am wondering whether the pure needs foot oil might be a good product to keep the boot leather from deteraiting in the in-sole area, and for that matter the entire boot?

I know from first hand experience that numerous fat-liquers and oils are used in the tanning process. I remember purchasing a 5 gallon bucket of tanning oil from Atlas oil when I was involved with a fur tannery (Fur dressing) and ended up using a lot of it it for work boots.

I have decided that I can not live long enough to make all the experiments and mistakes, therefore, does anyone else have any information or experience with the use of pure needs foot oil for boot and shoe making?

[das]

Larry,

In haste...

Pure neat's-foot oil is okay stuff, but it's fugitive--it'll bleed/leech out, or wash out the first time the boots get soaked. If you want to use a natural oil, try veterinarian's grade cod liver oil (search J.R. Baits & Lures, Ohio, on the Forum). This oxidizes in the leather and turns to a permanent jelly. I tallow mine ("Fancy Tallow oil" same supplier).

[dw]

I second the tallow on the insoles. I generally heat some up in a little tin and brush several coats on the grain surface only. I may further warm the residue with a hair dryer (serves the same purpose as a hearth or a warm attic) so that it is completely absorbed. If nothing else the tallow serves as a reservoir of conditioning that may last years if it penetrates far enough. It's a certainty that customers never oil or condition their insoles.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[hidesmith]

Al & DW,
In my experiences with shoe repair, I've noticed that people who work with animal products and by-products have the worst time keeping their shoes. The farmer's shoes get eaten by the manure, the slaughter house worker and the butcher lose their shoes by animal fat and so does the cook/chef.

My experience with bookbinding and repair shows me that acid is one of the things that eats leather and paper.

Tallow is one of the things that I had equated with faster shoe wear, based on the acid that is naturally found in the tallow. I know that the manure and fat wears the natural thread, but I've also seen a lot of cracks in shoe uppers worn by the aforementioned tradesmen.
Are there facts that disprove my findings? Are they a lot of coincidence? Pardon my confusion.

Bruce

[dw]

Bruce,

Al might be the better one to answer this but it occurs to me that tanning itself is acidic--tannic acid. And, as Larry points out natural animal fats are always added to the leather during and after the tanning process.

That said, I have worried about too much acidity with iron black and I have been told that uric acid will crack leather (in fact years and years ago cracking was blamed on men's urinals being at floor level.). So, like you, too much acidity worries me. But I suspect, like so many things, it's a matter of degree.

All that said, there is another explanation...

In most cases, if we examine the evidence, the cracking often occurs precisely where the foot is constantly creasing, ie. across the joints. Why would that be if it is acid alone that is causing the leather to crack or deteriorate? I have always felt that contributing, at least, is the fact that fats and oils tend to attract and accumulate dirt--grit, if you will. Dirt tends to be composed, to some extent of pulverized rock. And at least one mineral that resists pulverization more than many others is silica based--I refer to sand and/or actual glass (such as the volcanic based soils we see here in the high desert.

When this dirt lodges in the creases of a shoe and the shoe is worn...flexed...the dirt acts like an abrasive. It gets pushed and folded and as time goes by cuts its way deeper and deeper into the fibers of the leather. I would also submit to you that in 99.9% of the cases where manure or animal fats are at issue the owner of the footwear seldom if ever cleans his or here shoes/boots. So this abrasive is in place for long periods of time. Compounding that is that dirt, allowed to dry on a shoe, acrs as a desiccant--pulling what conditioners and oils that were in the leather to the surface and out ..to be sloughed off and lost forever.

I could also point out that tallowing insoles is, if I understand correctly, a fairly ancient and respected technique.

On the other hand, when I was coming up, I was told time and again that it was petroleum products...as in "synthetic neatsfoot" and many of the waterproofing agents such as Hubbards...that rotted thread and leather. And I would have to say that my experience tends to confirm that hypothesis.

But it is a good question and one that should concern all of us. I don't know any definitive answer, if there is one.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[das]

Bruce.

I'm no tanner, nor a currier, however most all of the "old" 18thc-19thc. currying formulas that I've messed with involve stuffing the leather (veg-tanned) include tallow, cod oil, and "degras" (a form or quality of lanolin). I've made and worn shoes made from 1786 Russia leather, and handled plenty of old leather that was not cracking. IMO most of the "biscuit grain", cracking and failure is due to laying too long in the tan vats/pits, and actual chemical burning of the grain, rather than anything applied later.

Seems to me, too, that the shoes and uppers you mentioned above were more than likely chrome-tanned, which is a different material, curried as I recall with "soap".

I guess the question is: how long would the leather have held up had it not had added fats and oils to curry it? Maybe somebody here with some tanning/currying background might enlighten us all? In the mean time all I know is that oak bark insoles that are not curried with tallow will grain-crack faster than the same ones that were tallowed

DW,

You mentioned Hubberd's boot dressing. I came across a can of that, and experimented with it, and rather liked it, now to find it's no longer available (here). What's wrong with it?

[hidesmith]

Acid chews up the integrity of the leather. Consider the case of red-rot on a bookbinding, or anyplace, for that matter. It fails where it flexes. A book with mild red-rot will fail at the hinge, and a shoe that has had its integrity compromised will fail at the flex. Dirt does act as an abrasive, and synthetic oils do cause natural threads to fail - I neglected to mention that well oiled shoes worn by mechanics sometimes need re-stitching at some of the seams. I much prefer synthetic threads for that reason, unless I can get hemp.

Based on a defective memory, I think I remember a bookbinding leather supplier saying that some leathers have had the acid neutralized, making it not quite acid-free, but a lot closer to it than many other leathers. I wonder if that is accurate

As an bookbinder, I have seen the effects of acid on leather and paper. This has made me paranoid to a degree, always questioning the use of products that contain acid.

I suppose there is nothing like documentation based on experience, and leather that is made from 2 1/2 hundred year old materials is as good an advertisement as any. Coupled with your combined experience, please pardon my paranoia.

[dw]

Al,

Well, you spelled it different (I remember it as "Hubbards" ) so maybe we're talking about two different products.

I started in shoe repair...went through an "apprenticeship" as a saddlemaker and then on to bootmaking. When I started...in repair and all through the early years while I was supporting myself and family and trying to refine my skill sufficiently to charge top dollar for boots...I worked in an area where logging was still very much a part of the economy.

I saw lots of different greases that these guys put on their boots. Most of them swore by one brand or another but Hubbards was the most common. And almost without exception Hubbards would rot the threads long before a product like SnoSeal or Oberdofs (sp?). And the leather would lose whatever "hand" or integrity it had long before its time, as well. I was told (as I mentioned above) quite early on that this was because Hubbards was compounded from petroleum products.

Hey, I'm not a chemist and I never had any aspirations along those lines. I just went with what I was told and what seemed to be true in my experience. To this day I do not use paraffin or synthetic beeswax or any synthetic dressings except silicone...and I don't use that much.

But I'm not locked into any position one way or the other. I'm open to other points of view....

BTW, I mentioned my early years because while making saddles I saw a lot of old saddles and almost without exceptions the ones that were the best preserved were the ones that had been oiled and rubbed with something very similar to tallow on a regular basis. Some of these saddles were near a hundred years old. Almost without exception there was little or no cracking....but then, tallow or no, there was no area on the saddle where regular flexing occurred while exposed to grit. That tells me something....

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC