Lasting

[dw]

Chuck,

I'm not sure what to do with that either. To tell the truth I'm not even sure it works out quite that way in actual practice. Although how would you objectively measure it?

Do you really think that the vamp, liner and stiffener, glued, are nine times stiffer than just the vamp alone? Or tht the vamp and liner are twice as stiff when glued as when not? maybe...like I said how would you measure it?

And how would you compensate for the inherent stiffness of each kind of leather regardless of thickness? Ie. my vamps are usually the same thickness as the liner but markedly firmer even before gluing.

Well it's a puzzle...

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[chuck_deats]

DW,
These are calculated numbers and it would take more equipment than you or I have to objectively measure it. Yes, I believe the vamp and liner glued is twice as stiff as loose, although the friction between the loose layers would mess with the the numbers some.

Thickness of the stiffener is the major driver for stiffness, if glued, and it does not make much difference what the stiffener is made from.

If the liner is softer than the vamp, the relative numbers should remain about the same, although not twice as stiff as the stiffer leather.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[dw]

Chuck,

Well, you know I was just thinkin' out loud. I have no basis, short of curiosity, to doubt your figures. But I got to thinking...and suppose that we stipulate that the vamp and liner all by themselves will bend through an arc of 120°...does that mean that when glued they will only bend through an arc of 60°? Maybe so...I wish we had some way to scientifically measure it because it is interesting. You could even work this kind of information into the "pitch" you give your customers.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[lancepryor]

DW:

Perhaps 1 iron is a bit less than it was, but the damp toe puff could be crumpled up like a paper towel! Mind you, this was likely Baker's oak bark tanned leather -- whether that makes a difference I can't say. Also, it was for a cap-toe oxford shoe (i.e. a half-brogue), so there were two layers of upper leather (with paste between them) on top of the puff, which perhaps also helps provide stiffness to the toe of the shoe.

Lance

[dw]

Lance,

This is a good time to ask...you and anyone else who might have a take on this...is is common to make captoes that way-two layers of upper leather? The captoe added on top of the vamp?

It would be my impulse (in fact I made a semi-brogue derby this way) (and most of the books--Thornton, Golding, et al, illustrate it being done with way, as well) to cut the vamp short and skive it , then joining the cap toe to the vamp as if it were one piece. In other words, only one layer of upper leather over the toe puff.

I understand it can be done either way but what is done most commonly in high end shops? And is there a reason for doing it one way or the other?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[luckyduck]

DW,

You asked a question I can answer. Weird.

As for the stiffness of the leather test.

Make up sample pieces of the thickness/glue combinations. Say 1" wide and 3" long. Then clamp them sticking horizontaly out of a bench vice. Lets leave 2.5" sticking out. Lastly, push (or pull) down on the outer end with a force gauge of some sort at the same distance on every sample and read the force to bend it .5".

Then if you look in a strength of materials book you could back calculate the "stiffness" of the piece. At least that is the way we did it in my labs at engineering school. You will probably get something like a modulus of elasticity number. I can dig out the books and get the exact math if you are interested. A fish weighing scale could do the pull down testing and get a force number as they will probably all be in the 1 - 10 lb range.

One other thing will make a huge difference in stiffness of the toe box and that is shape. A wide, flat top toe box with short sides will make a much softer feeling cap than a narrow rounded one with tall sides. This you can play with and easily see on your work bench with folding a thin piece of leather. Stiffness is height of the sidewall cubed, so it is obvious to the bare hand.

Now it is time to put the mechanical engineer back in the box and go inseam a boot.

Paul

[lancepryor]

DW:

I don't know for certain. However, my impression is that for bespoke work in London, it is more standard to have the two layers, rather than cutting the underlying vamp.

When I've done a cut vamp underlying the cap, I've never been able to entirely avoid showing the change in thickness where the vamp piece is skived.

On the other hand, a single thickness makes it easier to have a narrower toe that more closely mirrors the last, so perhaps that is a tradeoff decision to be made and partly a function of the toe shape -- or is that part of the explanation for the thinner puff?

Lance

[dw]

Paul,

That's genius! I've always thought I had an engineer's brain but I never educated it.

I agree with you about the different shaped of toe puff...I think there are more than a few "intangibles" involved.

But it sure is an interesting line of thought. If I were a lot younger and had less places to go I think I would be tempted to rig up a set up like you described above. Still might.

thanks

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[dw]

Lance

I've seen that same effect, with the skived vamp edge, you're talking about when I've put toe caps on boots and a few shoes. I think it can be lessened but it's something I would have to fool with to perfect the technique.

It occurs to me though, that I have seen...in Golding...instructions for cutting the toe puff so that it is the same shape as the toe cap---say a short wing toe cap. It seems like...just speculating...that if the toe puff were cut and shaped judiciously it would go a long way to smoothing out that transition from vamp to cap.

As I say, I have been reading Thornton as I scan it in, and the chapter on clicking techniques shows captoe shoes being cut pieced.

Thinking about it, I think the biggest obstacle to not cutting the vamp would be that you'd have two layers of upper leather to draft around the toe and to inseam through...scary!

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

(Message edited by admin on October 09, 2009)

[janne_melkersson]

DW
"Thinking about it, I think the biggest obstacle to not cutting the vamp would be that you'd have two layers of upper leather to draft around the toe and to inseam through...scary!"

Traditionally, the reason for cutting the vamp is besides it will make a stronger toe you will not end up with the joint visible. I am doing this all the time and it is "no" big deal. However, the feather line has to be moved back according to the extra thickness of leather, if not you can end up with grinning stitches.

[lancepryor]

DW:

Is Thornton addressed to factory production, or to handmade bespoke production? Certainly, for reasons of economy if nothing else, the RTW makers do cut the underlying vamp.

Regarding shaping the toe puff to ameliorate the transition, I guess it is possible, but boy would it be a challenge, since you need to shape the skive at the edge of the toe puff to closely mirror the toe cap's skive, (and in turn that requires knowing exactly where the toe cap will end up when you relast it), then change the angle of the toe cap skive/shape to a more gentle angle to the front of the toe. If you can do that, you're better than I (not that that is in dispute!].

When I made my short wing cap shoe, I did cut the puff to mirror the cap. I think the shape of the wingcap for some reason helps hide the transition; this may be because the skive ends up being longer/more gradual along the lines of the last (a basic function of geometry), or perhaps the transition is just less obvious because the edge of the cap is angled anyway and thus you don't have a clean right angle to highlight the transition. Just noodling....

Lance

[dw]

Lance, Janne,

OK...here's a thought--unless you are using extremely firm lining leather, it would seem to me that tapping on the vamp/toecap seam, during or just after lasting, would impress a "shadow" into the lining. OR...you could take a red grease pencil and outline the toecap seam from underneath and again, tap it to transfer the red mark to the lining.

Now I'm just speculating here, as well, but once you could determine where that seam is it might be a lot easier to cut and place a shaped toepuff. I guess it depends on how you approach installing the toepuff, in the first place.

I know that some makers last the toepuff at the same time as they last the shoe. I'm sure I'm backward in this regard (comes from bootmaking, I guess) but I always last the shoe sans the toepuff and then when it has a day or so to set, I roll back the vamp and install and refine the shape of the toepuff separately. So it would not be that big a deal...or so it seems in my imagination...to deal with that transition at the same time.

In practical terms, I don't see much difference in using the toepuff this way and leaving the vamp uncut. If the toepuff is cut and skived carefully, it would take the place of the vamp piece that has been cut away both in creating a smooth transition and in terms restoring the original thickness.

It takes two to noodle...

PS...In general, Thornton is addressing both factory work and handwork--he, like so many before, seems to feel obliged to cover all aspects of the Trade. But neither he nor Golding seem to differentiate when it comes to clicking.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member


(Message edited by dw on October 09, 2009)

[lancepryor]

DW:

Your proposed approach seems like it would likely work pretty well; however, the challenge to me would be to have the thickness of the puff where end of the vamp skive ends equal the full thickness of the vamp leather. If the upper leather is say 3.5 ounces, then where it ends you want the puff to be at that same 3.5 ounce thickness. Unless you started with a 3.5 ounce thickness puff, it would be hard to hit that target (or it would for me, anyway). Of course, perfection wouldn't be necessary; even an approximation would likely reduce the appearance of the transition. However, for the sake of a devil's argument, if you're going to go to that much trouble, why not just go with a thin puff and the double thickness of the toe? I would think you could skive the edge of the underlying vamp piece, so it's not too thick going over the feather-edge. You'd still probably have plenty of stiffness, less hassle with the toe puff, and a toe that wouldn't be much thicker than a single piece of upper leather with a thicker puff. Hmmm...

Like you, I last the toe lining before lasting in the puff, and that's how the guys I've seen in London do it as well. However, I don't fully last in the toe of the upper, I just have it tacked at the center, the joints, and the cap toe line when I do the back of the shoe. I only last in the toe completely after doing the toe puff.


Lance

[janne_melkersson]

DW
"OK...here's a thought--unless you are using extremely firm lining leather, it would seem to me that tapping on the vamp/toecap seam, during or just after lasting, would impress a "shadow" into the lining. OR...you could take a red grease pencil and outline the toecap seam from underneath and again, tap it to transfer the red mark to the lining."

Probably one of these two methods are used by most makers on this side of the pond and it is also used when the vamp is put together to a apron.

I was taught that the main reason to leave the vamp uncut is that it will decrease the vamp if it is cut.

Since there are many bootmakers reading the forum it might be of interest to know that in the West End trade the same idea is used when making side seamed boots (and most all other boot styles too) i.e. the top goes all the way down to the heel. That said, there will be four layers to last at the back the top, the lining, the counter and the counter cover.

I am making side seamed boots pretty much the same way as most US makers but on back seamed boots like dressage and field boots I let the top go all the way down.

Janne

(Message edited by Janne_melkersson on October 09, 2009)

[dw]

Janne, Lance,

Thank you both. You've given me some food for thought.

Lance, again in my imagination...I don't see the difference in thickness between the upper leather and the puff being that much of a problem. All that is really necessary is to ameliorate or extend the transition/skive of the vamp over a longer distance so that it can blend in.

That said, I would have to guess that all my toe stiffeners are at least in the 3 ounce range (although I think of them in terms of "irons" ). So maybe where I'm starting from is with the vamp and the stiffener being more or less equal in thickness. Of course...and one of the things that I am still struggling with...I tend to favour firmer and heavier just as a result of my years of bootmaking. Sometimes it is hard for me to embrace what I know, intellectually, is refinement.

I'm just gonna have to fool with it, I guess.

Janne,

...in the West End trade the same idea is used when making side seamed boots (and most all other boot styles too) i.e. the top goes all the way down to the heel. That said, there will be four layers to last at the back the top, the lining, the counter and the counter cover.

I am making side seamed boots pretty much the same way as most US makers but on back seamed boots like dressage and field boots I let the top go all the way down.

That's interesting about the way the tops are brought all the way down on sideseamed boots. Of course, I have enormous respect for the West End, but it is hard for me to imagine that...or even imagine why it is the preferred technique. I can understand it on dressage and field boots, however.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[chuck_deats]

Paul, et al
Thanks for the answers. All I am using is I/c numbers which you explained very well. I am on the gulf coast fishing. This computer does not work very well. Worried about redfish, not strength of material right now.

[romango]

I like this plastic shank I pulled out of a pair of cheapo boots.

I'm going to try to duplicate it with ShapeLock (http://shapelock.com/)

Hey, nothing wrong with a steel shank but I have to admire the efficiency of this approach.

11111.jpg

11112.jpg

11113.jpg

[erickgeer]

Rick,

Have you used the Shapelock before? Do you know what temp it "softens" at? The FAQ says it is mold-able at 150f - but is it rigid right until that temp?

Looks like neat stuff.

Erick

[romango]

Yes, I've used it before. Not sure I can tell you the exact profile of temp vs softness but it can be formed below 150, which is almost too hot to handle, and is rigid well above room temp.

I tried making a shank with it before and found in not quite stiff enough. But the shank above is quite a bit thicker than the one I made, which I think will work.

Could be they get away with this amount of volume because the rubber sole is kind of hollow. I'll let you know how it turns out.

I'm off skiing for a weeks, so it won't be right away.

[paul]

I'm hoping I can get a little correction and instruction.

I'm using the Yes! paste for the first time on a pair of Romeo style slippers with a pocket counter.

I lasted them yesterday, and today have stains on my counter covers. I'm keeping it wet today hoping to disperse the stain some, we'll see.

But I'm figuring it was a mistake to wet the outer leather (it's GH Taurus), appying YES! to both the wet counter and the wet Taurus, before lasting. Am I right? That must be what I did wrong here.

On my fitter, the outer leather (it was buffalo calf) was dry when I slipped the cased counter in with the YES! It didn't stain, so a pretty easy deduction, I'm thinking.

I appreciate any feedback.

Paul

[dw]

Paul,

I've had that problem, too, mostly staining the linings which I usually spritz.

Here's my conclusions..

First, I think my heel stiffeners were too wet. Now I wet the stiffener and then wrap it in paper(blank newsprint) overnight to let the excess moisture evaporate off. Essentially I want them surface dry but malleable--just like if you were going to tool them. The upshot is that there is no significant liquid to seep out of the stiffener.

Second, I spritz the linings but don't wet the uppers unless I really need to. My shoes are made to a mean forme. They are modeled as close to the contours of the last as you can hope to achieve. If the mean formes are accurate and the patterns are accurate, the shoes should, near-as-nevermind, "fall" on the last...without added moisture (boots are not at all like that).

Third, just spritz the lining (or upper,)don't soak it. Excess moisture will transport any "dark water" (residual stain left in the fibers of the stiffener) to the surface.

So far it has worked good for me. And as an added benefit I think lasting is easier to control because the leathers are not so subject to "over stretching" due to the action of the water.

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

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[paul]

Yeah, that's what I thought was the problem. Too wet.

Actually, I think the problem was impatience. I should know better. I'd been putting this one off for too long while I was busy with my other rat killin'.

Thank you for sharing your observations and experience.

Paul

[romango]

I've had this happen too. Too wet!

[athan_chilton]

It's rare, of course, that I have anything constructive to add to technical discussions, except perhaps if you're compiling a manual of what NOT to do. However I too have been using Yes paste, for everything except gluing outsoles, and just today compared lasting uppers with Yes, but no water, to yesterday, lasting with Yes plus water. Didn't have a problem with my heel counter or toe box, (and Yes seems to come off my upper leather easily enough) but the upper leather got way too stretchy, and the moisture just seemed to retard the drying of the paste. Today's effort seemed easier, not wetting the upper before lasting.

[producthaus]

At what point is a crimping board required for a particular like a Balmoral?

I talked to someone recently who made a Chelsea and they used a crimping board, which is a new thought for me and a discovery to pursue.

What are the factors that decide yes VS no? I am focusing on shoemaking, but would happily delve into bootmaking to understand more about this, where should I start?

(Message edited by producthaus on August 17, 2010)