The Crispin Colloquy

Al,

I enjoyed reading your "lesson" very much- more stuff to think about. Some of the things you mentioned from the factories are very surprising.

As the subject of inside cones came up, I keep on trying to get my head around the constructions I know, and how the last shape effects them. Namely I'm thinking about the court shoe. Needing to be tight to prevent gapping, and to hold the foot- lasts for these types have a very pronounced cuboid. I'm thinking by the nature of the shoe type, that an inside cone last would be very unuitable for this. I'm thinking that maybe the shoe was developed using straight last, so therefore never having an inside cone - am I wrong?

I've been thinking more on this namely because I am working on a new last model for myself, and I am trying to find a ballance between an inside cone and a distinct inside cuboid to allow me to make "true-fit" and adjustable fit shoes- so far it is elluding me and I think it may be a lost cause.

Time to start my day now.

Happy New Year,

Erick

Just to add to what has been said about anatomical features in footwear, some insoles/inserts are now relying on "proprioceptive stimulus" rather that "support." As mentioned earlier, this results in the strengthening and increased use of muscles, nerves, and tendons instead of weakening them.

Products at "barefootscience.com" use a stimulus under the arch to cause contraction of muscles and reduce overpronation. Those at "posturedyn.com" create a stimulus for those with morton's toe and also reduce overpronation. Some other insoles feature a "toe ramp" which esentially adds "toe spring" in relatively flat toed atheletic footwear. This is also a kind of proprioceptive stimulus.

You can experiment with simple homemade versions of these products and see that they do indeed change walking gate in an unexpected way (given how they provide only stimulus and no significant structural change to the foot). Of course you always want to be careful in doing anything that alters your natural gate (but then most footwear does this to some extent anyhow).

Hopefully podiatrists and the shoe industry will begin to realize that there are other stategies for foot health than adding ever more "support" and "cushioning."

Erick,

I'm confused (not rare), what do mean by a "court shoe"? The way I know to clip those tighter along the top-line via the last is to "clean out the cuboid" medially and laterally, or thin the whole back-part tapering in towards the island, so from the rear the last looks like a hollow-sided triangle /_\ or )_(. All of the 18thc. lasts are hollowed at the sides with very narrow islands, many maybe 1/2" wide, and the back is ramrod straight up and down, so when the foot goes it, the top-line is tensioned perfectly in most cases. The other adjustment is in the pattern--if there is a more or less vertical side-seam each side, I cut a draft reduction out of it, so when it's closed, the top is tighter, but it still looks straight, if you get my meaning. Not unlike what the cowboy bootmakers do at the side-seams near the ankle--looks straight, but it's actually necked-in and reduced by "X" amount. Give both a try and LMK.

Anonymous,

Well said, glad for the added input, and any more you might reveal on this proprioceptor research might be interesting. I guess the next gimmick after shoes with blinking lights in the heels, might be shoes with built in electronic zapper pads, like physical therapists use, that shock and tingle your feet to contract the tired muscles, detected, of course, by other electronic sensors within the footwear....or is this a proprietary concept on somebody's drawing board already?

Being "old school" myself, I prefer to make any mods, contours, etc. directly into the last, because I'm using oak-bark insoles and making welted work. As I think Lisa said the other day, feet are a "moving target" when it comes to fit, and beyond a certain point exactitude is--pardon my saying so--but a waste of time and effort. Feet are never the exact same size or girth twice in the same day, and obesity and fluid-retention issues exacerbate this with certain customers. It's a real problem for closed, pull-in boots with no adjustments, laces, etc.

BTW, one of the things I forgot to mention this AM about anatomically contoured last bottoms: this is all well and good as long as one was using thicker veg/bark tanned insoling. But, with the switch in the industry to crappy cardboard [AKA "Texon board", etc] in the early 1970s, trying to impart any foot bed either during mfg. via the last, or afterwards through natural wear, became moot. That material just won't break-in, it merely breaks-down in my experience. So, another guess is, with such "dead" insoling being used, anatomically contoured last bottoms became more of a nuisance than anything, because the insoles wouldn't bed done onto the last.

Hi Al,
I was interested in what you had to say about padding,

"In the met. area padding is again "what feels good", however too much underfoot and energy is lost in gait. The forefoot and toes need a firm surface to roll and push off for the next step, and if too much energy is lost, by transfer to sinking down into padding, than it fatigues the feet faster."

I've just taken the dog for a walk along the beach - only a 3-4 minute stroll away - as it's the middle of summer I kicked my shoes off, I was surprised as to how hard my feet were working in the dry sand, it was a complete wokout and they felt really good afterwards although very tired, and I'm not big or too unfit.

I hadn't noticed this before, but I'll do it more often as I think it'd be a good thing.

Happy New Year and more power and to y'awl
T.

Tom,

Having a good smile at your sandy walk, but yes, that's the idea I think. I know it might incite alot of chatter and further discussion, but the best boots I've ever found for "road marching", walking long distances on pavement, or on firm ground, were the old WWII British "ammo" boots (replaced the steel heel rims 'cause they slipped), and the WWII spec. Munson last paratrooper jump boots with a solid 8/8" rubber heel. First let me qualify by saying I have no lower back pain or heel-strike issues (yet) that I'm aware of. I grew up in the great sprawling American suburbia with concrete sidewalks and walked everywhere well into my '20s before I got a car than ran more than it was in the garage.

Both of these boots had generous toe-spring, and a 1+" effective heel-height. The soles (double thick) were semi-rigid--they flexed enough, but not supple at all. This combination just "worked" for extended walking. I'd think nothing of trekking 10 miles to, and 10 miles back, across the urban landscape. The boots kind of propelled you along with a rolling rolling action, but not quite like a rigid sole might. After the initial heel-strike, the curve of the soles was balanced just right, so that it was effortless to follow through, and the heel itself--so often an "obstacle" in boots--was part of the "engine" rolling you along. You didn't feel every rock and pebble, or uneven pavement either, so you tended to stride along briskly, more briskly that people seem to plod in sneakers these days, exhibiting little or no rolling action. In fact it was more effort to walk slowly without swinging you arms, carrying parcels, musical instrument cases, and other impedimenta.

Anyway, the reason I bring this up is part curiosity. Military footwear has been maligned for decades, if not centuries, mainly because it's heavier and stiffer than whatever the contemporary civilian styles for smart young men might be, and "5 pounds added to your feet is like an added 10 pounds on your back", blah, blah, blah... However, military footwear (US) didn't get all flexible and cushy until well after infantry got mobile, and then the guys seemed to wear sneakers in training--go figure? Somewhere it was advanced that military marching boots needed to flex more, to allow the foot's full movement. I never understood this, as the sole bending easily and twisting at every unevenness would seem to me to induce more injuries by wrenching the foot this way and that, than a semi-rigid sole that "protected" the feet. Imagine walking over very coarse gravel, would you prefer a flexible sole that allows you to feel every pebble, or a stiffer one that keeps your foot more or less moving in the same plane?

I'm digressing...anyway, I'm sure the fashion-athletic shoe people have researched all this, but adding shock-absorbing padding underfoot robs some of the energy needed to walk briskly, and the squishier the bottoms (inside and out), the greater this energy-loss is. Of course people insist on running on pavement, rather than a grassy track, so I can see they'd need some padding. But, like Anonymous hinted, it's way out of control these days. I see people shuffling and plodding along in these great padded "boxes" that pass for athletic shoes, with all the vigor of a pregnant Yak. They no longer seem to stride along.

Bill,
Regarding my models, which you have not seen, how can you declare any thing true or false about them since they are the work of the same lastmakers that J&V purchased, [Western, Krentler, Central] and wouldn't they be part of the company's stock, the same you draw your visuals from?

Many, not all of Jim Bowman's came from Carl Litche's carefully selected collection as well as other well known last makers. He also studied with Klingbeil. He was an excellent riding bootmaker and made good lasts because his models' were from good sources.

I have not mentioned Munson lasts by name, simply mentioning the real, observable changes in the Nocona I own, both wooden and plastic for the factory, and other's I have seen. So I omit any comment on Munsons. This is not a company trivia QA; rather a discussion on changes in lasts and fit; and believe you me, most women do not enjoy a real good fit; just acceptable fit because that is the pool of ready-made footwear from which they have to select from.

Joe Patrickus bought out MacMcDaniels ENTIRE inventory including his lathe. Lucky for you to have a few of Omegas. I don't remember them in the group of screen dumps you sent me when I was looking for older western last designs. Omitted from your post are the important nuances of the last which make it a good fitter. The western boot is a better fitting piece of footwear because it covers the instep. Pumps damage toes and the higher the heel the more trouble the wearer has eventually. The smaller toe boxes that help keep it on, plus body weight, plus gravity [3.14 lbs per] are alot of force to put on the toes.

Again, no offense intended, but you seem to want to be perpetually annoyed at anything I post. Could it be you want to buy the Gilman and spare parts inventory from me? I conclude from the delivery confirmation that you received the unused military duty shoe tacked up model I sent you.
;-)

Happy New Year to all!

Court shoes, pointed cowboy boots...

re court shoes, someone please clarify the definition! From doing a Google search I gather they are ladies' closed-toe high-heeled pumps? Is this correct?

re cowboy boots ... I've always considered ladies' pointed toe shoes to be a cause of much foot discomfort, and bunions. Many cowboy boots have pointed toe boxes. From discussions here I gather the toe box is lengthened to alleviate some of the toe-squishing, but even so, it would seem that the tapering in of the toe box along the big toe would still encourage bunion problems. Is there something I'm missing in the last design that eliminates this possible hazard? Thanks.

Jenny

Jenny,

Pumps and court shoes interchangable.

Just from my limited experience with western boots, I've tried on factory boots that fit just fine everywhere, except the toes were pinched- the salesperson told me it was because it was the wrong size.... I would have been swimming in anything bigger.

The pointier the toe, the longer the last should be, but I think aestheticaly there are limits to how extra long people are willing to have there shoes sticking out from their feet.

I really like to look at shoes by Ann Demuelemeester- in the past she has produced shoes that have quite a bit of swing to them, my perception is that they allow the point of the shoe to be more in line with the big toe, rather than pinching it towards the lateral side of the foot. I've pulled an image off of ebay- this is not a pointy shoe, but you can see the swing though.


I'm rambling a bit, so sorry about that. I hope I'm not too off-base with my thoughts

Happy New Year,

Erick

Jenny -
A court shoe is the modern or contemporary 'pump' or slip on shoe with a heel for women.

Al and Bill and DW,
I encourage you shoemaking men, who consider yourself industry professionals, to wear for a day, a slim skirt to the knee with 3" heel pumps that have a low, sweetheart throat and a pointed toe and walk around all day at the office or a trade show. Make sure you smile the entire time. Then use what you know to fix the "fit" without changing the heel height or the cute appeal of the shoe. Nothing bad would come of this cause either there would be compassion or really great pump lasts, and at the very least, create some common ground on which to discuss wearability of commerical lasts for women. The size that stays on is the size that compresses toes and puts pressure on the big-toe joint. Then let's talk about "handling" lasts from all centuries and decades. But really Al, what was your point between the commens of with the lasts you have handled and Carl Litche's methods?

Just for the record, Carl Litche's method is not to work from a cast. Rather it is to measure the foot extensively and then match the foot profiles to an existing last or model he already has on hand. He is the only one I know who carefully calculates the profile the last offers at instep, arch, lateral side, media side and sole profile as well as insole profile to the client. Working with the precision of an engineer, but no casting.

Bill Tippit uses computer software to design lasts for mass production and is willing to create a custom sized model from measurements that are better fit, but not guaranteed perfect. DW starts his bootmaking process with a leather'd up last making sure the heel profile is correct. These self-posted comments are all related and indicitive of parallel realities, and not at all at cross-purposes. Everyone who responds seems to be oblivious to the fact I did not tell anyone what to do; rather I posted back what had been posted, or researched by experience. Never said that Bill Tippit should do differently with his modeling program than his commerical clients want, or that he should be able to make a perfect custom last from measurements.

It is simply that people keep using lasts without recognizing the change in the fit. And as a woman who has suffered from the limits of footwear available for purchase, I intend to continue to explore the problems which are easiest to describe as 'that women, in particular, need better choices in footwear.' Even the older women who meet to knit at the local Starbucks every Wednesday from 7-9PM say the EasySpirit shoe, when it first came out, fit them better than the latest pair they bought.

So, in spite of the fact that women reportedly have higher tolerances for pain, [[ I have endured the pain of pointed toe pumps from the 1980s and surgery to correct a deformity that developed in my longer foot, from buying shoes that fit the slightly shorter foot,]] once the bunion get's started it does not go away like a pimple. Case in point my younger sister. I see no reason to accept the fit of commercial footwear NOW optimized for style and factory machines, with certian guidelines, as limits of what is possible for a good fit.

Happy New Year to all!

For Bill Tippit,
Regarding your comments on December, 23rd, you draw conclusions and discuss at great length peripheral issues -- that are not what I said - specifically your corrections about heel curve templates to heel height. What I was referencing and inferrring and saw and handled first-hand was the following: that [1] the lasts are for particular types of feet and the [2] heel curve graded by size are/is/was marked on the last model for which it was designed. Maybe I needed to use more words?

We had this type of informational misunderstanding problem before in our last phone call, when I was discussing the difference between military geometric grading standards and arithmetic grading and you responded with a comment on the Gilman Lathe's distortions. These separate last grading methods [arithmetic vs geometric] which result in new measurements by size, which are the 'goal' measures of the finished last, are independent of the lathe that does the work to cut lasts in the specified sizes. No matter if the machine is Fagus, or Gilman or some Ziedel, or another lathe.

Anyway, I hope this smoothes all your feathers et al. And I want to reassure you that I do follow your thoughts when you discuss your last production issues.

And could someone PLEASE help Jenny Fleishmann and tell her what she needs to do to start those capezio oxford soft dance shoes she wants to make? Doesn't anyone have an oxford last to lend the lass or a pattern for a men's size 7 or so??
I do not have anything in that style. And I sent her some impression paper so she can see where the weight is born and if the insole is sufficient on the last she has to modify and some of that Portugese leather I got as a sample.

Best to you in the new year.
Lisa-Pizza

Munson and the MIL 1 through 6 specs

For those who understood the reference to the Munson last and have greater interest, there are several [overpriced] copies of his publication for sale on ABE.com. Simply search for his name or part of the title.
"The Soldier's Foot and the Military Shoe: a Handbook for Officers and Noncommissioned Officers of the Line"
Munson, Edward Lyman. 1912.

Along the same line, the geometric grading for military lasts, which was source of the model I sent Bill was adopted long after Munson designed for the military; and Munsons' original work was graded arithmetically, not geometrically [which was later abandoned by the military]

The MIL 1-6 spec sheets I have, with foot measures by size, do not include much background and Dr. Munsons' work way back from 1912, is not documented in any publications I have been able to locate thus far. The model from the 1960s' is a good 50 years later that the publication listed and I could not, be sure it was derived from any existing models or created from guidelines of Munson's.

If it matters, my brother who went to a military academny instead of college in the 1980s says the shoes he was given were quite comfortable at the time. Other men disagree.

Jenny, Lisa
in George Koleffs book there are patterns for Oxfords etc. and he shows a method of making patterns from pictures of a shoe. if you go to www.zappos.com you'll see 3D pics of a Capezio oxford...

If Jenny (or anyone) fails to get a reply to a posting, it's not because they're being blanked, it's because no one has an answer, or sometimes the post has just been overlooked.

The other option, is for Jenny to get a last as close to the shape she needs, and build it up.

More power to y'awl

T.

Lisa,

I fully accept your point about "hobble" skirts and extreme heels/toes etc., but wearing a kilt is as close as I have or likely will ever get, and that with 5/8" heel Oxfords

What I was driving at earlier, the "problem" with the shoes you just described is not the last per se, but the style itself. Lower the heel, swing the forepart, broaden the toe shape, make sure they're +/- 1" longer than the foot inside, and most if not all of the discomforts would go away. Having said that, my wife has discovered that some of the vintage "Baby Doll" toe shoes from the 1940s are far more comfortable than modern shoes of the same heel-height, style, etc. I glommed onto a 1940s women's last to fiddle with, and it has way more medial swing in the forepart than anything I see today. In fact I had Bill T. scan it, and if you PM me, I might give you the model number so you can try it for yourself.

=======================
"Then let's talk about "handling" lasts from all centuries and decades. But really Al, what was your point between the commen[t]s of with the lasts you have handled and Carl Litche's [Lichte] methods?"
=======================

Okay, what would you like discuss first? Antique lasts fall into two categories: bespoke/custom-made, and generic, for mass-production (or one adapted for the other application). Some of each followed sound timeless principles of anatomical design that are common threads that go from century to century, others probably sucked. I spent a week with Carl in '99 learning his procedure, which wasn't all that different from what the West End firms have been doing all along since the "Golden Age"--they've been making one-off bespoke wooden lasts for customers' feet from only measurements and tracings for ____years. The 18thc. bespoke shops did largely the same, however the first evidence for tracing around the foot isn't until c.1824. Most bespoke bootmakers don't/didn't ever use plaster castings. One 18thc. ref, mentions this technique for "deformed" feet only, the plaster casts were then sent to a lastmaker to copy in wood. The impression I've got is that Carl's method is just fundamentally the traditional one, only highly refined through the use of all his engineer gadgets and precise measuring. Except for the tools he uses, and the devices he's created to trap the foot and the last, I don't recall him claiming that his technique was anything "new" or unique--but they are damned nice lasts.

=======================
"He is the only one I know who carefully calculates the profile the last offers at instep, arch, lateral side, media side and sole profile as well as insole profile to the client. Working with the precision of an engineer, but no casting."
=======================

This leads me to ask you then, how many lastmakers have you known or observed? With the exception of a few orthopedic "Space Shoe" makers back in the 1970s, I've *never* met a lastmaker here or abroad that used plaster casts (orthopedics excepted)--they *all* worked from measurements and tracings.

Hopefully you will figure out how to make "cruel" shoes fit and feel like sneakers without altering the style. If you succeed, I'll buy shares in your company

=====================
"For those who understood the reference to the Munson last and have greater interest, there are several [overpriced] copies of his publication for sale on ABE.com. Simply search for his name or part of the title. "The Soldier's Foot and the Military Shoe: a Handbook for Officers and Noncommissioned Officers of the Line" Munson, Edward Lyman. 1912.
=======================

Excellent little book, and I'd urge anyone interested to get one. E.W. Peterkin (late) charter HCC member gave a lecture on Munson's book back in the '80s, which can be found in the Guild video collection from John Bailey.

===========
"and the MIL 1 through 6 specs"
===========

No mention of these in there though, as they didn't start coming out until c.1959. If you go to www.stormingmedia.com, and search for 'Biomechanical Properties of Infantry Combat Boot', plus 'Comparison of 2 Current Issue Army Boots...' these reports are interesting too. I'll save you all the effort and agony to find out why the US Army dropped the Munson last:

1) After WWII and Korea soldiers had complained that their Munson-lasted boots weren't wide enough when worn in the cold/wet with extra/thicker socks (Why they didn't just suggest going to a bigger size/wider width, I've no idea.)

2) The Munson last was associated with the Goodyear-welted boots, and because the mil-spec called for cotton (yes cotton!) thread throughout, the inseams were failing prematurely, especially in tropical climates--the baby (Munson last) went out with the bath water (cotton sewed Goodyear-welted boots). (Why they didn't just change the spec to nylon thread, as some combat boots from post 1956 did have nylon in the uppers, but retained cotton in the inseams and soles.)

3) There was increased pressure from off-shore firms--Bata in particular--the get the Cold War US military juggernaut to buy and adopt their "new" injection molding "DMS" system, thus capitalizing it for expanded civilian mfg. applications, or recouping the heavy investments already laid out, (like the good old Blake/MacKay sewer was brought into production and wide-spread lease only after getting a jump-start via army contracts in the Civil War); so there was a bit of chicanery on the part of would-be contractors to elbow the Goodyear welted boot out of the way so they could get lucrative contracts.

The US "Mil" lasts, were created by geometrical grading, as the result of the big post-war study of anthropometrics, so they were the "latest thing", and being fresh out of the R&D phase, perhaps easier to adapt for Bata's DMS (?). Munson boots were decried as "too tight" fitting, and so out they went. As far as I know, the "MIL" lasts are no longer geometrically graded, but the model last is still the spawn of the geometric Devil, weird-fitting, and has little in common with the venerable old Munson. The Munson, the "MIL" lasts, none of these are or can be legally "proprietary" today because they were all created with tax-payers' money.

=======================
"The MIL 1-6 spec sheets I have, with foot measures by size, do not include much background"
=======================

I had the same problem. The "MIL" lasts, and the DMS boots produced since c.1963, plus all the uniform and equipment R&D shifted to Natick Lab. in MA, and getting anything out of them is like trying to go through the Freedom on Information Act. I bet the R&D files are up there, but good luck trying to crack through the bureaucracy.

=======================
"Dr. Munsons' work way back from 1912, is not documented in any publications I have been able to locate thus far."
=======================

Do you mean not cited? Munson's book is cited all over the place. It was his original research, so no, it's not discussed in other publications.

=======================
"The model from the 1960s' is a good 50 years later that the publication listed and I could not, be sure it was derived from any existing models or created from guidelines of Munson's."
========================

Can't recall the date on Bill T.'s Munson, but I have examples of dated Munsons from the 1930s onward, and they are all exactly the same model. You might find what got marked "Modified Munsons"--Bruce was pulling those out of that NE factory too--it's the same last with a medium leather fitting stuck on over the lateral ball to deepen the last right there, and a little prodding with a priser and it pops right off, and you'll be back to 1914. In those days new runs were just turned off the same tacked-up master turning models provided to the last mfg. from the US Quartermaster Dept., like a photo-copier, and the military inspectors were very rigorous, all of which pretty much insures that a 1960 Munson was the same as a 1914 Munson, except for the "mod" above.

In WWII and Korean War Munson last footwear was produced in 137(139?) length and width combinations, and for females too.

Tom's spot on. Jenny, if you want a good Oxford last to start with, just ask Bill. I'm sure he has a bunch of models.

Hi all...I actually sent some info to Bill and he's going to see what he can find, and then if I can afford it, I'll buy a pair of lasts from him! My wish list of shoemaking supplies keeps getting bigger, and my paycheck doesn't, unfortunately!

In the meantime, I am working on my homemade lasts, which I hope will work for dance shoes with a 1/2 inch heel. After I sand down the roughness, I'm thinking of making fitter(?) shoes buy putting ladies nylon knee highs over the lasts, putting on an insole of thin poster board and then covering the lasts with narrow strips of duct tape, which I think will have a little give. I'll probably just cut an opening down the top to get it off the last (haven't cut the lasts in two yet). Lisa has suggested another method of making a fitter shoe, as well. I just want to do something as quickly as possible to test the fit of the lasts...it doesn't have to be pretty! Any faster ways of making a fitter?

In the meantime, I continue to go through the many boxes of shoes in my closet, in hopes of getting rid of some to make more space. I came across a very nice pair of Naturalizer nubuck tie walking shoes that hurt the big toe joint (my "almost" bunion) on my right foot because the arch length is too long, a very common problem for me. However, the heel is actually comfortable! The counter only goes partway up the heel, which is similar to what I've been thinking about doing, and then there is padding around the topline, which usually bothers me, but doesn't on these shoes. Perhaps it is because the counter is so low it ends BELOW the padding, so it allows the padding (which is fairly soft) to adjust to my foot rather than pressing it into the back of my heel. Very interesting. They go back on the shelf in the closet so I can try to do something similar later!

Jenny

To all:

I’ve tried to enjoy the holiday weekend with as little work related effort as possible. Starting tomorrow we’ll all need to get back to another 12 months of deadlines and “to do” lists. However, I wanted to try to add anything I could to the tsunami of postings from the past few days. I won’t bother with duplicating what others have said on any of the topics.

TOE PINCHING: It’s my experience that pinched toes usually come from one or both of the following reasons. Either the last has not been extended beyond the foot enough to accommodate the narrow toes or it is too straight and should have been pronated more. I think the latter is the reason so many standard lasts need a “runner” placed on the medial side of the toe area as the first step towards customization. The length issue is very predominant also and too many people try to fix the problem the way the retail clerk tried to take care of Erick, by just suggesting a longer size. That displaces any good fit points that the proper size would have had and only creates more problems than solutions. Just think of the concept of Sabbage’s Sectionizer that DW uses. You have the foot and then you add 1/11 of that length (or whatever the toe shape requires) TO THE END OF THE TOE (not spaced throughout the last in an overall grade) to allow for toe room in the last while keeping the fit points of the last and foot in synch.

MILITARY LASTS: First, my Munson came for a turning model dated 1950 something. It was a factory copy of a model provided by the US Government. Interestingly, I discovered 2 years ago when talking to a VP of one of the Government’s major footwear contractors that the Government no longer requires the shoe companies making military footwear to use lasts made from Government provided models. Lasts can now be purchased from anyone in any country to be used for the boots and shoes and new styles can be used. Of course, this hasn’t reduced the massive amount of paperwork required to win a contract but as long as the boots and shoes are made in America and all of the actual components on the finished product are as well, it no longer matters where the form they’re made on comes from. And so, the decline continues. Another note, and I’m not sure if this practice still continues but I think the smart money is on “yes”, when I was working at JV we would get contracts to produce lasts and we were told by the government inspectors who came to OK them that they probably would never be used. Why? The department was just using its annual budget so that they would not have the budget reduced the next year. They didn’t need the lasts, they just needed the budget to justify their staffs. There was apparently a massive inventory of military lasts that were never even taken out of the bags over the course of many years. This was back in the days when the lasts were still purchased by the Government and sent to the footwear contactor to have the shoes made. They were then returned to the Government at the conclusion of the contract. Your tax dollars at work!

That’s all I’ve got. Happy New Year to all.

Bill “The Last Man Standing” Tippit
www.globalfootwearsolutions.com

Al,

I'm curious...I know you're...shall we say..."obsessed" about medial swing. And that's fine for people like yourself who want or like a broad bear-paw of a toe. But do you ever get an order...or what would you do if you did...that requires an narrow pointed toe?

I can tell you from experience that putting a runner on a "standard" last on the medial side and then cutting or trying to style the forepart of the last for a narrow toe will leave you with a shoe (or boot) that looks like you're going two directions at once. Sometimes you have to do exactly that but it's not a choice I'd make casually.

Like so many other aspects of boot and shoemaking...well, what does Dan F. say?...fit is only one leg of the three corner hat (stool). Styling is important too or we won't bootmakers long.

Not that Corcoran's aren't stylish--especially under a double breasted zoot suit!

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

frommer@bootmaker.com
http://www.bootmaker.com

Erick,

I don't honestly think that the swing on those shoes you posted is anything out of the ordinary. I don't believe that my Old krentler 352's have any less swing.

And not to be too contrary but, the way I see it, if you look closely at either shoe you will see a dark patch just ahead of the medial joint. I think this is a pretty close approximation of where the first toe is imprinting. If that's the case the center of the toe or the shoe/last is actually more in line with the second or even the third toe.

See the attached mod of your photo.

On the lasts that I use, the center of the toe is aligned with the LOMA--the line of muscular action--which runs between the first and second met heads. For appropriate feet, which in my opinion is about 80-90% of the population (with minor adjustments)this is about as good as you can get.



Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

frommer@bootmaker.com
http://www.bootmaker.com

Bill,

Great stuff on the military lasts! I got the straight dope on the boots from an old buddy, now the curator at the H.Q. Dept. of the Army, Washington, DC. Several Army guys I know says it's gotten so bad, they just give you a voucher to go buy whatever boots you like from stores or catalogues, that conform more or less to the look of spec boots. The three mfgs. of US combat boots litigated right after 9/11, because there was no way they could produce the numbers the government asked for, for the ramp-up to Afghanistan/Iraq. I think I posted the bits about how we were out of bullets, too, and now buying those on the open market, as well as contracting the "M-4" carbine [anemic version of the M-16--shorter barrel=reduced velocity/lethality] to Pakistan; and how most uniforms now have labels in saying made in the Dominican Republic. Saw something on the news recently about using illegal aliens to make MRE rations.

On the bright side???? At least the new "basketball boots on steroids"--the current combat boots--are stitched again, even if it is just stitch-down.

DW,

==========
"But do you ever get an order...or what would you do if you did...that requires an narrow pointed toe?"
==========

In a word? Send the customer elsewhere

No seriously, if one of my existing toe-styles didn't suit, and in good conscience I couldn't clip the great toe far enough to accommodate the style wanted, I'd turn away the order in a heartbeat. I'd rather make nothing, than make something that will hurt, or is based on "bad" design.

For my narrower toe shapes, those are based off a US Navy last, which has lost of swing, plus ample toe for chopping up into almost anything short of a winkle-picker.

DW,

The Shoe example isn't the most extreme of Demeulemeester shoes. I'm including a pic that sort of shows it- it's hiding a little. I've been looking at some sole shapes that are pretty darn straight lately.

What is a "runner"? Thanks.

Joe,

It's a build-up in the forepart of the last that begins at the feather edge. To widen the forepart but it must widen the insole as well.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

frommer@bootmaker.com
http://www.bootmaker.com

Al:

Your comments about the causes of good fitting lasts, and the loss thereof, are interesting. I wonder if you have any thoughts as to why the features you cite (the hollowed-out bottom and the lack of a feather edge on the rear of the lasts) cause a shoe to feel more comfortable?

On a related note, in a recent discussion about foot problems, the use of a pad behind the met heads was addressed. Again, is there any explanation for why this works? My (very limited) understanding of the foot is that the main supports for the body are the heel and the 1st and 5th met heads. It seems to me that the pad (and the hollowed out last) would cause some of the weight to be shifted to the 2nd - 4th met heads, which seems contrary to the original bio-mechanical design of the foot. So, why does this lead to a superior fit, or to the relief of (certain) foot problems? Is it that, on a soft surface for which the foot was 'designed', some of the weight is borne by the 2nd - 4th heads, but on a hard surface there is no give from the surface, so all the weight ends up being borne by the 1st and 5th? Or, is there some other explanation?

At some point recently, there was also a discussion of the rationale for the radius on the bottom of the last, which is imparted (at least in part) to finished shoe. One explanation cited was that the radius increases the girth, thereby allowing a narrower appearance to the width of the shoe, yielding a more elegant appearance. This makes sense. However, I also wonder whether the curvature acts as a sort of 'springing' to help keep the upper close to the foot and to prevent wrinkling? As you wear the shoe, doesn't the curvature disappear? If so, wouldn't this pull the upper down a bit, yielding the benefits noted above? I have no idea if this is correct, it just occurred to me as I thought about the question. Any thoughts, comments, or enlightenment would be welcomed.