The Crispin Colloquy

Mine arrived about 10 days ago.....not had time to try it! Good find Dee-Dubb!

Be safe!

Jake

A second layer of felt is fine.

das wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 3:26 am A second layer of felt is fine.

When you consider what felt is and how it is made, I was not so concerned about adding another layer, as whether it had been a common practice...historically. I am sure two layers would merge/melt into one with a very little time and the heat of the body. The only experience I have with this stuff is the old shoes you sent me...and I seem to recall only one layer and pretty thin layer at that.

BTW, and FWIW, the felt is 'sanded'--it appears to have sand sprinkled all over it. Bothered me a bit simply because I wanted, and expected, it to stick to the insole. But a maker in London, who is familiar with the stuff...told me that preventing it from sticking to itself when rolled, is exactly why it is sanded. And the sand just brushes off...mostly.

dw wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 1:59 pm


But the real problem with cork, as I said, is that it is fundamentally occlusive. It prevents the insole...given that the insole is leather at all...from breathing. Simply because the cement used to mount the cork seals the fleshside of the insole.

but you do mount your shank and the outsole with the cement? Will this prevent the insole from breathing?

P.S. Considering that the Irish Flax Felt made with bitumen, material that has a great waterproofing property, how can the insole , considering it is made from leather, "breath" (i presume, that under the term "breathing", you mean the hygroscopic properties of leather?)

Well, I do mount the outsole with All-Purpose, although most of the time (when old brain cells remind me) I only cement the welt and a similar area on the outsole. That said, traditionally it was done with paste. Remember that AP is probably post WWII so the Elder Icons never used AP either...for anything.

I am not as concerned with the shank area, simply because there is a filler, and the shank & shank cover, in-between the insole and the outsole. And all that is mounted with either Hirschkleber or a water based cement.

Thing about using AP to affix cork or leather filler is that the flesh side of the insole gets sealed off. Think about a hose with a nozzle on it. As long as the nozzle is closed, it seals the end of the hose, no water will get through. That's what the AP does, prevents movement of moisture through the insole--it 'seals the hose.'

The felt either lays in there or it can be spot affixed with HK...no sealing. At the same time, the fibers of flax create a multitude of interstices which allow the felt itself to breathe despite the tar...probably not quite as readily as untreated felt but it doesn't seal anything.

If you could lay a piece of leather in as a filler with no AP, or with Hirschkleber, that would be dandy. but if you do, you almost certainly will get creaks.

Having said all that...I suspect that the untreated felt is the superior solution. Why the Old Guys didn't use it (or did they?) in lieu of the tarred felt, i don't know. But the Irish Flax felt is also known as Shipbuilder's felt, so maybe it was simply more available...like pine pitch and hemp, etc..

hey @dw thanks for the explanation.

A few more thoughts: when you use term "breathing", you are talking about hygroscopy, don't you? If so, the main purpose of leather insole, in terms of hygroscopy, is to adsorb the water vapours from the air, or in case of leather insole to adsorb the sweat. The sweat obviously will be adsorbed from the inside of the shoe. And obviously will be later evaporated also from the inside of the shoe. It's just impossible for sweat to go through the bottom.

On the other hand, glueing the outsole with AP will create a thin waterproofing layer between the insole and outsole, which will prevent the moister from the outside/ground to penetrate deeper into the shoe (that is also why waxes, different solutions etc. have been used on the outsole and the welt to prevent the moisture to penetrate the insole).

Sorry for my, such a long, train of thoughts, but where did i go wrong?

Anton,

"Hygroscopic"...according to the definitions I have found...means that a material will absorb moisture from the air. Leather may/will do that but I would not consider it to be breathing.

I don't think the word 'hygroscopic" was ever used, or even considered when the Elder Shoe Gods conceived of the concept of 'breathing'.

I am shoemaker, erstwhile teacher & amateur writer, I am not a scientist. I'm not sure I need the confusion that the word 'hygroscopic' brings to the table.

When I think of "breathing" I think of 'wicking' or if I want to get technical of the propensity of moisture to want to equalize when two substances are in intimate contact.

You say that it is "impossible for sweat to go through the bottom." I am not so sure. Nor am I sure on what basis you make that claim. In my career I have seen more shoes than I can count that have sweat stains on the outside of the shoe--a sure sign that if there is no barrier, moisture will move through multiple layers. And, for good or ill (as you imply), if there are no occlusive barriers, standing in a shallow puddle will make your socks wet.

An insole that has been cemented will wick some moisture from the foot. But it reaches a saturation point when it can absorb no more. At which point, because it is sealed and the foot is still generating moisture, it cannot yield the moisture to the air even--moisture cannot evaporate until the foot is removed. If the insole is not sealed, the moisture will move to the next drier substrate--the outsole...if, and only if, the outsole is not sealed.

The one certainty in all this is that rubber shoes are hotter...and wetter...than leather shoes. Shoes with rubber outsoles are intrinsically hotter and sweatier. Simply because, in both cases, rubber is occlusive

Neoprene cements are also occlusive...fundamentally turning leather into rubber. There is no way to escape from that fact. As are waxes (which rapidly wear or flake off) and finish coats on top grain leather.

Is that good...for the shoe? I don't think so. Is it good for the foot? I don't think so. Most of the Old Guys obviously didn't think so, either, or they wouldn't have made a big deal of breathability. And the average, know-nothing consumer seems to think so as well, because despite the repeated attempts at 'marketing' and piles of money thrown at it, and the huge profits to be made, rubber, vinyl, pleather shoes never really catch on.

Is occlusiveness and the reasons for avoiding it (cements, heavy wax jobs, etc.) an issue? One that ought to concern the mindful shoemaker? Is it a good thing or a bad thing? To paraphrase Major Dick Winters in Band of Brothers "every maker (sic) must decide for himself."

"Hygroscopy" ain't in it.

"Hygroscopy" aside, I've heard different views from shoemakers on whether leather "breathes". It makes sense to me that it doesn't breathe in the same sense that fabrics are breathable ie letting air pass from one side to another, but also that it can conduct moisture from the inside of a shoe to the outside if not blocked by cement, as @dw says. From casual observation, shoes without the topy feel less hot and sweaty, but I wonder if this might be accounted for by a relatively insulating character of rubber soles compared to leather? I think I'd have to wear a pair of shoes for a fairly long time before they stop absorbing sweat, at least if they have a proper oak bark insole rather than e.g. leatherboard. And after a day's rest they seem good and dry again. I must admit the topy is mighty tempting compared to resoles.

Personally, and from some limited experience (haven't been looking for it for all that long...don't use Topy or any rubber much), I think you're right. I've seen boots and shoes with Topy half soles and the insole was hard and cracked and somewhat burnt looking...just in the forepart of the shoe. Not sure if there's a direct correlation but it looks to me like the Topy is holding in heat. And by association, either generating more sweat, or not allowing it to move out of the shoe.

wow, really interesting discussion, thanks DW.

dw wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:40 am Anton,

"Hygroscopic"...according to the definitions I have found...means that a material will absorb moisture from the air. Leather may/will do that but I would not consider it to be breathing.

I don't think the word 'hygroscopic" was ever used, or even considered when the Elder Shoe Gods conceived of the concept of 'breathing'.

I am shoemaker, erstwhile teacher & amateur writer, I am not a scientist. I'm not sure I need the confusion that the word 'hygroscopic' brings to the table.

When I think of "breathing" I think of 'wicking' or if I want to get technical of the propensity of moisture to want to equalize when two substances are in intimate contact.


"Hygroscopy" ain't in it.

Sure, we can go with the verb "wick" and so not to confuse anyone. According to the Webster, the verb "wick" means:

: to absorb or drain (a fluid, moisture, etc.)

(though the first know use of this verb dated back only to 1949, but again, no problem, let's stick to it).

So how can the insole, that has underneath an Irish Flax Felt or Tar Felt, that are both great waterproofing materials to say at least, after wicking the sweat from the feet, conduct it to the outsole? Also keeping in mind, that the average person's feet produce sweat in amount only about half of a pint or approx. 230 ml (depends on a couple of factors, in reality actually even less, and don't forget, that part of the upper, which also will take a certain amount of sweat, but let's stick to this scientific data). It also doesn't happen at one moment but rather stretched out gradually over the day. If you spill this amount of liquid at once (which is not accurate, but let's assume it) on the surface of the leather insole with Tar Felt under, it will hardly reach the bottom of leather insole, but will not go through such a material like Tar Felt. That is also an explanation to next comment (because with such a small amount of sweat and a waterproofing material in your case, or cemented outsole it seems impossible) :

dw wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:40 am You say that it is "impossible for sweat to go through the bottom." I am not so sure. Nor am I sure on what basis you make that claim.

It would be great if you could test it (or maybe you already did it), because my results were the opposite.
And with all due respect to your age or years you've spent in the trade, if there is no other real facts rather than just your own words, then it is not a substantive conversation, to me at least.

dw wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:40 am An insole that has been cemented will wick some moisture from the foot. But it reaches a saturation point when it can absorb no more. At which point, because it is sealed and the foot is still generating moisture, it cannot yield the moisture to the air even--moisture cannot evaporate until the foot is removed. If the insole is not sealed, the moisture will move to the next drier substrate--the outsole...if, and only if, the outsole is not sealed.

totally logically and makes complete sense, that's why i'm asking, at least myself: Irish Flax Felt or even Tar Felt are both great waterproofing (sealing) material used in constructions, shipbuilding and other industries, will they not seal the leather insole?

The part about the rubber soles and following comments are out of this topic/subjective assessment, so i'll not go further, not to loose the main focus.

dw wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:01 am Not sure if there's a direct correlation but it looks to me like the Topy is holding in heat. And by association, either generating more sweat, or not allowing it to move out of the shoe.

I guess ordinary reasoning leads to the following. Pretty much all modern shoes have cemented insoles, in addition to whatever stitching they may have to attach them to the soles. So the difference in feel between topy-ed and non- topy-ed shoes does not seem to be down to occlusion, assuming that AP cement and the topy are equally occlusive. (If AP cement won't let any moisture pass, this doesn't seem to be a matter of degree.) So it seems there is something else at work than 'breathability' / wicking causing cemented insole + leather sole + topy to feel different than cemented insole + leather sole. Absent other explanations, it would appear to be insulation. And there's (therefore) a tradeoff between avoiding resoles by using sticker soles, and the long term worse risk of insole failure via more sweating. This risk seems worse the less drying out the shoes get between wears.
I'm intrigued by the possiblity of making shoes with just paste, or a minimum of AP cement around the welt. I gather from the thread that to do this you need tarred felt, or something similar, to avoid squeak risk. It seems some London makers do the opposite, using paste on the welt and AP or rubber solution on the inner part, to avoid a glue line on the welt. I wonder how durable this is, given the constant flexing on the forepart. Back when there was no AP cement, I guess the weaker and soluble adhesive of paste didn't matter that much because of the frequency of resoling?

@nickb1

Well, @das would be the better one to answer your question regarding how outsoles were mounted prior to AP or some sort of rubber solution. But AFAIK, outsoles were temporarily fixed into position with tacks or nails and then of course the outsole would be hand-stitched. They even had special 'punches'/stamps to camouflage the nail hole.

That does not imply more frequent resoling, however. The leather was better, the tanning was better, and people may not have been walking on such abrasive surfaces or in such corrosive environments. So an outsole may very well have lasted longer, all other things being equal. That said, I suspect it took a considerable amount more skill and mindfulness to do this.

Beyond all that, tarred felt need not be used as a forepart filler. I use a 100% wool felt and mount it with HK (paste)--no creaking, no occlusion.

@Anton K

Have you ever seen Irish Flax Felt? I suspect you are not understanding several fundamental aspects of this:

First, the point about "interstices" mentioned above. Irish Flax Felt is a fiber mat, just as leather itself is...except maybe even less densely packed. Between the fibers are air spaces--the 'interstices.' These interstices act in the same way as the interstices between the fibers in a leather insole (or outsole) --they allow moisture to pass. I suspect the bitumen's function is to prevent the flax fibers from getting wet ...in the jungle environment that is the the inside of a shoe...and rotting. As an experiment I took some Irish Flax Felt and gently formed a basin in it. Then I put water into that basin...drip, drip drip--the water drained from the bottom surface of the Irish Flax Felt. As I suspected it would (and consistent with my understanding and explanation).

Second, it is the sealing of the insole that prevents moisture transport. The AP creates an impervious barrier. Turning the leather into rubber (neoprene rubber to be more specific).

Thing is, sweat, water, moisture doesn't have to pour through an insole. It doesn't even have to drip, drip, drip. It just needs to be a conduit between high moisture content and a lower moisture content. The AP prevents that. It's almost like cutting a telephone line--there can be no communication between various components. No equalization.

The Irish Flax Felt does not prevent the transport of moisture. It's not, in and of itself, occlusive.

Even if it the felt were occlusive--like a sheet of plastic that was somewhat smaller and just floating loose between the insole and the outsole--it wouldn't entirely prevent the wicking or the breathing, because it's not sealing the leather. Granted, it would temporarily impede transport of the moisture...until the moisture accumulated and found a way around the plastic.

All that said, the controversy / objection I am hearing is to the concept of occlusion and whether AP is occlusive. If you doubt it, cement up a piece of insole on both sides--flesh and grain--and the edges. Drop it into a bucket of warm water. Wait 24 hours and pull out a dry insole.

I've been doing this for 50 plus years. I hope I have been doing it with an open, earnest mind ready to learn new things... even if they are old things. I hope I am not fixated only on what I want to believe, need to believe to make things easier on myself. I am not that person. I have mindfully tried to not be that person. Hence my willingness to explore old (and new) things and, where appropriate, discard years and years of habit and ingrained beliefs and druthers.

At bottom, it would be much, much, much easier to dismiss the concept of occlusion and even of breathing, and its importance to a well made shoe, and just take the easy way and the expediency of using AP everywhere I can.

But truthfully, even there I am not 'pure of heart', I do use AP (as sparingly as I can)...I do use some occlusive techniques. But less and less every year...I don't think I have enough time to rediscover all the wisdom our predecessors knew, however.

...
Now, if we could win to the Eden Tree where the four great rivers flow,
And the wreath of Eve is red on the turf as she left it long ago,
And if we could come when the sentry slept, and softly scurry through,
By the favor of God we might know as much—as our father Adam knew.

The Conundrum of the Workshops Rudyard Kipling

dw wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:34 pm @Anton K

Have you ever seen Irish Flax Felt? I suspect you are not understanding several fundamental aspects of this:

First, the point about "interstices" mentioned above. Irish Flax Felt is a fiber mat, just as leather itself is...except maybe even less densely packed. Between the fibers are air spaces--the 'interstices.' These interstices act in the same way as the interstices between the fibers in a leather insole (or outsole) --they allow moisture to pass. I suspect the bitumen's function is to prevent the flax fibers from getting wet ...in the jungle environment that is the the inside of a shoe...and rotting. As an experiment I took some Irish Flax Felt and gently formed a basin in it. Then I put water into that basin...drip, drip drip--the water drained from the bottom surface of the Irish Flax Felt. As I suspected it would (and consistent with my understanding and explanation).

Second, it is the sealing of the insole that prevents moisture transport. The AP creates an impervious barrier. Turning the leather into rubber (neoprene rubber to be more specific).

Thing is, sweat, water, moisture doesn't have to pour through an insole. It doesn't even have to drip, drip, drip. It just needs to be a conduit between high moisture content and a lower moisture content. The AP prevents that. It's almost like cutting a telephone line--there can be no communication between various components. No equalization.

The Irish Flax Felt does not prevent the transport of moisture. It's not, in and of itself, occlusive.

hey DW, thanks for the explanation.

I guess you're right, that i don't/didn't understand these aspects of Irish Flax Felt. I have never seen it, i had a Tar Felt, the roofing material, and as i wrote before, i've tested it and unfortunately it doesn't let the moisture to go through. I supposed that Irish Flax Felt seemed to be of a same kind as Tar Felt. That's why i've started this discussion, and apparently it's not the same (Irish Flax Felt / Tar Felt), so now it's worth for me to get my hands on Irish Flax Felt to try it out (i live outside the US and it'll be a little challenging for me to order it from there, but now it seems worth doing it). Can't wait to test it.

dw wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:34 pm All that said, the controversy / objection I am hearing is to the concept of occlusion and whether AP is occlusive.

AP is deffenitly occlusive, no doubt, but

dw wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:34 pm cement up a piece of insole on both sides--flesh and grain--and the edges. Drop it into a bucket of warm water. Wait 24 hours and pull out a dry insole.

why would you cement up it like that? No shoe is made like this, where the cement goes all over flesh, grain and sides. But, if you cement only one side e.g. flesh side, you can also wait for a cement to dry completely (a couple hours) and than put in a bucket of cold/warm water for 2 hours, the whole piece will be wet, completely, Been tested a dozen times, no doubt here. So AP is only occlusive to the side/part it's been applied for.

@Anton K

Well, I had much the same experience. As I mentioned some time ago, @das had sent me some c. 1930 West End shoes that had been 'deconstructed'. I was surprised to see what looked like tar paper as a bottom filler. I asked das about it and he told me it was tarred felt, not paper. I looked again and sure enough.

Tar paper is easy to find. Everywhere and anywhere in the US. But It's paper. And it is just about as bad as your original reservations about Flax Felt would lead you to believe.

I have always believed that you can learn much by looking at, and even trying to duplicate, what the Old Guys did....whether you adopt those techniques or not is not the point. And, FWIW, in almost every instance, I have found that the Traditional methods and materials result in a better, more stable, longer lasting shoe than the techniques we are left with today.

So I had this vision in my mind and couldn't shake it. I tried spreading pine pitch on pure wool felt. Thing is, it would never dry--months later it was still a gooey mess. Somewhere in the process, I realized that the wool felt by itself was more than adequate and a significant improvement over my standard leather and AP filler.

Talking to some British shoemakers on another forum I learned that the Irish Flax felt was widely available over there. Another fellow jumped in and mentioned that it was also available here in the US, at one location under the name Irish Flax Felt...and sold by the linear foot. Seemed worth a try just to scratch my itch, if nothing else.

It's hard to say whether using wool felt and HK as a bottom filler has ever been done before. Surely it must have been, although I've never heard of it. But that's the way things go...serendipity. I tried the Irish Flax Felt and I can understand why those old West End shoes were made that way, but now that I've scratched my itch, I'll probably go back to using pure wool felt and HK.

...why would you cement up it like that?

Well, you wouldn't. It was just a simple test to illustrate that AP seals the leather. But again, I suspect you misunderstand: If it is sealed on one side, it can not transport moisture, it can only absorb it. And then only a limited amount. It is still occlusive, IOW. It will not breathe.

Yes, you can get the outsole entirely wet but it takes time...I don't know what leather, or what thickness, you're using for outsoling, but 10-11 iron Masure chestnut outsoling takes at least a good four hours for the leather to get completely wet right to the core and sometimes I find that only after it has soaked for four hours and then set in a plastic bag overnight, is the leather really and truly fully wet and fully malleable. And the Baker Oak bark outsoling isn't much faster.

In any case, bottom line is simply that once you know that AP is occlusive, once you know, or even suspect, that AP prevents the leather from breathing, why would you deliberately debase your work like that? If something is potentially, possibly (no matter how attenuated) detrimental to the work...to your health, even (and AP is that too)...isn't it the better part of wisdom to look for an alternative? Esp. if you care about the quality and functionality of the shoe?

Isn't that, at least partially and in context, what 'integrity' is about?

That's the problem with all learning--it invariably alters your perception of the world. Sometimes in ways that you might rather it hadn't. It is the Garden of Eden in a water glass--once you understand the drawbacks of AP, or Goodyear welting, or celastic toe stiffeners, you are never innocent in that regard again.

hey DW,

thanks for an interesting discussion. One thing is clear for me right now, i was wrong about Irish Flax Flex, can't wait to test it in hands.

I took a half dozen photos and will try again this afternoon but it is hard to catch a drip in a photo. I tried against dark backgrounds and light backgrounds. And I am trying to take the pic one handed while holding the felt such that the water doesn't all run out the end.

In the meantime here a a photo that did come out. I held the felt up to the light...bear in mind that the felt is not screen so had to tilt it this way and that to get the proper angle for the light to come through, but these holes were scattered throughout the piece:
(click on this photo to enlarge)

extremely interesting, hopefully i will post soon a couple pics too

Here you go...this is actually a folded, 'canoe' shape--drip, drip drip:

Interesting topic. Sorry, but I am joining late in the game and am hopefully not asking stuff that you have already discussed long time ago. Compared to all of you I am basically a shoemaker infant and it would be great if you would allow me to ask some questions. So far I have used a filling of 6 mm cork, which I glued to the insole using a cement and sanded it down to the welt level. I read before that using cement between the filling and the outer sole is not a good idea because it blocks the sole, when walking. Nevertheless, when I did not use cement, the shoe was creaking. Are you using Hirschkleber on both sides for the cork filling? Regarding moisture transport would not cork already block the transfer regardless of which cement/pasture one is using?
I had also played with the thought to use felt for the filling, since I had read somewhere that this was used in the old days for working shoes, but in that case how to you adjust its thickness? I seem to be able to get my hands on 3mm and 5mm thick felt, but being wool based I assume that sanding it would not work well, is that correct? How do you thin down the excess thickness?
Thanks and have a nice day, Carsten

@carsten

Most who post here regularly have no problem answering questions no matter how many times they might have been asked or the information covered.

That said, at least some of the answers you are looking for esp. regarding cork and cement were addressed in the above conversation. Let me see if I can summarize...

Yes, the cork itself is occlusive but the real issue is the cement that is used to hold it in place in the forepart of a shoe or boot. The cement--All Purpose solvent based neoprene cement seals the insole so that it doesn't matter if it's cork felt or leather used as the forepart filler, the insole will still not be able to breathe.

The creaking you mention probably did not come from the forepart or the cork but from some other part of the bottom where leather was rubbing against leather.

If leather is used to fill the forepart, it nearly must be cemented in both to the insole and to the flesh-side of the outsole. If it is not, the shoe will creak. One cannot use paste.

If felt is used it can be pasted with HirschKleber. The HK will not seal the insole, and is therefore not occlusive. Moisture will move readily through the felt.

A forepart filler always looks and function better, IMO, if it is filling the space between the inseams. leather can be made to do that by fundamentally 'skiving the leather flush with the welts. Wool can be leveled the same way--with a sharp knife. I suspect cork could also be cut flush.

When a shoe is machine welted--Goodyear welting/gemming--a deep forepart cavity is created. Cork or neoprene or thick wool perhaps are the only materials that can fill this cavity.

When a shoe is handwelted the forepart cavity is virtually non-existant (or can be) and thus no need for thick fillers. I have used leather in the past--simple scraps of lining leather cemented in. And these days i use 3/32" wool felt from Sutherland Felt. I can mount the felt as an overlarge piece using HirschKleber and a sandbag for a press. Once the paste is dry, I can skive it flush with the inseam. And never worry about sealing the insole or breathing the solvents in the cement. Because there is no leather rubbing against leather there are no creaks and no need for AP..

The Irish Flax Felt must be cut to size and can be mounted with a dab of HK or just left loose. Either way the propensity to creak will be significantly reduced if not eliminated entirely...again, it is leather rubbing against leather that cause creaks. The irish flax felt does not have to be cut flush because it is thinner than most of the other materials mentioned. A good tight inseam is wanted however.

Thanks for the detailed explanation dw!

I guess it is the fate of every student to be told by the teacher that he is not paying attention .. That does not never appear to change even at the age of 48 :-) - anyway thanks for your patience. I am just an engineer who is trying to make some shoes for his family and who has had no prior experience -except for what I read about the topic and the maybe 35 hand welted pairs I have tried to make. Since this is a very complex taks for me I try to handle one problem at a time and therefore maybe sometimes overlook stuff that does not solve an accute problem I have right then. Often I am surprised about what new details I discover in photographs that appeard to be unimportant during the 15 times I saw them before. I even lack the right vocabulary but that won't stop me from trying harder...

Your picture is an eye opener to me. Your bottom is like you said already very planar. Since your holdfast arrangement looks similar to mine, I think that my seam of the welt is much closer on the edge of the welt and therefore my welt is much less skived. Maybe this is because I had started with off the shelf welts from Minke, which were made this way. Furthermore, I have always tried to push the welt further inside (=under the insole) than Thornton recommends in his book, because I found that with his design I was able to see the welt threat from the outside between the upper and the welt in some unfortunate cases - but maybe this is just lack of experience. Some shoemakers I have talked to, however, appear to recommend this strategy.
All of this and probably a thicker (too thick?) toe cap at the transition to the insole leads in my case to a much deeper cavity that I needed to fill. For sure this was the case for my last wholecut pair (in the gallery), where -I guess for the same reasons and the use of thicker upper leather I noticed the welt even ending up too narrow at the tip of the shoe.

It's interesting that you say that my creaking should not come from leather rubbing on cork. As far as I can tell my creaking appeared only after I did not cement flesh side of the sole onto the sanded cork sheet. All remaining parts were still cemented. Maybe the upper is rubbing against the welt I wonder....

Next time I will try to change the welt in order to reduce the depth of the cavity and also use felt. Since this one I might be able to obtain easier where I live, maybe Merino wool felt will also do instead Irish Flax Felt. I am curious to see how that feels different on the foot.

Thanks again and best regards, Carsten

dw wrote: ↑Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:12 pm Here you go...this is actually a folded, 'canoe' shape--drip, drip drip:

lovely photo, thanks a lot DW!

@carsten

Well I wasn't admonishing you for not paying attention. That was not my intent and not in my mind.

It is possible that not cementing the outsole to the cork caused the creaking but I have seen too many shoes and boots that, when the outsole is removed for replacement, the cork remains relatively intact (unless it has already disintegrated...which it invariably does). That wouldn't happen if the outsole had been cemented to the cork.

With regard to the insole, I do not think that cutting a wider feather is necessarily going to create a flatter inseam. As you can see from the photo below, I don't always cut a wide feather.

I think it is all about trimming.

I suspect that if you study the path of the awl as it travels from the channel through the holdfast and the upper and then through the welt, you will understand that a lot more excess--upper, lining, even the edge of the welt--can be cut off than most people are comfortable with. That and judicious hammering of the inseam while it is still a little moist (tempered) will produce a more planar result...consistently.

This is what a typical insole looks like on my men's dress shoes using 4 ounce uppers and 2+ ounce veg lining:

@dw : Thanks for your reply and the photo of your insole.

Except for the more narrow area of the ball of the foot and the heel, I think it looks fairly similar to mine. it is a good tip you gave me too remove more excess material. Will try that next time.

I do try to hammer the inseam to make it flatter, but maybe it is not damp enough and also maybe I am not hammering enough. So far I have always used a hemp threat which ripped sometimes, when I pulled too hard during inseaming- so I was always afraid of breaking the inseam by useing too much force or hammering too hard.

Great forum - Thank you very much for your effort!

Carsten

Yr. Hmb. Svt.