White's Boots
-
Yeah, I get it, and the boots look fantastic - I am torn - at same time, it's not exactly what I wanted and at $450 I feel like I should say something. I don't know what to do. I'm really disappointed… I've got White's with a soft toe and with the hard toe, and I prefer the former... But these boots are fantastic.
-
I'd keep them.
Having lived with the soft toe for a while, I think all mine will have celastic from now on.
-
I'd keep them.
Having lived with the soft toe for a while, I think all mine will have celastic from now on.
Finally. I'm glad someone with experience admitted their preference of the celastic toe. Soft toe has never made any sense to me.
-
Same here. Why would you want the toe of ur boots to look caved in after a while?
-
Thanks guys I really like these, just not what I expected. Now I'm afraid if I return them I might not like the soft toe as well - then I'd really be kicking myself. These are really growing on me, "bird in the hand…" Maybe a hard toe looks better with a big heavy boot like this.
I nailed the leather combo I was going for, after a lot if research and guessing what the oil bullhide would look like "in person". They are soft, but tough, more of a matte finish. Fuck. :-\
-
Yeah, I love bullhide. It's one of my favorites for boots.
-
…Maybe a hard toe looks better with a big heavy boot like this.
FWIW, I like them the way they are Bluegrass.
-
I'd keep them.
Having lived with the soft toe for a while, I think all mine will have celastic from now on.
Finally. I'm glad someone with experience admitted their preference of the celastic toe. Soft toe has never made any sense to me.
Me neither, it just looks like another thing to make your expensive boots look prematurely old.
-
Really, it depends on the boot. Viberg service boots with the deconstructed toe look fine and feel good. White's boots with the same construction don't work as well. From a comfort standpoint, no celastic can make sense- leather only construction is a bit more forgiving. Celastic can sometimes be too rigid and unyielding, especially for people with problematic feet (hammer toes or bunions, in particular). That said, I have pretty ordinary feet and now that I've had a pair for about a year, I have a better understanding of what I like and what will work for me. Others may feel differently.
-
My personal opinion, but to start I like the look of a structured toe box much more. Second I think the solid box ensures a boot breaks to my foot just how I like without them looking too sloppy by end of their first sole. I have pretty long toes though, so how my boots bend and break over themselves differs a little from others.
-
Fuck it, I'm keeping them. By the time I spoke to Josh at Baker's I'd already decided to keep them - but he was real nice, said White's does not generally like to do a soft toe in bullhide since its so soft it collapses almost immediately, and he thought I'd like this better. I suspect he's right - I'm happy - minor freakout. You spend all the time deciding what to do, it can make you kind of nuts. Wore them tonight, real comfy just like my others.
-
They look excellent.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk
-
good choice Bluegrass
soft toe bullhide picture hear: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Whites-Boots-Semi-Dress-Black-5-top-size-9-5-D-/310814655705?pt=US_Men_s_Shoes&hash=item485dff44d9&nma=true&si=LFaJB5RJ%252BoDJxXBi4s0b3CAk8P0%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557
BTW: my boots have been sent from bakers to be delivered this Tuesday… and they weigh 8 pounds!
Edit: Took another look and it says 8.8 pounds!
-
White's does not generally like to do a soft toe in bullhide since its so soft it collapses almost immediately, and he thought I'd like this better.
He's right…
@Chris:
