I wear RM Williams. Do you? Do you have a reason to/not to?

>>11320327
No, I don't wear them because of their price.
Yes, there are several bootmakers on that range you could consider. Are you looking for Chelseas?

>>11320327
They are very good (maybe the best, dont quote me I know tons of brands have popped uplast decade) for bang for buck in terms of construction but it depends if you like the last/design of it.

>>11320332
It doesn't have to be a particular boot style.

File: cheaney-richmond-r-derby-boot-in-walnut-grain-leather-p168-1252_zoom.jpg (192KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1000x1000px

>>11320374
for half of the price of RM Williams boots you can buy a Spain made boot.
Berwick are quite good, but it's a pain in the ass to find a retailer.
For the same price of the RM Williams you should check Cheaney boots (picture related), but they are dressier than the aussies.

>>11320327
Here's my low down.

I've owned many over the years. None with me now.

Quality, like most things made these days, has gotten demonstrably worse.

I'm talking quality of materials here; build quality largely the same.

HOWEVER
Now that they're owned fully by fucking LVMH means that even the days where you could get a generally well made wholly australian made boot for a good price are numbered.

Fuckers have already cut the awesome MTO program, the best MTO program of any large footwear manufacturer out there, and are upping out put on new styles made totally in china or romania and other shittier places where it's cheap.

My advice:
If you must have them - and finding whole cut chelseas at all is a rarity, so if that's what you want so be it - go for kangaroo leather.
If in fact there are any models they offer left that are still made from the stuff. Goddamn do I really hate lvmh and their lowest common denominator crap.

Roo leather because roo's aren't farmed; they're a free range pest.
Because of this their leather has not been subjected to the crappification that cow and calf leather has undergone the past 30 or so years.

This is one thing that I myself have noticed in my boots compared to those owned by older relatives: the yearling is shit, and is prone to cracking waaaay sooner than its predecessor leathers, regardless of level of care. Heck even a fucking RMW shop manager confirmed my suspicions with his own observations.

It's not just RMW, cow leather in general has become shittier because the leather trade, being a by product of the meat industry, gets what is being made and people these days want their quick steaks and burgers so cows are hormone quick-grown leading to subpar leather quality.

Top shoe makers in yurp and elsewhere pay premium for the remaining good stuff. RMW does not do this. Even their french calf (or whatever the fuck it is called now) isn't that good. It's better, but count on it getting worse as the company degrades.

>>11320504
cont'd

So, roo leather because it's not farmed.
Get the composite rubber soles. Avoid the leather soles unless you plan to topy them.

RMW leather sole quality is another thing that has become significantly worse. Same problem with pretty much all other mid-tier/low-tier decent shoe/boot brands out there that don't use the more costly oak-bark tanned leather soles.

The composite sole will last much, much longer than the flimsy piece of shit leather soles they put on them these days. This goes for all other shoe brands too btw, unless they're bark tanned.

Lastly, the insole:
The poron footbed "comfort" insole may be comfy, but I've never been convinced as to their longevity compared to the traditional leather insole/footbed. Being a fiber cloth, they just don't hold up as well IMO.
It's comfy as shit, yes, but not ideal.

I don't think such a combination exists anymore for purchase, that is a roo leather, leather insole, rubber outsole deal.

But if there is, that's the one I would get.

I buy things for the long game, even if that's not practical.
A comfort innersole pair will last a long time, I've just become anal about this sort of shit.
So if these aren't you're only pair of nice footwear, buy what you want.

But I count the standard yearling/comfort innersole model that they seem to be pushing as their only choice these days as relatively disposable. Not like a sneaker, but not like the 20/30 yearer's they used to be.

In this era where you're encouraged to buy more shit and throw out the old on a daily fucking basis, you could do worse than any RMW boot.

But act fast, as that company will continue to get better at cutting corners and declining in every respect.

Do it.
Do it now.

They do sell kangaroo leather. They are made to order in most fits though - they have the yearling in stores.

The rubber sole does seem to be the way to go. I do not remember the shop assistant saying anything about the innersole.

I'm sure this is a pleb opinion, but I can't help but feel that chelsea boots just look like they belong on women.

>>11320657
Probably because the only ones you've been seeing are womens models.

They're riding boots. And in the antipodes, variants include workboots for construction amongst other things.

Modern ones with a flat heel aren't riding boots, just dress/work boots.

The higher heeled models out there (block, cuban etc.) do look more effete but they are the ones used for riding as the heel locks into a stirrup unlike the shallower flat heels.

Wearing those you're either cowboy or gril.

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

I got meermin chelseas. They're nice.

>>11320801

+1 for meermin, decent quality with decent price

>>11320327
I'm copping my first pair very soon. I've read nothing but great things about them. Do you have actual pics of yours? And as for boots try Peter Nappi. I have a pair of dark plum Rocco's that are amazing.

>>11320327
yall r still wearing chelseas? alright. they look cool m8

File: IMG_1592.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>11320926
I wear mine often. I have gone one multiple walks of several hours.
Leather sole is not the best for longevity.

>>11320960
hi kevin

>>11320960
>chelseas arent a trend
>ditch the southern accent nigger

>>11320974
that's the normal process of the leather sole. The more you wear them they become more compact and they resist more. Is just the outside. Nevertheless, I would worry about that creasing. You should buy some shoeblocks.

>>11320974
How long have you had them again.

>>11321015
Almost 3 months.

>>11321009
>You should buy some shoeblocks.
This is something I've been meaning to do for years.
I will purchase sufficient for my wardrobe in the coming month. Enough is enough.

reminder that reddit >> 4chan in terms of useful information

https://www.reddit.com/r/goodyearwelt/comments/3r7zuq/the_beginners_boot_buying_guide_v20/

>>11321186
>reminder that reddit >> 4chan in terms of useful information
maybe you should stay there then

>>11321059
If that's everyday wear it ain't too bad.

>>11321351
>>11321186

>reddit vs. 4chan meme

100% of 4chan users visit reddit

>>11321186
Decent guide, thank you. I have found my next purchase.

>>11321351
>>11321541
#triggered

>>11321861
you're welcome
found me some nice chelseas through the guide

>>11320327
The tab on the front is fucking stupid

>>11321950
good thing no one ever sees it when it's worn :^)

>>11321950
have you ever worn decent chelsea boots?

>>11321950
retard

File: docs vs blunnies.png (186KB, 838x328px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 838x328px

blundstones or doc martens, duh.

>>11322192
l m f a o

>>11321956
It limits you to wearing them in only one style though.

>>11322706
because they should only be worn in one style, that is, the hem of your pants covering the upper half, unless you're a grill

>>11322192
rubber soles on chelseas look weird

>>11322192

GOD DAMN those are both ugly as fuck

>>11320504
Wait shit they got rid of the MTO program?

>>11322192
Something slimmer plz
docs are better if you must

RM Williams are, to ordinary, non-aristocratic or artistic-minded Australians an outrageous display of wealth. keep that in mind when wearing them

>>11320519

Gonna pull the trigger on some MTO kangaroo craftsmans tomorrow then.

I like leather soles, is it worth ordering some with the leather sole and switching to a rubber sole in the future? Or just go rubber soles from the start?

>>11323318
this to be quite honest

>>11323318
There are no aristocratic Australians.

And that statement is so full of shit since you see a shit ton of farmers wearing RMs, it's their shoe for dressing up but still needed to step on a paddock.

Just went into my local R.M. to try these bad boys (craftsmen, black). These are some sexy fucking boots, not too formal, not too casual.

I'm very tempted to pull the trigger - do they ever have sales on these badboys? Easily worth the $495 but I'd hate to get them today to see them cheaper tomorrow.

Plz give us a hand effays

File: FA0dXoq.jpg (3MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5184x3456px

better option in the same price range

>>11323464
How so? What are they and what's the quality like?

i hate their silhouette

imma sell mine

though as for as quality goes you probably cant beat em

OP asks for replacement for Chelsea boot (the only makers in the world that does it using one piece of leather).

Threads goes on to give poorly designed and inferior boots.

/fa/

>>11323615
that's 'cause i'm keepin my brands a secret from fuccbois like yourrself

>>11323615
>the only makers in the world that does it using one piece of leather
not true, by the way
maybe the only ones at that price point

>>11320327

I own the pair, absolutely lovely and the fit is incredible, BUT the rubber is falling apart from the leather sole after 2 months wear, the leather is so subtle, and soft, its amazing, but at the same time, weak, it got punctured by a piece of stray branch (:' () and the actual rubber sole is piss poor. it wore down to the leather in 2 months wear, and dont say its how I walk because I wore stan smiths pretty much everyday for 2 years and it took 2 years for the sole to be absolutely destroyed beyond wearability.

tl;dr i LOVE the shoe, but the price for quality point is outragous, get it second hand or a "defect" from DFO or something.
I still wear them but they need constant care and maintence, not this indestructable meme everyone spreads.

>>11323452
I do not think they have sales. I looked it up myself and could find no evidence of one.

>>11323364
I've got leather and am switching to rubber. Don't know if it will be a good change or I should've just done it at the start.

>>11321018
brand? lovely

>>11320504
>>11320519
>tfw got my dads ~15 y.o boots because he bought another pair
>tfw his pair are already falling apart
this actually brought a tear to my eye. first blundstone and now this

>>11320801
those look fucking hideous though

>>11323887
Send them in for comprehensive repair.

https://www.rmwilliams.com.au/boot-repair/Boot_Repair.html

https://www.rmwilliams.com.au/inside-the-boot-repair-room-%7C-r.m.williams/ourcraft_insidebootrepair.html

>>11323615
>>11323847
I think they're the only ones doing RTW wholecut Chelseas on a consistent basis. Jil Sander had some really nice ones recently.

You can definitely get them made bespoke, for like at least triple the price of a pair of RMs.

File: 44969791OH_21_a.jpg (11KB, 428x550px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 428x550px

>>11324129
pretty sure guidi always does one piece chelseas although very expensive and not traditionally styled
theres a nice marsell pair which is on sale now styled more traditionally (pic related)

>>11322192
>two made in china pieces of junk cashing in on better made models of yesteryear

not really a choice famalam
both are fucking shit

>>11324513
Says the dickhead that's probably never owned either pair. My chelsea Docs have held up against all kinds of abuse.

>>11322192
These look way better IRL. I'd go with the blundies tho

>>11324522
>Says the dickhead that's probably never owned either pair.
lmao buttbaby faggot

i've owned the new ones and the old ones

which do you fucking think are better?

have a cry chinkbabby

>>11324560
Holy shit what a sperg.

>>11324564
says the faggot that like inferior plastic junk and gets mad about it online

>>11324560
Jesus christ what a faggot. Leave this board you fucking autist.

>>11324522
DM's are crap.

looking at some of the rmw boots on their site. cant beleive someone would make a leather/crepe combination outsole. lol. looks like utter shit.

>>11323853

quality does not necessarily mean durability.

silk is a quality fabric. however, i wouldn't wear a silk night shirt into a mosh pit.

>>11325124
yeah except this is leather you're talking about, where durability makes up a large portion of its quality