I've been thinking about buying some chelsea boots for awhile

If you can't shell out the money for quality Chelsea boots, just don't buy them

>>11863158
What are some quality chelsea boots?

>>11863168

Aquatalia, Meermin, and Story Et Fall are two brands with high build quality and a more reasonable price tag.

>>11863271
Three* lol

>>11863271
Those are sadly all out of my price range. Aren't there any mid range brands. Yes I know I am a pleb.

theres a thread on ktt. Believe it or not the HM suedes are said to be better of the cheaper ones. I havnt tried myself but as an anon said earlier youre not gonna get good quality for 100 £

I've heard Taft is good for relatively cheap ish. Sold out ATM I think though.

>>11863370
I am not looking for good quality, I am looking for the best quality in my price range.

>>11863356
No. Seriously, save up. You'll thank yourself later

>>11863386
Well I need new shoes now, I don't really have time to save.

>>11863356
Then don't buy. They just wont look good or work. Story Et Fall is the absolute minimum. Go on Grailed and buy used, idiot

>>11863436
fuck you retard. you don't deserve to be spoon-fed if you cant even save up for something you want.

>>11863458
Yea let me just walk around barefooted for a couple of months while I save up, sounds great.

>>11863476
so buy a different, not so expensive pair of shoes that are comfortable enough to get yourself a fucking job. God you lazy shits never change.

>>11863445
The ones I bought looked just fine, atleast I thought so. Also I am European so with the shipping costs from grailed I could pretty much buy a new pair.

>>11863481
Oh you know kind of like how I have been asking about chelseas in the 80£ range?

>>11863436
>buy a normal pair of shoes right now
>save up a few hundreds, wearing your boring cheap shoes
>buy those fucking great boots

The alternative would be to try some lesser brand, but you'll have to ask yourself what is the bare minimum quality you want to get, in construction and materials.

If you're ok with any pointishy suede chelseas, you should find some under 60 pounds.
If you want grain leather, unless you already know the brand and the materials they use, you're better off spending the few hundreds.

>>11863527
good looking chelseas dont exist in that price range

sorry m8 set aside more money are buy a different style shoe

>>11863672
Whats the difference between a 80£ chelsea and a 200£ chelsea, besides stitching and materials.

File: FerusRK.jpg (98KB, 894x533px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 894x533px

>>11863693
>besides materials

lmao you act like the materials isnt the most important part. Cheap leather looks like complete garbage and gets worse over time. Getting better leather is worth the price increase by itself, not to mention that you'll be able to get a more refined shape and a sole that can be replaced.

if you cheap out you'll be getting absolute shit tier like pic related

>>11863746
wat the fuk is this garbage kek

Not going to hate on Chelsea boots in general because I thought about getting them for the longest time but when I did see them in person and had them on it reminded me so much of a women's boot it was rediculous. Chelsea boots are definitely not for everyone.

>>11863746
dem boots look like shit

>>11863746
The ones I bought for 80£ looked just fine. Don't you think the form of those shoes are retarded because of execution rather them materials.

>>11863271
not op but meermins SNUFF RAPELLO SUEDE looks quite nice.

How do i make a good fit with it?

File: hmprod.jpg (21KB, 446x522px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 446x522px

Has anyone tried the H&M Chelsea boots? Only $100

>>11864568
Have you even glanced at that picture? It looks thin and plasticy. The elastic section barely looks like it's got any give to it.

Don't do this senpai

>>11863149
Perhaps a good opportunity to ask: Price doesn't matter, but are there ANY black chelseas with a fucking round toe cap on this planet? All of them are pointed to some degree.

>>11863158

Na ignore this fag I bought some cheapos from H&M and wore them as my regular going out shoes for the last year and a half and never had a problem and get complements regularly.

>>11863804
sounds like you're a pussy nerd

File: IMG_0337.jpg (52KB, 400x278px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 400x278px

>>11864568
>>11864594

I think it's just the material that's ugly. I own pic related from there and they look fine.

>>11864660
that ugly stitching makes you look special needs

>>11864660

i own a pair, have gotten many many compliments.
do i wish i could afford a $400 pair? yes
can i afford a $400 pair? technically yes, but ski seasons coming up

the $65 pair i got at h&m work just fine

>>11864720
continuing, I think body type is more important than actual quality for something like chelseas

as long as youre on the tall side and have thin, longish legs, anything halfway decent will look good

File: -0197_zps2479fea5[1].jpg (429KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1000x667px

>>11864660
This is a pair of $45 dollars Chelseas

Pic related is a pair of $800 Chelseas.

I'll continue not listening to /fa/ when they tell you every article of clothing needs to be three quarters of a grand to look good.

>>11863746
Those look shit because they're terribly designed anon. Using leather made from a fucking unicorn hide wouldn't make those shoes look better

The suede there hasn't even started to go to shit

>>11864768
It doesn't. At that point, you're paying for the designer rather than the actual 'quality' of the boot

I'll continue to stand by SeF being the best bang for buck chelsea you can buy. Not too too expensive, well made and all that

I do think the boot you posted looks better than the H&M ones tho, as a side

>>11864837

It may look better but my core point is just how MUCH better. If spending that extra $700 on a visual difference nobody in the real world will notice gives you that much of a confidence boost and is worth it to you go for it. But I feel like at a certain point you have to be honest with yourself and say okay no amount of increased material quality in these shoes is going to make me look exponentially better.

I'm all for paying for a shoe that will last but at a certain point you hit diminishing returns where an $80 boot is going to last you just as long and get just as many compliments.

>>11863149
Check out M&S I have a pair from there that were £75 and are pretty well made.

>>11864859
>get compliments
What backward ass site are you from anyway?

>>11863746
toe looks like a pair of nmds lmfao

>>11864951

I was making the effort to show regardless of whether you "dress for yourself" like /fa/ pretends they do or if you're doing it to look good for other people it still applies.

File: Screen Shot 2016-10-16 at 1.17.24 PM.png (286KB, 750x736px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 750x736px

>>11864768
i prefer the rm williams at 370 au

File: img-thing.jpg (20KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 300x300px

I ordered these recently. Leather>suede for winter, at least where I'm from.

>>11865404

Leather always looks better desu. Good choice, anon.

>>11864768
The difference is that the $45 dollar pair is going to start losing its shape after one wear and develop ugly wide creases because the leather is 3/4 plastic.

Stop consuming shit products.

>>11864609
go fuck yourself most boots are rounded chelseas are dope because they're more almond shaped. choose another boot if you want a rounded toe.

File: CP-suede.jpg (30KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x500px

plebs need not apply

>>11864656
Ouch anon that's a real blow to my ego

>>11865496
Sure, but good suede is cheaper than good leather, while still looking good, best bang for your buck.

>>11865062
they were $365 a month ago rip
thanks lvmh

File: IMG_3016.jpg (30KB, 650x731px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 650x731px

I got pic related for free from a buddy because he never wore them but now I see why, is there anything to coordinate these with? I really haven't had any luck

Ur in Europe right ? Buy from zalando they deliver free and I've seen good Chelseas there for 100-150.

File: Gaziano-Girling-chelseas-fashion-men.jpg (112KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 667x1000px

>>11867011
pic related sorta similar in colorway but anything light tan would be fine, maybe medium wash jeans