Sandro shoes

File: 405[1].jpg (7KB, 405x267px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 405x267px

I got a pair of samba knock offs. Fit is TTS.
Quality is so-so, the mudguard ripped open on both shoes and I had to have them restitched by a cobbler for a total of like 25 Eur.

The sole is holding up great though, and the upper leather is okay as well. They might be worth buying on sale.

>>12634022
>Quality is so-so
That sounds like absolute shit
I have surplus gats that cost me less than your repairs and they are holding up fine
Plus I think those are easily the worst fucking GAT replicas I've seen, thde design is atrocious

File: G17102_01_standard[1].jpg (173KB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 2000x2000px

>>12634027
I'm fairly sure they're supposed to be samba replica, and not GAT replica. Maybe go educate yourself on the correlation between those two.

I suppose the stitching on the mudguard going off might be due to me using size 44 shoe trees on size 43 shoes. I do hope for the sole to hold up better in comparison to OG or MMM GATs, or Sambas since it got extra stitchings.

Anyways, in terms of comfort they're better than my old pair of OG GATs, thanks to the leather lining and the very nice leather insoles.

>>12634071
Look at the colors
They are replica of MMM gats because that's the popular model and everyone rips it off

>>12634089
Biggest diff between GATs and Sambas is the mudguard shape, which is an open T on Sambas (and the Sandro) and a closed T on the GATs.

It makes sense however to say that Sandro clearly had MMM GATs in mind when they did that replica on the Samba, which is the father of the GAT

>>12634113
>GATs in mind
well no fucking shit

>>12633817
Quality is shite