I bought a pair of doc Martin Boston's, and I'm really not a fan. There is a weird lump under the ball of my foot that makes it feel as if my socks are all bunched up. They are breaking in well though, and feel ok now that I added insoles under the heel. But the part up by the toe is driving me nuts.
Joey
I know nothing of the good doctor's shoes, but I know I want to get a pair of these! http://www.zappos.com/merrell-barefoot-road-glove-2-white-apollo
The Merrill's i had wore out fast, cheaply constructed, and weren't very comfortable. They had asymmetric soles, which may have had something to do with the comfort. Not worth the price.
Huh. Good to know. I have a 10yr old pair of 5 eye classic black DMs with the oil proof sole that I wear every day. The seem to be unkillable quality shoes.
These say "Made in Great Britain" on them. Perhaps they have gone to the far east with the factory.
CGLockRacer wrote: The Merrill's i had wore out fast, cheaply constructed, and weren't very comfortable. They had asymmetric soles, which may have had something to do with the comfort. Not worth the price.
Same here - I had a pair of the closed toe open style hiking/water shoes that the sole peeled off the nose of after just a couple days. I took them back and the 2nd pair did the same thing. They were shot after just one summer and replaced with a same style set of Keens. They hold up well but make my feet hurt after hiking in them.
I wish Solomon made that type of open hiker/sandal thingy - I've beat the ever-loving E36 M3 out of a pair of their Quest boots. Expensive but worth every penny.
CGLockRacer wrote: The Merrill's i had wore out fast, cheaply constructed, and weren't very comfortable. They had asymmetric soles, which may have had something to do with the comfort. Not worth the price.
Did they have Vibram soles?
Every pair of Merrells i've had have lasted incredibly long... (Though usually i buy Sprint Blasts)
In fact i bought a new pair last week.
The Nepitos on the right. Really excited about them. 
Anyways, Joey... i've tried on a few pairs of Doc Martins and none of them have ever felt right to me. That ball up there drives me insane. There's another company doing that now as well, was really disappointed. (I'll try to remember the name.)
joey48442 wrote: I bought a pair of doc Martin Boston's, and I'm really not a fan. There is a weird lump under the ball of my foot that makes it feel as if my socks are all bunched up. They are breaking in well though, and feel ok now that I added insoles under the heel. But the part up by the toe is driving me nuts. Joey
My exact same issue. I have a pair that's about 8 years old sitting in my closet that I can't wear.
In reply to DaveEstey:
No. They had the Merrill M in the tread design if you held the soles together. However, one shoe had a harder spot in the sole then the other due to the design.
I've had great luck with Merrill's full on hikers, pretty good luck with the slip on Merrills (Jungle Mocs), and not-so-great luck with DMs. I had a pair of DM low-top casual dress shoes for work. After about 6 months the sole material had hardened enough that tile floors were dangerously slick and they were thin enough that you could feel every pebble. They were also way wide in the toe, felt like clown shoes and always got hung up in the clutch pedal/brake.
Swank Force One wrote:
What Pumas are those on the left and in the middle?
Unless talking full-on hikers, if the Merrells i'm looking at don't have a tread pattern similar to this, i don't buy 'em:
Pretty much anything with this pattern or similar by them holds together like crazy. I typically get 2 years out of a pair of Sprint Blasts wearing them EVERY DAY in EVERY condition before they're to the point that they're unwearable.
ransom wrote:Swank Force One wrote:What Pumas are those on the left and in the middle?
Left are 76 Runners, middle are Squash 2000s.
So far, the 76 Runners are far more comfortable, one of the most comfortable shoes i've ever owned, solved my only complaint with the Speedcats that i've been wearing for the last 5-6 years, and that's lack of padding.
I'm still breaking in the Squash 2000s. I wanted something Adida Samba-esque without actually buying Sambas. These are it. I like 'em better than Sambas actually... better fit, slimmer profile, little less bulky.
I usually buy shoes once a year, so this is it. 
We have a Puma outlet store about 40 minutes south of me. Got the two pairs of Pumas for $76 out the door. The Merrells were a bit more, but i'll mainly just use those for light hiking and such, to replace my old 5 year old pair of Garmont lows. I'll get ~3 years out of them.
I went through 2 pairs of Docs in 2 years, they are junk. I had to send the first pair back for warrantee after cracking in 6 months, when the second pair died from leather cracking I said to hell with them and got different boots. Oh and talk about an uncomfortable pair of boots, aweful padding. Most boots will need insoles, but the docs still tore my feet up fierce braking them in. Another once great company gone to hell.
I started wearing Docs c. 1981, and wore the classic British made model 1461 8-eyelet boots daily until they moved manufacturing to China.
That pair didn't fit right - they come in UK full sizes and I found I was now in between sizes - and the uppers split after less than a year. I tried another with the same result.
I gave up on my beloved Docs. Around this time I transitioned from being on my feet at work to the professional seated world, so it wasn't a huge loss.
A few years ago I got an sales email from the Doctor Marten's people advising me of the new "Made in UK" series. The downer was the price. Unsurprisingly they're close to $200 vs. the $110 Chinese product.
When a 35% off sale happened I pulled the trigger on a pair. They're exactly my old boots, but nicer made. The fit is perfect, they broke in quicker than the old ones (But you have to get the tongue perfect on day one or they're never right) and they're wearing like iron.
At the next sale I bought a pair of the classic 3 eyelet shoes which are also perfect.
So - ~real~ docs are only the 3, 8, 10 and 14 eyelet shoes and boots in black or oxblood, made in the UK. They sell a lot of others, but for the first 40 years or something, those were "Docs".
In very short: Classic UK models are great, Chinese no so much.
Same here with the Docs. I started wearing them more than a dozen years ago. When they switched production to China, quality seemed to nosedive. A little while back I noticed the "made in UK" shoes on their site, so I rolled the dice--all-black wingtips. I totally love them, and they're aging very, very nicely.
I think it depends on your feet. I have an old pair of UK Docs I got back in the early 90's. I tried wearing the damn things for a month (long story...) and my feet hurt every minute of it. They held up reasonably well, but they've been in their box in the closet ever since... Maybe it's because I have fairly narrow feet.
I have been wearing Doc's for 25 years now.
I went to the Dr. Marten store last summer and bought some new 1460's. My old pair from 15 years ago finally gave up. I had $250 in my pocket and intended to get the Made in UK pair but every pair I tried on just killed me. I ended up spending less and getting the Lifetime warranty 1460's. They were immediately more comfortable and have broken in well. When I wear these out I just mail them back and get a new pair. I hope it works out as easy as they say.
Ian F wrote: I think it depends on your feet. I have an old pair of UK Docs I got back in the early 90's. I tried wearing the damn things for a month (long story...) and my feet hurt every minute of it. They held up reasonably well, but they've been in their box in the closet ever since... Maybe it's because I have fairly narrow feet.
I would agree. I can't find a pair of Docs that are comfortable. I have a relatively small size -- 9.5, and a narrow foot. On the other hand, almost every pair of cowboy boots I've tried fit like gloves . . .
Doc's have to be "worn-in" kinda like older motors needed to be broken in. Buy your next set before your current ones are done.
Ian F wrote: I think it depends on your feet. I have an old pair of UK Docs I got back in the early 90's. I tried wearing the damn things for a month (long story...) and my feet hurt every minute of it. They held up reasonably well, but they've been in their box in the closet ever since... Maybe it's because I have fairly narrow feet.
The feet are a big part of it, particularly in fit. If you have narrow feet and have to cinch the hell out of a pair of shoes, they aren't going to "lay" right over your foot as the manufacturer intended, and they won't be comfy.
We just spent a good 2 hours recently trying light duty hiker/approach shoes on my fiancee. We found that Salomons fit nicely, she can't wear Merrells or Vasques, Garmonts are just OK.
Surprisingly, the second best fit was a pair of Scarpa Crux approach shoes that is probably what she'll end up with, since what we're doing doesn't require an actual dedicated hiker.
Swank Force One wrote: Left are 76 Runners, middle are Squash 2000s. So far, the 76 Runners are far more comfortable, one of the most comfortable shoes i've ever owned, solved my only complaint with the Speedcats that i've been wearing for the last 5-6 years, and that's lack of padding. I'm still breaking in the Squash 2000s. I wanted something Adida Samba-esque without actually buying Sambas. These are it. I like 'em better than Sambas actually... better fit, slimmer profile, little less bulky.
Thanks! I'm actually waiting for a pair of Sambas from Zappos.com, but they changed them a few years ago and they stopped feeling right. OTOH, there now appear to be five different types of Sambas, so maybe this pair will be good, though I have no berkeleying idea how I'll determine I'm getting the right duplicates if they work out (unless I stock up now...)
My problem with the Doc's Made in UK is that they will randomly start smoking for no reason.
I'd really suggest trying the Pumas over the Sambas. The Pumas seem to be so far a cross between Sambas and the old Adidas Salas, but taking the best of both. (I still have a nice pair of Salas somewhere, but they never really had quite enough cushion.)
In reply to Swank Force One:
You appear to know a lot about casual footwear. I'm not sure whether to ask for a recommendation for a quality non-sneaker looking everyday/all-purpose with jeans type shoe... or post metrosexual joke images.
You'll need to log in to post.
