WWII Army Officers Dress Shoes

[Vladimir Berkov]

Since we are talking about the US, probably neither. We had enough boot-making capacity to be able to send millions of pairs of service boots to the Soviet Union as lend lease, and introduce a boot style during the war (two-buckle boot) which require more leather than the previous one when virtually all other nations were moving towards more economical styles such as low boots or canvas-topped boots.

I am of a split mind on the rubber soles anyway, they increase the wear and provide a little traction on hard surfaces but they also make the boot heavy and sort of clunky. I prefer the German style lowboots (or CW brogans) for long marching as they just seem lighter for some reason, perhaps because even with hobnails the sole is thinner.

One advantage of rubber soles is that during the winter the cold isn't drawn into your feet by steel hobnails though, which I am sure was appreciated by US soldiers in the winter of 44/45.

 

[MrBern]

Fort Blank

Suppose that's how that monk-strap shoe fad got started?

At some point it may have been deemed advisable for all personnel to wear the rubber half-soles rather than use up more leather in resoling. The question is: leather or rubber - which was in shorter supply?

Well the books have usually said that the rubber soles solved the leather shortage & happily turned out to be more durable as well as better for resisting moisture.

I recall the book warned that sneaky salesmen use a line something like, "All the officers at Fort Blank are buying these..."

 

[MrBern]

Since we are talking about the US, probably neither. .

I'm not sure aboutthat. There was a fare amount of rationing in th USA. There were rubber drives to collect old tires & unusued rubber clothes.
But of course, the situation in Europe was far worse.

heres an interesting link about the scrap drives

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/020531.html

and from the quartermaster link
http://www.qmmuseum.lee.army.mil/WWII/shoes_and_the_army.htm
To the fullest extent possible, the Army has developed substitutes for leather to help ease the shortage. Some of these have proved as good as leather, and some are better. An example is the sole made of reclaimed rubber and used on service shoes and combat boots. This substitute wears far longer than leather. It is saving 30,000,000 pounds of sole leather a year.

 

[Baggers]

I recall the book warned that sneaky salesmen use a line something like, "All the officers at Fort Blank are buying these..."

That same anecdote is in my May 1942 edition. It was used in the context of being sold a non regulation "...shirt; cap, trench coat, off colored coats, ad infinitum." Note that the inclusion of the trench coat was because it was a totally non-regulation item, not because one might be sold the wrong pattern.

So is the admonition to new officers to "...not adopt such a transparent subterfuge, for one example, as changing the buttons of the issue overcoat from gilt to horn and deceive yourself in the thought that your parsimony may go unobserved. If you wish to look the part of an officer, wear officers' clothing!" A rather stern warning, I thought.

Bottom line, an officer should look like an officer, and while certain items of Quartermaster issued equipment are suitable for use in the field, when wearing the service uniform in garrison, he should be turned out as smartly as possible.

But back to footwear. I'm wondering if the monk strap craze was something picked up in England. I have a book that details uniforms and insignia of the British Army, and in it is a picture of a monk strap low quarter made by Church's that would have been worn by a British officer.

I'm with Vladimir on this. while the rubber sole would make the shoe longer wearing and not conduct cold, it makes it look clunky and not as dressy in my opinion.

Cheers!

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

I'm not sure aboutthat. There was a fare amount of rationing in th USA. There were rubber drives to collect old tires & unusued rubber clothes.

The purpose of rationing was mainly political, it wasn't due to a lack of productive capacity. The government wanted to keep prices down even thoguh demand had increased, thus you had war price control boards and other new government agencies, as well as rationing. With rationing, you essentially artificially reduce demand as people cannot buy as much as they wish. Thus the prices are artificially kept low and as a side benefit the government does not have to pay as much for goods used as war material.

 

[MrBern]

With rationing, you essentially artificially reduce demand as people cannot buy as much as they wish. .

Actually, thats not reducing demand, there was plenty of demand, thats reducing supply.

But you already said the USA was providing millions of boots to other nations. So maybe thats why there was low supply for the homefront.

I wouldnt say rationing is mainly political, but it is to control the allocation of supplies for the war effort. And to avoid hoarding & the black market exploitation.

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

Actually, thats not reducing demand, there was plenty of demand, thats reducing supply.

No, it actually is reducing demand. An example of artificially reducing supply would be government mandates to factories/companies forcing them not to produce more than X units of production.

I wouldnt say rationing is mainly political, but it is to control the allocation of supplies for the war effort. And to avoid hoarding & the black market exploitation.

The reason why it is political is because it is instituted entirely for political, not national security or economic reasons. It is just as effective from the military perspective to use free markets and price-determined supply and demand, with the government operating on the free market to purchase necessary goods and services. It is more effective from an economic point of view to let the free market run unfettered. The problem is that most governments (in particular the statist administration of FDR) think they can produce "better" outcomes by interfering with the free market.

This is because one consequence of free markets in times of shortages is that some people can't afford goods, particularly luxury goods. With rationing what the government does is force the market to provide goods to segments of the population which would otherwise not be able to afford them, while simultaniously allowing the government to benefit from controlled prices for war supplies.

 

[cookie]

Buzz Rickson Shoes

I think demand was artificially lowered yesterday because I notice the Buzz Ricksons have gone to USD400 a pair!

 

[Les Gillis]

Doghouse,

What event did you go to that it was raining?

Les

 

[MrBern]

No, it actually is reducing demand. An example of artificially reducing supply would be government mandates to factories/companies forcing them not to produce more than X units of production.

Well just because sugar might be rationed off, doesnt mean theres any less demand for them.
The demand is still there, which is why citizens end up going to the black market to procure goods. The supply is going to the military, so the supply to the homefront is limited.
Tho with fuel, the limited gas, actually does cut the demand for new tires.

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

Perhaps this could be split off into a new thread, I would like to discuss the rationing issue but doubt this is the best thread for it.

 

[MrBern]

Nah, lets continue w/ the shoes.
Does anyone have a pair of the monkstrap shoes? Any opinions?
Also, is there any particular reason why the service shoes eventually became roughouts?

 

[cookie]

Low quarters - re the colour etc

These went to a Buy Now 'bayer today for USD150

World War Two brown leather with maroon laves used but very nice pair of Army officer's leather low-quarter dress shoes. This pair was made by B.F. Goodrich and are still in very nice shape, in fact they could be worn or put into your collection or both. They are unmarked for size but I think they are around a 10-11 or so in size. Get yours while you can. I think this is the first pair I have ever sold. They came with some AAC items but could be used and worn by any Army officer in WWII.

>> Broken Photo Link <<



>> Broken Photo Link <<


There is some shoe polish on the bottom of the shoes that I am told was done by the shoe shine shops in the recent past to cover scuff marks and if the shoes were worn this would eventually wear off I believe. You cannot see this on the top of the shoes at all, only if looking at the bottom of the shoes. I don't think that this takes anything away from the quality of this nice pair of shoes at all.

 

[Baggers]

Hmmm, I thought the one thing officer's low quarters had to be were plain toed. Those shoes have caps. [huh]

Cheers!

 

[Fletch]

Yes, the 1/4s would have had to be easily distinguishable from the enlistee service shoes, which all had the capped toe.

However, I do remember reading something somewhere about the number of new shavetails exceeding the supply of suitable shoes early in the war, and new officers being authorized to wear any pair of shiney brown lace-ups available.

 

[fortworthgal]

LOL maybe Washita up in OK?

 

[Hondo]

I too own a pair of Buzz Rickson's.
And, I'll add, do not waste your money.
If you are wanting a shoe acccurate
for WWII Reenacting, do not buy them.
Their color is far too "orange" to be considered
the correct "russett". I own a few original shoes
from WWII, and although the Rickson's are well made,
they are not acceptable for an accurate WWII impression.

Ricksons:

http://www.eaglesquadrons.com/coppermine/thumbnails.php?album=31

Originals:

http://www.eaglesquadrons.com/coppermine/displayimage.php?album=22&pos=14

SJ

Thanks SJ, Eagles Squadrons says "Private Purchase Officers Dress Boots, Made by E. Vogel Bootmakers, New York City U.S.A." I like these, Im guessing hard to fine in size 11" [huh]

>> Broken Photo Link <<

BTW: it just dawned on me, Buzz Rickson= Steve McQueen (War Lover) :eusa_doh:

 

[doghouse riley]

Doghouse,

What event did you go to that it was raining?

Les

I went to a "Battle of Bob's Garage" at "The Siege of the Texaco Parking Lot" event outside of Hot Springs, AK. BAD!!! It was suposed to be a Bulge event. Thier were more single wide trailers with broken windows than reenactors. Not an exaggeration. Still... got to try out my raincoat.

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

There seems to be something about Arkansas that just breeds bad reenacting. I remember a buddy and myself driving hours and hours to an event near Little Rock and when we got there found the commander of the German units had a two-foot-long ponytail!

 

[doghouse riley]

Ouch! Everyone knows that German Officer regulations call for a ponytail not to exceed 18" in length unless he is a bearded gebergjaeger.