In Person – The Calvin Klein Carter Laceup – $84.00 (reg. $140)
The Calvin Klein Carter first showed up in the April issue of Esquire. And $140 has been a lot (read: too much) to ask for a shoe with the kind of texture that’ll scare a lot of people off. But Calvin Klein is running a site wide 40% off sale, which means these drop to $84.00. And that’s a fair price. Here’s why:
The leather uppers feel like they’re barely leather. The vamp wrinkles quickly and the chances of a good long life can’t be too promising. But for now they feel good and sturdy, they’re quite comfortable, and the uniform stamped pattern looks better in person than on a computer screen. Slicked up dress shoes they ain’t, but you can wear them plenty of different ways. For example…
.
1. With Seersucker: Suit by Bonobos, Shirt by Calvin Klein, Tie by Alfani RED
Hey now, didn’t that suit just… It did. Bucks are what most guys go with when they put on seersucker. But these, with their contrast sole and textured upper (kinda like the bucks), are a nice change of pace. Without being a totally weird change of pace. Provides a slightly slimmer profile than most bucks too.
.
2. With bright pants: Pants by Bonobos, Sweater by BR, Shirt by GAP, watch by SEIKO
Not everybody loves green pants (or even tolerates them), but a lot of guys are wearing chinos other than standard khaki this year. The Carter runs parallel and plays nicely with the off the wall look, but since there can be too much of a good thing, keep your torso picks toned down.
.
3. With Jeans: Blazer by Banana Republic, Shirt by GAP, jeans by Levis
These seem to have been made for jeans and an almost weightless cotton blazer. They work just fine now with a lighter blazer and gingham shirt, and will transition easily in the fall to darker, heavier fabrics.
The Calvin Klein 40% off sale expires Thursday 6/23 and 11:59pm ET. These are going to be a risk for many, so know that you can return to a CK store, but shipped returns cost $8.00. Here’s the return policy.
Ya know; these just do not seem risky to me at all…guess I’m stylistically more aggressive that the….uh…average Joe. That, or I’m just clueless.
I posted this when Joe first featured these shoes in April but my post was a little late. Thought I would post it here. Hopefully it helps someone out:
“I’ve had these for about two months now and I’m really satisfied with them.
These shoes are great for going sockless as they are super
comfortable(the cloth lining in the toe box seems to be super
breathable). These match well with a lot of outfits and the texture adds
that ‘little extra something’ to the overall look without taking away
from the rest. The only downside I found was how quickly the these
wrinkled. After one or two wears there was a noticeable wrinkle across
the toes. It kinda takes away from the overall sleekness of the shoes
but I’ve been keeping some shoe trees in these at that seems to have
helped a bit. Either way I’ve gotten tons of compliments on them so
they’re still a great find in my book.”
As you see it pretty much coincides with what Joe had to say about them. As someone who has had first-hand experience with these shoes I just thought I would add my two cents.
Joe, been a big fan of the site for a while now. Love this edition of “How To Wear It.” Keep em coming.
I’ve always liked Calvin Klein’s style, but I am consistently disappointed with the quality. I bought a pair of Calvin Klein Oxfords a year ago and they lasted me only a few months of moderate wear before completely breaking down. I like the look of the Carters, but I fear a repeat. A good pair of Allen Edmonds (while an investment for sure) will last you a decade if properly cared for. And at the end of the day, it will be cheaper.
X2 on the Allen Edmonds (or Aldens). Cheap shoes are no bargain. Not familiar with Calvin Klein shoes but I have owned Kenneth Coles and they are JUNK. Cost per wear is much cheaper with expensive shoes. Besides, cheap shoes usually look cheap from day one.
OTOH, American shoes do tend to be a little on the clunky side, especially when there is a 360 degree welt. Oh well, I guess you could drop a grand or more on a pair of John Lobbs or Edward Green’s. I’ll pass.
Thanks for the kind words about the site. Per the inexpensive vs. top notch quality shoes argument, this crops up from time to time and there are two schools of thought (with some, like myself, on the fence in the gray area inbetween). Inexpensive shoes are in a small, small way, like a mortgage. Way more expensive in the long run, but provides many with options they otherwise wouldn’t have in the present.
That, and I’m wearing these right now, and I gotta say that they’re unique enough that I wouldn’t spend $300 on a high quality AE/Alden version (not that they make one with this texture), but love em’ at the double digit price point I landed them at. I’ll use these sparingly, keep shoe trees in them, and I think I’ll get them to last for at least a year or two. Maybe three.
That strategy works and works real well for me. But I totally understand why it doesn’t fly for others.
My ideas on the quality/cheap shoe option, which sounds similar to Joe’s:
Your “staple” shoes (brown oxfords, maybe brown loafers, double monks, black dressier shoes if you wear ’em) should be higher quality. That could mean alden/ae’s/some italian-made stuff, or it could mean the higher end florsheim/bass, or splurging on some Sid Mashburns. You still shouldn’t be wearing the same pair every day (but then, we know that by now), and putting them in trees when they’re off duty, but they’re good quality, and will last you a lifetime under heavy wear.
Your “fun” shoes, which I like a lot and have–ahem–*several* pairs of, can be lower quality, almost down into impulse-purchase land. For me, that’s pretty much anything under around $60. For example, I got a pair of light blue canvas oxfords on Gilt a couple weeks ago for $50. They are ultra-light, comfortable enough, and fun as heck. I’m not wearing them even once a week; more like maybe once every three weeks to a month. At that rate, they’ll last for darn near ever. I splurged on a bright kelly green pair of Frye boat shoes that were on sale at Neiman-Marcus. $85, so out of my normal impulse range, but awesomely well made and fun enough to be worth it. With the lower frequency that I wear (and support others wearing) fun shoes, they can last long enough to be worth the purchase, especially in light of their overall jazz-factor.
I dig shoes because they’re one of the few things that dudes can have fun with w/o appearing Dennis Rodman-ish.
Those are clean.
What is the fit like? Size up, down, around?
I normally wear a 10.5, and these, in a 10.5 feel just fine to me. They aren’t clunky, but they aren’t as slim as some of the CK ads make them look. Nice and balanced. I have a borderline wide foot (usually wear wides only in running shoes) and these have enough room for me.
Joe….Hautelook had these a short time ago for $59….I don’t know enough about the site to know if they’ll come around again….also, on Hautelook right now, there are tons of Hilfiger suits and separates that are marked well down….
I really like the look of that shoe in terms of shape and stitching, but it looks (at least in the first photo) like something I would get at one of those .99 cent stores. I love the idea of the textured upper, but that one comes off looking like plastic imitation leather and the sole looks like it is plastic imitation wood. Again this entirely based on that first picture, but I think I would prefer to get something that looks quality but is cheap, like Clarks, Ecco, Timberland or certain house brands by shoe specialty stores. I understand these are just fun shoes and quality isn’t a factor, but I think shoes shouldn’t look cheap.
They carry shoes at dollar stores?
Sure, why not?
Well I’ll be. I had no idea.
I think you could probably pick up a gross of these for a lot less than those Calvin Kleins.