Nice video on these boots. I agree they are pretty nice for what they are intended to be. I bought a Zind pair in the color in your video from Helm's "warehouse" sale for $125 in early 2024 . I expected in advance that mine were returned or used for try-on or display, and they were not in pristine condition. But I was surprised at the overall quality and finish. In terms of value for what I paid, they rank at the top of what I own. That said, I don't plan to buy another pair for $295 right now. But I now know the sizing and what to expect from them and overall I'm pleased to have a pair.
I totally agree that these boots are comfortable all day. With other boots that use synthetics such as the Wilcox Kern, I found them uncomfortable at the end of the day. (Note, I cured that problem with the Wilcox Kern boot by taking out the foam insert and putting in a thick leather insert. Now they are all day comfortable and my foot imprint is on the leather insert.) I do like my Helm boot with a caveat...I feel that the rubber heel topper is too thin and would have to be changed sooner rather than later.
Helms were actually my first boots. I discovered them several years ago when I walked by their store in Austin. Back then they were made in the U.S. with Horween leather. The heels were very thin and I had to have them replaced fairly often. I wore them for many years and liked them, but I recently donated them to make room to add other brands to my collection.
I think you nailed this review: these boots don't pretend to be what they are not and do a fine job being what they are. I think the midsole white line signature looks better with this lighter color upper---it's too much signature on the darker leathers imo. One wonders how these would hold up with daily use but then you're getting what you pay for and if they endure like an ordinary pair of sneakers (with similar extensive use of foam) then no harm, no foul. Excellent review.
I'm with you to a point with tongue gusseting, but I think it depends a lot more with the leather. The tongue is partially gusseted on my Monroe derbies but I still have some tongue slide since it's a thicker veg tan Tochigi. Nathan isn't gusseting the tongue on his boots but I've had no issues with sliding on them (I went with a tumbled rough out so maybe that helps). I had a pair of these boots in black and I think the last was just not working for me I ended up flipping them.
I had a pair of Helms and a couple of other pairs of Blake-stitched boots (I live in the south, so Blake is a good option here). My other Blake boots were far more expensive and not done any better than Helms. A couple are way sloppier. I agree with you that Helms is a good boot for its price point.
Yes, but the stitching that you can see underneath is about the same SPI and that is the Blake stitch. It is equally neat and equally low SPI. I should have clarified that in the video, sorry. Thank you for pointing that out.
I have a pair only 1 and never again buy a second they are falling apart the heal stay collapsed because its cardboard and the sole is about done only low wears in 2 years
I believe there are two sets of stitching on these. The top stitch holds the upper to the insole or what you might think is the top leather midsole, and it’s a 270 stitch. I believe the heel of the upper is nailed or stapled to that insole layer. Then on the bottom layers you have the white midsole and outsole that is stitched to that top insole layer. That is a real stitch and is similar to the outsole stitch on a GYW boot. It’s all real stitches just different construction than GYW construction.
I have these in the Olive color. Oddly, I found them to run large. Ordered a 9D as I do with other heritage boots and they're a bit roomy on me. I wear a thicker sock and lace them tight. Got them for $206 during their black Friday sale. I know you mentioned a lack of arch support. Do these not have a shank?
Interesting. Feet are just so weird so sizing advice is always difficult. $206 is a good price for them in my opinion. They don't have any information about a shank so I would guess not or perhaps a composite one?
I literally said that I got them for free. Not sure how that's suspicious. Of course they sent them out to people to review. That's normal. I understand that it does create bias, but I did also point out that they're not my favorite boots. It's not like I'm telling everyone to go out and buy them.
@@almostvintagestyle oh did you say they sent them for free? Didn’t hear that, fair enough then, I must have become overly suspicious cause many good reviewers have turned lately and keep promoting clearly low quality brands. Anyway, my bad 🫶
When I see boots like this, it really makes me question the value proposition of viberg right now. Even the heel here is cut closer to the upper than vibergs 3 times the cost. Ever since Viberg decided to structure the toe in the 2030 last and change the last, it just looks like all the other service style boots. Most people could not tell the difference between Viberg and something like this from a distance (obviously a little more exceptions with this due to blake). I really really don't understand Viberg's value proposition anymore at all and their shell boots are $1700. If they brought back their old shape and figured out how keep that slim toe with the structure since people complained about the collapsing toe (i mean why not, gaziano for example has a very sculpted low profile toe that is structured) then they might have more a value proposition. The 2030 last as it is is no longer something special or worth the cost.
I know a lot of people are upset by the changes they have made, which is unfortunate. I also wish they would make 2005 last engineers again, but they don't.
My first time seeing your video. Your knowledge and presentation good but could be better. I find your collection very impressive but they are a distraction during your presentation. And when you are showing your close ups it is very hard to see what you are trying to show. This is only and effort to help so take it with a grain of sand, hopefully not in your boots.
