Puffer

17 hours ago, Shyheels said:

Yes, a bold move to be sure.

In my world stepping off a boat onto a muddy towpath in stilettos is not something I fancy trying. 

Thigh boots with heels (but not perhaps stiletto) would be of benefit in such an environment.   Why not push the boat out?

6 hours ago, Bubba136 said:

I have never worn or owned a pair of heels with metal heel tips. When ever the heel tips on my shoes need replacing, I either did it myself using a set of tips that came with the shoes when I bought them or took them to the local shoe repair shop. Same for my wife’s shoes.  As for what the tips were made of,  I really don’t know for sure.  Hard rubber or some sort of rubber/plastic compound, I would guess.  Don’t know what I am going to do now since the only local shoe repair shop has closed.  The closest one that I have found is 50 miles away from me.

...

Replacement heel tips (top pieces) in suitable material are readily available econominally online in a variety of sizes and are quite easy to fit with a minimum of tools.    The size of the fixing pin can vary, as of course can the size/shape of the tip itself; the latter is not difficult to trim/shape to suit.   I suggest that you give such DIY repairs a try, regardless of the availability of any local repairer.

On 4/19/2024 at 1:01 PM, Jkrenzer said:

I agree 100%.

There is no balance to the shape. Anything under 3 inches should be blockier. The heel tips must wear very fast. Higher heels carry a lower percentage of weight on the tips. Walking heel to toe the shoe is already level before all the weight is transferred from the other foot.

...

Does not walking 'heel to toe' put an initially large weight on the small tips of high stilettos, as they are the only item in ground contact?   Conversely, walking in low heels, where the foot is placed almost flat when walking, would surely distribute one's weight more evenly?   I can see that, if standing still, more of one's weight goes forward as heels get higher, but wear when stationery is minimal so not really relevant.

9 hours ago, mlroseplant said:

... I think a large part of the reason why I get away with what I get away with is because I am not physically large. ...

I think that is a very valid proposition; you are much more likely to be overlooked (literally!) or ignored because, with or without height-boosting heels, you do not stand out, either in the company of others or against objects such as a doorway.   I am tall (but by means a giant) and am quite conscious of being more prominent than many men.   I have always been reluctant to draw enhanced attention to myself by what I am wearing - however normal that might actually be in terms of style, colour etc - and it took a fair measure of courage for me to venture out in even modest men's cuban heels some years ago.

I'm not sure I can agree that saying (for example) 'Give 110%' is wrong, albeit frequently misused.   If someone is working or producing something at a certain level or pace that is considered to be the acceptable standard (so '100%'), then asking him to do a little more (say, to 'give 110%') is neither an impossible concept nor illogical, even if it is unreasonable or unrealistic.   No different from the 'motor' example, really.   Unless one can be sure that a particular measurement can never be bettered or exceeded (e.g. the speed of light, or absolute zero), it must be possible (in theory anyway) to vary it, up or down, by some stated percentage.

21 hours ago, at9 said:

A stepped drill or cone cutter is ideal for enlarging existing holes.

Agreed, but I doubt that any are large enough to be used effectively (and safely) on holes bigger than about an inch diameter, which is likely to be insufficent for cable or pipe runs.   A solution (at least if drilling through wood) might be to nail a piece of 6mm MDF or simlar board over the existing hole and then drill through that and the underlying substrate with the holesaw (including its pilot) of the correct (larger) size.

4 hours ago, mlroseplant said:

You must have a drill press. Otherwise, I can't see how you were able to use a hole saw without its pilot bit with any accuracy whatsoever. I've learned a few tricks about how to get away with that in a pinch, but it's never pretty. However you did it, nice work out of you!

4 hours ago, at9 said:

One trick for using a holesaw without the centre bit is to drill a hole in a piece of scrap wood, using the centre bit in the usual way. Then use this as a guide when drilling the wanted item. Ideally clamp the guide and wanted item together. Works perfectly in my experience.

You are both correct!   Yes, I have a vertical drill and it was duly used.   I did prepare a guide by drilling through a piece of 6mm MDF with the holesaw, and then placing this on top of the composition material to 'centre' the holesaw (with its centre drill retracted) before cutting the required disc.   Clamping was not necessary (although it might well be advisable to avoid 'snatching') and a little water was used as a cutting lubricant.

If and when the extra top piece requires replacement, it should be possible to prise this off and simply glue another on.   But, if the original plastic top piece fails (or the extra height created by the composition is unacceptable), I would fill the peg holes with dowel forced in and use brass panel pins to nail the new top piece into the dowels, reinforcing with suitable adhesive.   Adding some wood forced into the hollow void before glueing and nailing would give a stronger job.

On 3/23/2024 at 5:14 PM, Puffer said:

These appear to be a recent ASOS introduction; sizes UK 6 - 12 and £56.00.   The height of the rounded heel looks to be close to 4".   Sleek looking - although the chain detail may not appeal, but is much more discreet than that on previous offerings.   Now, this is a boot that I would wear!   

I did succumb to these; details here: https://hhplace.org/topic/25644-asos-chelsea-boots/

These ‘ASOS DESIGN heeled chelsea boots in black faux leather with chain detail’ seemed to me to provide the right balance between enjoyment and discretion and I could no longer resist them when a double discount was on offer.   I usually wear a UK11 or 12 and opted for 12 (securing the last pair, it seems) to allow thicker socks if needed.

First impressions were favourable – a 3 5/8” heel, a zipped shaft taller than the online advert implied, and an almond toe.   The fit was good and comfortable indoors.   The ‘round’ heel may not appeal to some, but it is not really noticeable.   Likewise, the gilt chain detail is perhaps rather too ‘blingy’, but could be removed.  

The hollow plastic heels were, as expected, rather noisy – and the plastic top pieces will obviously wear and need replacement.   I decided to modify them before wearing them outdoors.  The top pieces (held by four pegs) were carefully prised off and fitted with discs of 1/4" composition material, glued on.   (I used a hole cutter, without its centre drill, to produce discs just a tad too large, which were then reduced and smoothed on my grinding wheel before glueing.)   To dampen noise, I filled the hollow heels with compacted sawdust, with pieces of crimped drinking straw inserted temporarily into the peg holes to stop sawdust entering.    The top pieces were then pressed in; the fit seems firm enough not to need any adhesive.  The composition layer can of course be removed when worn and replaced.

Adding the extra layer to the top piece has increased the heel height to 3 7/8”.   The balance of the boots has not been affected; indeed, they sit rather better with the extra height.  I wore them outside briefly with thick socks and bootcut jeans and they seem comfortable enough.

The pics show the boots as received, as worn with bootcut jeans, and the stages of heel modification.  

12 hours ago, mlroseplant said:

I don't know anything about her either, other than she is quite attractive, and evidently likes to wear high heels a lot.

Agree that she is attractive (if without a discernable figure) and does indeed favour high heels, despite being 5'10".   There's hope for the world yet!

I know nothing of the actress 'Zendaya', who is apparently the star of a forthcoming tennis-themed film 'Challengers'.   But she was pictured in Rome wearing a pair of eye-catching 5" white stilettos with tennis balls impaled on the heels.   It is apparent that the heels are parallel-sided 'dowels' in shape.   They look like the style of shoes jkrenzer would favour - if he has the balls!

34 minutes ago, at9 said:

I've just bought these: https://www.asos.com/devils-advocate/devils-advocate-heeled-cuban-boots-in-leopard/prd/204126104#colourWayId-204126112

I needed to go up a size. Lower heel than my other leopard print boots from Asos but they are real leather. All indications on the website and box is that these were expensive boots - over £200 originally. I paid £46 by getting new customer discount, easily done by signing up with a different email address. They seem well made and comfortable but I haven't yet worn them outside. Soles, although synthetic, are a bit slippery. I'll rough them up before wearing outside.

Interesting boots - but don't wear them on safari or you might become a target!

I too have received Temu e-mails.  It is a Chinese marketplace (somewhat like Amazon) with a wide range of products, mostly at low competitive prices - especially where the same item is offered by several sellers.   Although some customers have complained about missing, damaged or incorrect items, the general trend is of satisfaction.   I recently bought a selection of small tools and workshop items with a total cost of about £17 (with free delivery for £15+) and they arrived within a week exactly as ordered and with no apparent defects.   There is a free returns service if needed.

I  did search more widely on the Temu website and there are many footwear items offered - including a large number of high-heeled shoes, boots and sandals, including stilettos.   So, I am surprised that Bubba could not see any; maybe the offerings to US customers are different?   I don't know what the quality is like; the low prices (typically £10 - 40) may be indicative.

On 4/3/2024 at 2:01 PM, Bubba136 said:

... the “hippie culture” carryover from the 60’s , which in my opinion, is responsible for the entire lowering behavioral standards and lack of respect for anything or anyone, these days.

23 hours ago, mlroseplant said:

I blame Janet Jackson for almost singlehandedly ruining pop music, but that doesn't make it so, init? ...

I can certainly identify with Bubba136's view that a lot of civilisation went downhill from the mid-60s, as the rock-n-roll era was replaced by the hippie culture.   And recovery has been impeded by the fact that (i) the majority of the hippies are still with us; (ii) the next generation or two have been directly influenced by their hippie ancestors.   However, we must be careful if trying to establish a causative link: arguing post hoc ergo propter hoc ['after this and therefore because of this'] often results in a fallacious result.   But I still blame the disciples of flower power!

On 4/3/2024 at 7:50 PM, ramon020 said:

I bought these yesterday., looking forward now. Will receive in a few days .exciting…

I look forward to hearing how you like them!   I see that the price has reduced to £36.40 - very tempting!

8 hours ago, Bubba136 said:

It’s obvious that women today, while still wishing to remain fashionable, are no longer willing to endure uncomfortable attire which really high heels can be considered.  I believe that the grunge look is popular because it combines something feminine looking while  being comfortable to wear.  For dressing up, girls shoes can be “oh so sexy” and feminine with low heels and fancy adornments.  Block heels and over the vamp sandals are noticeable these days at church, weddings and other gatherings where being nicely dressed is appropriate because they maintain a genuine feminine appearance while being comfortable.  Now, if men were as foregoing, they would find suitable attire to replace the traditional suit and tie.

It all depends upon what one regards as truly 'feminine' in appearance.   On the basis that most of the present clumpy and ugly footwear is rarely worn by anyone other than a female, they can indeed be regarded as 'feminine' in style and appearance.   But that doesn't make them automatically attractive, let alone pretty or elegant, in the way that most 'feminine' apparel is designed to be, even if (such as lingerie) it is not intended to be on show.   Leaving the truly grungy and the light and strappy aside, few of the prevailing female footwear styles are attractive to look at and I doubt they are particularly comfortable either.

These appear to be a recent ASOS introduction; sizes UK 6 - 12 and £56.00.   The height of the rounded heel looks to be close to 4".   Sleek looking - although the chain detail may not appeal, but is much more discreet than that on previous offerings.   Now, this is a boot that I would wear!   

23 hours ago, mlroseplant said:

It is the latter. Unless something radical happens, which is not beyond the realm of possibility, given the general gullibility of the American populace, I should have no problem keeping employment here in Iowa, as long as I can still climb a ladder.

I'm sure you will remain OK for work - as long as you don't wear stilettos up a ladder.

It is my birthday today so I am naturally feeling a little more vulnerable as yet another year passes, especially as the physical activities I have been carrying out in retirement (some 10 years now) progressively become a little more onerous.   But, around the family, there is a steady demand for plumbing, electrics, joinery, etc etc - none of which was in my original contracts of employment ...!

On 3/8/2024 at 10:21 AM, mlroseplant said:

The subject comes up more and more often lately. I get asked, "Squirrel, how long have you got left?" The answer is I don't know. I can't afford to retire early, being as my ex-wife got half my pension years ago, so the best I can do is hope I don't get hurt or sick in the next 9 years. The good news is, my house is paid off as of this month!

Are you referring to the potential time that your employment might last, or to the remaining time during which you expect to remain on the planet and fit for work?   If the former, then (as Bubba says) you should not find it too hard to get alternative and suitably lucrative work.

 

5 hours ago, Shyheels said:

I won’t starve (hopefully!) I’ll just keep writing magazine features until I become too senile to continue, after which I shall set myself up as a political columnist and commentator

What do you mean by 'until'?  😁

I doubt that, as a political columnist and commentator, you will be offered much work.   There are far too many around already!

Elegant and properly-proportioned classic courts - very nice!

10 hours ago, mlroseplant said:

...

I seem to remember another guy who walked several km in high heels pretty much every day. I want to say he was from Oz, but my memory is fuzzy. Perhaps a former member here?

Are you thinking of the New Zealander (in Christchurch, I think) who wore a man's suit jacket with a skirt and stilettos for work (in car sales?), and typically a dress and stilettos for socialising, seemingly with little or no adverse reaction?   I can't think of his name but he has been absent for some time now.

7 hours ago, Shyheels said:

I’m seeing more in the north of England than I did in London

Twas ever thus, especially in the north east (and Scotland).

17 hours ago, dww said:

I can remember the 20th of july 1969 very well, I was an apprentice at Goonhilly downs earth statalite tracking station, I remember Neil Armstrong saying one small step for man, one giant leap mankind, and I watched it live.

David.

Update one giant leap for mankind.

Perhaps we only heard the 'for man' version in the UK, where we care more about correct use of language and so had something to discuss over the years!   Interestingly, the official transcript is undecided whether the 'a' is included or not.

12 hours ago, Jkrenzer said:

He said "one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind'.

The quote is accurate as he is a man and the term mankind is gender less. 

11 hours ago, Shyheels said:

I believe he did say “for a man” - there was something about this in a documentary a couple of years ago. The transmission isn’t really clear though

I have heard and read otherwise, more than once, although I agree that there is some doubt.   Armstrong has often been criticised for (apparently) saying 'for man' (which equates to 'mankind' and is therefore a tautology) - although one can forgive him in all the circumstances.   If he had (correctly) said - and been clearly heard to have said  - 'for a man', there would have been no need for comment over many years.