More vintage. This time its Thom McAn shoes likely from the late 1960s or 1970s.
According to Wikipedia, Thom McAn was a retail shoe giant in the United States during 1960s and 1970s. The “Bootmaster” line was a premium line for their stores. I kind of remember Thom McAn in the 1980s when I worked at a mall in San Diego. I don’t remember wanting their shoes. I liked Vans. But that was then.
The shoes are well built. They have a thick single leather sole, storm welt, leather heel and are fully leather lined. I would rate them lower than Alden and a Florsheim Imperial in construction but they are still a very fine shoe.
When I first saw the shoes, they reminded me of Nettleton longwings due to the heavy broguing and the plug in the heel. So maybe Nettleton manufactured these shoes for Thom McAn. Or they could be a copy of Nettleton’s design. Maybe Thom McAn was the Sketchers of 1970. Or I could be entirely wrong. It happens.
There is no size information in the shoe. I did a Google search and found a few other Bootmaster pairs and they were also missing the size. Why would you not mark your shoes with size? I don’t know. Maybe there was sticker on the shoe at one point.
[***The size is described below in the comments***]
The old english gothic “Bootmaster” logo is pretty cool but the “Bootmaster” name seems like an odd marketing name for your premium dress shoes. But there are lots of things I don’t understand. Like teenage girls. And magnets.
I haven’t worn them yet so I can’t comment on their wearability.
Enjoy the photos.
These shoes actually do have the size marked inside. Older shoes often display the code in a three or four digit “code”. Here, that code is 4105. The first number, 4 is the width. 1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D, 5=E, etc. The 105 is the size, 10.5. 100 would be a 10, 95 a 9.5, etc. So, these are a 10.5D.
Thank you. I think you are right since I thought these shoes fit like a 11D.
Thank you so much! I came into four pair of vintage boots brand new in the box and the only size was 4105. I have been looking everywhere for the answer!
Just purchased a pair of these NOS on ebay in brown. The funny part is that the ebay vendor copied your description word for word.
It happens a lot
Began shoe repair trade in 1969
By then, they seemed to be fading.
I wonder if these are even older,
By the 80’s they were a has been.
Nunn Bush had some great double soled wingtips also.
I would rate the Nunn Bush wingtips way above the thom mchan
As ive done some of them within the past 10 years.
Had to talk the guy into it, After taking them apart for resoling, i was very happy to see how good they were. Told him not to be “stupid” his shoes now were as good as any he could have bought for 300.00, and my price to him was 80.00.
I havent seen any Thom mcan wingtips for 30 years.
My husband has a pair of these shoes that he wears to this day that belonged to his father…. His father bought them in 1968 for his daughters wedding (my husbands sister) These shoes only get worn at special occasions … Most recently at a wedding in Cincinnati Ohio.. still look brand new… do you have any idea how much these cost originally…
I don’t have any old price sheets on the pairs but I would imagine they cost around $30 in 1968. Bootmaster is one of the coolest vintage logos I have seen