Other than that, though? Pretty damn unimpeachable. They get beat up easily (most suede shoes do) they can wear down in strange ways the toe box has a propensity to stretch and I can't really recommend wearing them to do any strenuous physical activity-though I do have a friend who occasionally rock climbs in hers, so the potential to surprise is there. There are, of course, a handful of cons to consider, but they're fairly negligible. It's the most comfortable shoe I own, it pairs with an obscene number of silhouettes, and its unfussy disposition makes slipping it on the easiest decision of my day. So, does all of that make the Birkenstock Boston clog worth it? (If you thought my answer here was going to be anything other than an emphatic “hell yes”, you might want to scroll back to the top and start over.) My hallway is overrun with shoes, but somehow the Boston wins at least half of the Out the Door Battles. (If that hole is making you nervous, my alternatives were limited given the supply shortage, and I only wore them with pretty thick socks things just escalated quickly once I hit cork.) How Do They Fit? For those following along at home, that’s over 650 miles logged without any noticeable deterioration-and my feet still feel great. They lasted at least five and a half months without the hole you're eyeing in horror, and only started really breaking down after about the four-month mark. My gait isn’t what you'd consider “light on footwear,” either, and those Bostons were present for probably 50 percent of that distance. My previous pair (pictured above) clocked about six months of near-daily wear, and I logged some serious miles in them: per my snitch-ass iPhone, I’ve walked an average of 5.6 miles per day over the past six months, or roughly 12,500 steps-as evidenced by that terrifying heel drag. I’m now on my ninth-or is it tenth?-pair of SF Bostons. POV: You're me, about to head out of the apartment.
0 kommentar(er)
