7 ms·

It seems bizarre to me to define the standard 'size' of an item based on some aspect of the manufacturing process that is not part of the final product the user

by ken 9y ago

It seems bizarre to me to define the standard 'size' of an item based on some aspect of the manufacturing process that is not part of the final product the user will ever see, or could measure. Shoe sizes often measure the size of the last, not the foot. One shoe company I've bought from in the past had a warning on their webpage that they use different manufacturing processes for different models, so the same numbered size of two similar-looking shoes actually differ by quite a bit.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
I also find shoe numbering bizarre. How could such a numbering system survive to this day? Why not use goddamn centimeters? (Fortunately, e-stores selling shoes were bitten enough by the ridiculousness of that problem that they ended up providing scales translating shoe numbers to centimeters.) Ultimately, the best workaround I've seen was the one the father of my SO used - he would measure the foot of his child, then cut a wooden stick to appropriate length, and go with that stick to the shoes store.
- kazinator 9y ago
  US shoe numbering for men is simple. There is a bit of insanity in that women's and children's sizes are derived from that in more than one way. There are two ways of determining size, but they are supposed to coincide, theoretically. Manufacturers use the "last length" as the basis for shoe size. However, that is not the foot length, and how a shoe with a given "last length" fits a given foot is a variable and so the fit ultimately requires testing. The last length is supposed to be about two shoe sizes larger than the foot length. The last length formula is L3 - 24. So a last length of 12 inches (one foot) corresponds to size 12. From there, surrounding sizes are 1/3 of an inch increments. Which is the odd thing: where else you do you see increments of 1/3 inch? Thus, in any case, if you have a 12" foot, that's a US men's size 14. The foot measuring instrument you see in stores, Brannock's Device, accounts for this and so its formula is L3 - 22. So these sizing systems are intended to coincide, but are different estimators. You can see that using centimeters doesn't solve all the problems. Suppose centimeters were used, but the manufacturers used last-length centimeters rather than foot centimeters. You'd have to convert your foot length to last length according to some rule of thumb, and then ultimately resolve things by trying the shoe. If manufacturers had to use foot centimeters, they wouldn't be able to measure some trivial property of the shoe like last size to determine size. Foot centimeters aren't absolute; they would have to use some representative model of a foot and base it off that: still no guarantee that a 27cm size based on a representative model foot fits your 27cm foot.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    Yeah, I meant "foot centimeters" - the issue isn't about metric vs. imperial, I'm just writing from European experience. The issue is about "foot" vs "last" vs "shoe numbers". I'm not fully convinced by the argument that manufacturers (or at least distributors) can't use foot centimeters - after all, somehow I can successfully buy shoes on-line by measuring my foot and then using vendor-provided foot-length-to-shoe-size conversion scale to pick appropriate size. From the experience of myself and everyone else I asked around, this works reliably.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - ken 9y ago
    I own two pairs of men's boots, from different companies, with US sizes on the label 2.5 apart from each other. They're the same physical size, and both fit me perfectly. That's pretty typical. I generally have to try new shoes in about a 3-size range. According to the L x 3 - 24 rule, these boot should be nearly an inch different (or at least, their lasts). Maybe the US system is theoretically simple, but in practice it seems to be just an arbitrary number that can't be meaningfully compared to anything except the same model of shoe from the same company. In contrast, I've ordered shoes from Japan 3 times, from 3 different companies, and I did it by putting a ruler next to my foot, and then choosing that number of centimeters in the online form. Every time, I got a shoe that fits great. Maybe using an absolute length doesn't solve all problems, but my experience (with sample size of probably N<20) is that it works far better in practice. An arbitrary unit of measurement removes accountability, by way of obfuscation, and gains us nothing.
TeMPOraL 9y ago
Added: for the people who - like me - have no damn clue what the hell "last" is, it's that wooden foot look-alike they use in shoemaking/repairing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last

by ken 9y ago

TeMPOraL 9y ago

I also find shoe numbering bizarre. How could such a numbering system survive to this day? Why not use goddamn centimeters? (Fortunately, e-stores selling shoes were bitten enough by the ridiculousness of that problem that they ended up providing scales translating shoe numbers to centimeters.) Ultimately, the best workaround I've seen was the one the father of my SO used - he would measure the foot of his child, then cut a wooden stick to appropriate length, and go with that stick to the shoes store.

kazinator 9y ago
US shoe numbering for men is simple. There is a bit of insanity in that women's and children's sizes are derived from that in more than one way. There are two ways of determining size, but they are supposed to coincide, theoretically. Manufacturers use the "last length" as the basis for shoe size. However, that is not the foot length, and how a shoe with a given "last length" fits a given foot is a variable and so the fit ultimately requires testing. The last length is supposed to be about two shoe sizes larger than the foot length. The last length formula is L3 - 24. So a last length of 12 inches (one foot) corresponds to size 12. From there, surrounding sizes are 1/3 of an inch increments. Which is the odd thing: where else you do you see increments of 1/3 inch? Thus, in any case, if you have a 12" foot, that's a US men's size 14. The foot measuring instrument you see in stores, Brannock's Device, accounts for this and so its formula is L3 - 22. So these sizing systems are intended to coincide, but are different estimators. You can see that using centimeters doesn't solve all the problems. Suppose centimeters were used, but the manufacturers used last-length centimeters rather than foot centimeters. You'd have to convert your foot length to last length according to some rule of thumb, and then ultimately resolve things by trying the shoe. If manufacturers had to use foot centimeters, they wouldn't be able to measure some trivial property of the shoe like last size to determine size. Foot centimeters aren't absolute; they would have to use some representative model of a foot and base it off that: still no guarantee that a 27cm size based on a representative model foot fits your 27cm foot.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  Yeah, I meant "foot centimeters" - the issue isn't about metric vs. imperial, I'm just writing from European experience. The issue is about "foot" vs "last" vs "shoe numbers". I'm not fully convinced by the argument that manufacturers (or at least distributors) can't use foot centimeters - after all, somehow I can successfully buy shoes on-line by measuring my foot and then using vendor-provided foot-length-to-shoe-size conversion scale to pick appropriate size. From the experience of myself and everyone else I asked around, this works reliably.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- ken 9y ago
  I own two pairs of men's boots, from different companies, with US sizes on the label 2.5 apart from each other. They're the same physical size, and both fit me perfectly. That's pretty typical. I generally have to try new shoes in about a 3-size range. According to the L x 3 - 24 rule, these boot should be nearly an inch different (or at least, their lasts). Maybe the US system is theoretically simple, but in practice it seems to be just an arbitrary number that can't be meaningfully compared to anything except the same model of shoe from the same company. In contrast, I've ordered shoes from Japan 3 times, from 3 different companies, and I did it by putting a ruler next to my foot, and then choosing that number of centimeters in the online form. Every time, I got a shoe that fits great. Maybe using an absolute length doesn't solve all problems, but my experience (with sample size of probably N<20) is that it works far better in practice. An arbitrary unit of measurement removes accountability, by way of obfuscation, and gains us nothing.

TeMPOraL 9y ago

Added: for the people who - like me - have no damn clue what the hell "last" is, it's that wooden foot look-alike they use in shoemaking/repairing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last