Can we talk about Courcheval vs Ardennes please?

S'Mom

S'Mom

Resistance is Futile
O.G.
Apr 8, 2006
19,280
459
#1
I really love Ardennes but I'm torn at the moment between a little something in Courcheval and a similar one in Ardennes....the difference between the two other than the leather is in the color. There's not a question of which color I like more (I will be thrilled with either) it's more about the leather.

As I'm completely inexperienced with Courcheval can we talk about the differences between both - pros and cons - I would LOVE to hear your thoughts!!!!
 
#2
I love the durability of Courcheval. I had a vintage Kelly bag in red. Pros-hardy, wine and water roll off, and retains its shape; Cons-plastic hand feel, color will fade in spots and hard to tell when the leather is dry;

Good luck!
 
#3
It is my understanding that courcheval is the earlier version of Epsom. I'm sorry I can't add anything further from personal experience. Hope that helps a bit.
 
#4
Courcheval ages very well, and retains their structure beautifully so I think this is a leather than is strong enough for the decades. Plus point for me vs Ardennes is the weight. Nearly featherweight in comparison. I've a 20+yr old courcheval and it is my carry bag especially when travelling as it endures very well I really don't worry much about it.
 
#5
I recently purchased a Black Kelly in Ardennes.... and I looooove this leather!! Talk about luxurious!

I also have an Epsom Birkin. But she will be my only Epsom B. She is an amazing color (which Epsom handles very well) and light as a feather! :heart: her!!!

However, I prefer Ardennes over Epsom/Courcheval (and togo and clemence just not chevre). Hands down. BUT my Kelly is Sellier... so that matters bc I love the structure that Epsom retains. Still.....

The look and feel of Ardennes is spectacular. It has flatter grains than togo and (mine, at least) has no veining. It developed a minor patina over time (my Kelly is from 1997 but looked fabulous). However, since I purchased the bag pre-owned, I sent her away to Doc for a spa to prevent dryness and color-loss. Before I sent her away, I never put her down for the 3 weeks she was with me. She is so light and the leather is simply no-fuss and amazing. I'd definitely pick Ardennes over Courcheval darling. No doubt.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hermezzy
#6
I have a courcheval CDC from way back. It's been great, the leather is in better condition than the hardware. I have nothing against courcheval or epsom, but I have seen and felt Ardennes and seriously, there's no competition, go for the Ardennes
 
#8
Israeli_Flava said:
I recently purchased a Black Kelly in Ardennes.... and I looooove this leather!! Talk about luxurious!

I also have an Epsom Birkin. But she will be my only Epsom B. She is an amazing color (which Epsom handles very well) and light as a feather! :heart: her!!!

However, I prefer Ardennes over Epsom/Courcheval (and togo and clemence just not chevre). Hands down. BUT my Kelly is Sellier... so that matters bc I love the structure that Epsom retains. Still.....

The look and feel of Ardennes is spectacular. It has flatter grains than togo and (mine, at least) has no veining. It developed a minor patina over time (my Kelly is from 1997 but looked fabulous). However, since I purchased the bag pre-owned, I sent her away to Doc for a spa to prevent dryness and color-loss. Before I sent her away, I never put her down for the 3 weeks she was with me. She is so light and the leather is simply no-fuss and amazing. I'd definitely pick Ardennes over Courcheval darling. No doubt.
Click to expand...

We are TWINS on the black Kelly!!!!! I ADORE mine as well and since it's also pre-loved I sent it off the the spa for a bit of refreshing and I feel NAKED without it so I know what you mean!

Thank you for your honest opinion of the two leathers....I have NO experience with Courcheval but it sounds like perhaps I should keep to the Ardennes path!
 
#10
coleigh said:
I love the durability of Courcheval. I had a vintage Kelly bag in red. Pros-hardy, wine and water roll off, and retains its shape; Cons-plastic hand feel, color will fade in spots and hard to tell when the leather is dry;

Good luck!
Click to expand...

Yes, that papery-feel bothers me Coleigh....I think it's Ardennes for me!!!!
 
#11
I have both courcheval (Kelly) and Ardennes (Birkin). In terms of durability, it's like epsom vs. fjord. You can't compare them cos they're not the same. Both hold their shape, but courcheval (predecessor to epsom) is embossed leather, thinner and lighter, whereas Ardennes is thick and strong and feels indestructible. Of course much heavier too.
 
#13
TammyD said:
I have both courcheval (Kelly) and Ardennes (Birkin). In terms of durability, it's like epsom vs. fjord. You can't compare them cos they're not the same. Both hold their shape, but courcheval (predecessor to epsom) is embossed leather, thinner and lighter, whereas Ardennes is thick and strong and feels indestructible. Of course much heavier too.
Click to expand...

Ardennes is an embossed leather as well.

Courchevel was introduced long before Ardennes was, and it was produced untill the early 2K just before H released Veau grain lisse ( a shiny version ) and then Epsom in 2003. It's probably the best seller leather along with Box, before TOGO era....

On the long run :
Both can lose color to corners and both can be very hard to touch up (unless dark colors)
Colorwise, I think Courchevel looks better in Gold, in Green, in Yellow, Bleu France, even Bleu jean if you can find one that would be a collector !
While Ardennes looks fabulous in Black, Rouge Vif, Vert, Bleu Saphir ( the old one from the 80's)
 
#14
Thank you, Perlerare....Mine is black and honestly it looks ALMOST like Chèvre in some lights...has a lovely sheen to it!

I believe it will be Ardennes for me and Muffin this go-round.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Back