Opinions on Cl vs LV shoes...

Jan 25, 2009
963
149
NYC
I asked this question in the LV thread and so far there was no response. Lol

Are LV shoes a no-no when compared to CL shoes?
 

skislope15

Member
Aug 11, 2010
3,296
19
I asked this question in the LV thread and so far there was no response. Lol

Are LV shoes a no-no when compared to CL shoes?
I dont think there a no no there just not the same kind of style as loubies are. I find lv's are more classic shoes and cls are more exotic and unique. Also the sole is more recognizable ten lv's are and some people like it to be known that there shoes are expensive kwim?
 

AEGIS

lettin' them have it
O.G.
Nov 29, 2010
20,281
423
i never think of LV when I think of shoes and the shoes I have seen do not impress me. They do handbags and are good at it.
 

CEC.LV4eva

O.G.
Jun 4, 2006
16,953
1,010
I kind of think differently. Both LV shoes and CL shoes like to be known for their brand. LV has lots of blinged metal-ware, monogram, or some form of LV sign on the shoe. CL just has it on the sole.

Width - LVs are normal to wide
Heel height - LVs are clearly incomparable to CL's 160 height now. If you go higher than 3 inches in LV shoes, they also tend to be uncomfortable.
Style - LVs are typically pretty casual to conservative. CLs... are pretty wild these days. Most CL's shoe design have a sexier silhouette due to its high pitch. I don't think LV's are nearly as sexy looking as CLs and I think few would disagree...
Comfort - LVs are in general almost all more comfortable than CLs (toebox), except for LV's sandals which are often horribly made. LV's monogram or vachetta leather on shoes are just the worst idea ever.
 
Jan 25, 2009
963
149
NYC
I see most people would go with CL for the bulk of their shoes and I would too. I was just wondering if a gal went from wearing CL shoes to LV - would it be a major don't fashion wise...
 
Jan 25, 2009
963
149
NYC
CL is the holly grail of shoes while LV is a more classic brand of shoes.
Wow. Being that LV is such a hot designer I would of never thought that their shoes would of been considered classic. I guess when I think about classic I think simple. LV shoes cost just as much as some CL shoes and since their bags are a must I wondered if they could compete with CL in th shoe department.
 

IFFAH

"..."
Jan 22, 2006
17,156
96
When I buy LV shoes, I'd only go for non-classic ones, in limited seasonal designs if they caught my attention. I wouldn't buy classic for LV, CL would be a better preference in that department. Overall, I'd prefer to spend on a pair of CLs.
 

AEGIS

lettin' them have it
O.G.
Nov 29, 2010
20,281
423
I see most people would go with CL for the bulk of their shoes and I would too. I was just wondering if a gal went from wearing CL shoes to LV - would it be a major don't fashion wise...
if it's what you like...why would it be a don't? i don't think they'd have as many options though
 

sfields

Member
Jan 14, 2012
22
0
I've never been much of a fan of LV in general. They made good bags in the day but now they're just too popular, over-faked and commercial.
 

Lyn2005

Member since 2006 :)
O.G.
Apr 14, 2006
2,778
12
Vancouver, Canada
Speaking from my personal experience, I find LV shoes uncomfortable. Their flats hurt my feet. Their heels hurt my feet even more, I still wear them, but if looking for comfort, CL makes relatively comfortable high heels. I think it's the hidden platform CL uses in a lot of styles. I go LV when I want a simple classic line ( their logos can be small details hidden on shoes) and CL when I want attention (that flash of red is totally visible even under bootcut jeans)