When the New York Times published a glowing review of R.M. Williams boots, calling them the “world’s finest,” it sparked a massive debate in the menswear community. Are these $600 boots a lifelong investment, or is the mainstream media falling for marketing hype?
In this video, Sven Raphael Schneider reacts to the New York Times’ claims, cutting through the sentiment to look at the hard technical facts. Watch below to see why he “cringed” at the research.
Inside the Critique: R.M. Williams Under the Microscope
The New York Times article, “These boots lasted me for 12 years. Unfortunately, they’re $600,” makes several bold claims. We’ve broken down the key points of contention from our video review:
- The “Finest” Fallacy: R.M. Williams has rugged Outback roots. Raphael compares their construction to the “Golden Ratio” of tailoring found in masters like George Cleverley and Gaziano & Girling.
- The Poron Problem: The NYT author loves the “bouncy” comfort. Raphael explains why finding synthetic Poron foam in a $619 boot is actually a red flag for high-end enthusiasts.
- The “One-Piece” Myth: Is the whole-cut upper really a rare luxury? We reveal which $200 brands offer the same feature without the steep price tag.
- 12 Years vs. 60 Years: Why wearing the same pair every day is a recipe for disaster, and how a proper rotation can quintuple your boots’ lifespan.
Expert Resources & Breakdowns
To give you the most objective view possible, we recommend exploring these primary sources mentioned in the video:
- Read the Original Piece: The New York Times: These Boots Lasted 12 Years
- See the Technical Surgery: Rose Anvil’s R.M. Williams Cut-Apart – Watch them cut a $600 boot in half to reveal the internal materials.
- The Cobbler’s Perspective: Trenton & Heath – Explore how master cobblers recraft and improve upon factory-standard boots.
Ask the Expert
Is “Yearling” leather better than Box Calf?
Yearling is durable but coarser. It’s perfect for the Outback, but Raphael explains why it lacks the “fine” elegance required for a true dress boot.
Why does the NYT author think the rubber is “extraterrestrial”?
He likely hasn’t experienced high-end rubber compounds like Dainite or Vibram. Raphael discusses how a local cobbler can often upgrade your boots to be better than the factory original.
Are Australian sizes different?
No. They are standard UK sizes. If you are a US 11.5, you are likely an Australian/UK 10.5.
I have a pair of 5 yr old RMs and also a pair of Crockett and Jones shoes so Iโm in a reasonably good position to compare the brands. Firstly, the RM Williams boots are more comfortable from the outset than my C&J loafers. The yearling leather is a great combination of toughness and softness and resist scratches better than C&J. I think the leather sole of the C&Js just makes the shoe a little too stiff. The sole is certainly wearing a lot faster.
RM area very good combination of style and durability/ ruggedness. Many men donโt like the more โfeminisedโ heel shape and general design of more exotic ( and usually more expensive) boots.
There are older reviews out there praising the quality of construction.
In my opinion, RM have hit the sweet spot of ruggedness, durability and style. My boots are 5 yrs old and show little wear with minimal maintenance. Rugged, stylish, masculine and long lasting with good quality yearling leather. Legitimate question about recent changes to construction though. .
I appreciate the detail you went in to discussing these boots. Very informative. I also liked the video. Very nice.
Sven,
Enjoyed your takedown of the New York Times piece on the RM Williams Chelsea Boot. Some very well deserved comments.
Oh, there is so much more could be said (not by you, though!)… but, really, JUST 12 years? I have 40-year old properly-made Church’s and Botticelli’s and Bally’s and Lloyd & Haig shoes, which could conceivably last ANOTHER 20 years or more, along with rubber-soled German Marc ankle boots I bought in 1983 or so that finally died. And Trippen, too, have been added to the mix along with some Dr Martens made before they destroyed their brand.
And yes, wearing the same shoes every day is rather irresponsible if you care about them at all.
My local cobbler knows all the ins and outs of different brands, and has pointed out how many “high-end” brands cut corners all over the place, particularly in not just insoles, but also in sole leather and elsewhere. Even my Bally and Botticelli shoes have had their quite thin original outsoles replaced by him with something a bit thicker and better leather that will actually last, and then Blake-stitched on instead of just glued.
As for comfort, I’ve recently gone back to my all-leather soled shoes and boots to avoid the sweating and discomfort and other issues coming from wearing only rubber-soled and cushioned shoes — it’s counterintuitive, but is alleviating a lot of foot issues.
As always, thank you for your hard work and insightful analysis!