No.

Words added to fulfill minimum requirement.

 

The right Chelsea boot would be acceptable. Not those, however. They would need to be very sleek.

 

Overshoes are the best thing to wear with a suit in slushy weather. No shoe on its own will be appropriate.

 

Agree. Chelsea boots are fine, but not those. The sole has to be much slimmer. These Chelseas would be appropriate, for example:

https://www.carminashoemaker.com/mens-boots/chelsea-black-80216

(not that I'm a big fan of Carmina's Simpson last, but still).

If not leather sole, then at least something dressy, like Church's Diamond sole.

 

Are those over shoes?

I guess I'm confused. If worn as overshoes, sure. If worn just as footwear, the no.

 

Agree. Chelsea boots are fine, but not those. The sole has to be much slimmer. These Chelseas would be appropriate, for example:

https://www.carminashoemaker.com/mens-boots/chelsea-black-80216

(not that I'm a big fan of Carmina's Simpson last, but still).

If not leather sole, then at least something dressy, like Church's Diamond sole.

Good example.

 

Certainly not those. I don't think even the sleekest Chelsea's are suit appropriate, but I seem to be in the minority here.

 

Certainly not those. I don't think even the sleekest Chelsea's are suit appropriate, but I seem to be in the minority here.

I suspect that I am in the minority - not you. There is a pretty massive hate on for Chelseas on this forum that I have never been able to understand. And no, I'm not attributing that hate to you - but I've read some incomprehesibly over-the-top categorical dismissals of Chelsea boots here in the past, and from more than one or two members.

I don't think of a Chelsea as a first choice for a dress boot - a lace-up bal boot is best. But on a sleek last, the clean vamp and toe box of a Chelsea present, at a minimum as "acceptable" with a suit to my eyes.

If this pairing is wholly unacceptable, I'd be keen to hear why.

 

I have a pair of AE Taunton Chelsea boots in brown; I would wear them with a gray suit, perhaps.

 

The side gore just does not work with a suit. A nice refined pair of chukkas would be better.

 

The side gore just does not work with a suit. A nice refined pair of chukkas would be better.

I don't know man.. RogerP makes it look really good. Better than someone who would wear regular balmorals...

 

Unless you are a newscaster sat behind a desk, or you spend your day walking and never sitting down in public, chelsea boots are pretty conspicuous when worn with a suit in a business setting. One would have to make a judgement about how desirable that is.

 

Unless you are a newscaster sat behind a desk, or you spend your day walking and never sitting down in public, chelsea boots are pretty conspicuous when worn with a suit in a business setting. One would have to make a judgement about how desirable that is.

In what way are they conspicuous - as compared with, say, a bal boot?

 

The side gore just does not work with a suit. A nice refined pair of chukkas would be better.

I disagree. I can't see how a gusset - particularly where there is little or no contrast with the shaft - is wholly inconsistent with a suit, as compared with the open lacing of a Chukka.

 

In what way are they conspicuous - as compared with, say, a bal boot?

They'd be more conspicuous that a bal boot because they have the side gore and a bal boot or even a chukka might at first glance be mistaken for a shoe. Having said that I think that bal boots and chukkas are also conspicuous (if they are noticed) when worn in a business setting with a suit -- any boot is. Don't get me wrong, I love boots. I've also worn boots with suits on an evening out. For business, however, I think they might be distracting -- depending of course on the job in question. Business dress should hopefully proclaim good taste but not draw too much attention to itself?

 

I adore my Chelsea boots. However I would not wear the style with a suit. I cannot offer a logical rationale but it would not seem decent to me. Laces and suits is the combination which more comfortably satiates my notion of propriety.

 

They'd be more conspicuous that a bal boot because they have the side gore and a bal boot or even a chukka might at first glance be mistaken for a shoe. Having said that I think that bal boots and chukkas are also conspicuous (if they are noticed) when worn in a business setting with a suit -- any boot is. Don't get me wrong, I love boots. I've also worn boots with suits on an evening out. For business, however, I think they might be distracting -- depending of course on the job in question. Business dress should hopefully proclaim good taste but not draw too much attention to itself?

Sorry, I just don't see them as conspicous or distracting or contrary to good taste.

I understand WHY some boots / shoes are inappropriate with a suit because there are aesthetic elements which are clearly at odds with the requisite level of formality. I just don't see a gusset or gore as being remotely in that category.

I'm happy with the way they look with a suit. If you think they appear to be in conspicous poor taste, I'll just have to try to live with that.

 

I don't know man.. RogerP makes it look really good. Better than someone who would wear regular balmorals...

Thank you sir.

 

Some regional differences again.

Chelsea boots seem to be a wardrobe staple in Australia (did anyone say RM Williams?). I mean, their Prime Minister wore them while meeting heads of foreign states. With proper suits and so on. Can't get any more official than that.

Might be a bit more questionable in more 'traditional' environments. Don't know about the UK.

In Nordic countries, I don't think anyone would care. Color is more important, anyway.

 

I don't know man.. RogerP makes it look really good. Better than someone who would wear regular balmorals...

Yeah. Roger makes everything look good though.

 

Sorry, I just don't see them as conspicous or distracting or contrary to good taste.

I understand WHY some boots / shoes are inappropriate with a suit because there are aesthetic elements which are clearly at odds with the requisite level of formality. I just don't see a gusset or gore as being remotely in that category.

I'm happy with the way they look with a suit. If you think they appear to be in conspicous poor taste, I'll just have to try to live with that.

Funnily enough, I actually didn't say that they would be "in conspicuous poor taste". I said they would be distracting and this might not be right for business. Taste is a personal and subjective thing and this is presumably why business dress is by its nature so conservative ("better to play things safe" etc.).

My comments were aimed primarily at the OP/thread and are just one man's opinion. I'm sure a man as confident as yourself in his chelsea boots will have no problems at all living with that. :cool2:

 

Certainly not those. I don't think even the sleekest Chelsea's are suit appropriate, but I seem to be in the minority here.

+1 for the Minority Report.

Whatever the merits of boots with suits, the OP goretex model should be as far away from a suit as a match from kerosene.

 

Yeah. Roger makes everything look good though.

And thank you, sir. :biggrin:

 

I'm not a boots with suits guy, either. Not saying it can't be done...by the right person...that can pull off a certain amount of "flair" and not look silly doing it. I'm not a flair guy....I would just look silly (or sillier, as it were).

 

Chelsea boots and Jodhpurs confuse me, I can never figure them out.