Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Vintage Shoe Sizing Standards

LizzieMaine

Bartender
Messages
33,825
Location
Where The Tourists Meet The Sea
We talk a lot about shoes here, but one topic I've yet to see examined is the issue of changing size standards. If you look at vintage catalogs, you'll notice it's very rare to find sizes over 9 (US), at least before WW2, and the common assumption is that gals then simply didn't have the larger feet that so many of us have today. But is this true? There's reason to suspect otherwise.

In going thru some mid-thirties vintage Montgomery Ward and Sears catalogs recently, I noticed a size scale for shoes -- a very simple foot-measuring chart where you'd lay your foot on the page and read the size off the scale. What's most interesting about this is that there was no separate scale for mens' and women's sizes -- it specified that men and women were to both use the same scale. So when I measured my own foot, it gave my size as somewhere between 8 and 8 1/2, not between 9 1/2 and 10, as in modern sizes, and I noticed that for most styles listed in the catalog, 8 or 8 1/2 were the largest sizes offered. (Interestingly, this thirties-era size scale seems quite close to the modern-day sizing of women's shoes in the UK.)

So, here's the question -- you gals who have a lot of vintage footwear: how closely do the marked sizes correspond to your own known size in modern shoes? Does this vary according to the era of the footwear -- do you wear a larger size, for example, in '50s shoes than in '30s? As far as I've been able to find, we've never really tried to pin down a standard for vintage shoe sizing versus modern sizing, or to document when it changed, and it'd be interesting to see if a pattern emerges from the replies to this question.
 

ShooShooBaby

One Too Many
Messages
1,149
Location
portland, oregon
most of my vintage shoes are 1940s. the ones that are marked tend to be a 7.5 or 8. in modern shoes i also wear a 7.5 or 8 as well, so no discrepancy for me...
 

Blondie

Practically Family
Messages
724
Location
Nashville
I take an 10 1/2 or an 11 (or a 10 if the shoe is AMAZING )
and the 40's/50's shoes are the same size ,
so ditto for me !
 

JupitersDarling

One of the Regulars
Messages
221
Location
South Carolina
I've got just one pair that I can say I'm positive are 40's- a pair of Deliso Debs- they're a 9B and fit just like a 9M (I am an 8.5-9M in modern sizing).

The 50/60's shoes seem to fit me at least a half size smaller in most cases, maybe due to the pointier toe boxes?
 

playbelle

New in Town
Messages
38
Location
Europe
LizzieMaine said:
(Interestingly, this thirties-era size scale seems quite close to the modern-day sizing of women's shoes in the UK.)
I have no personal experience with shoes from that era, but I am a UK size 3 which should correspond to modern US 5.5 or 6, and I've occasionally come across vintage shoes on eBay that list the size as 4 or 4.5, but going by the given measurements, they would fit me.
 

DecoDahlia

Familiar Face
Messages
68
Location
Los Angeles
Vintage vs Modern Shoes Sizes

I have (and wear) shoes from the 1920's to the 1960's, and, LizzieMaine, I think your suspicion that the old American catalogs, like Sears', used the British sizing system is right, since I'm a modern US size 6 1/2 to a 7, but a couple of my 20's-early 30's shoes are marked a size 5 1/2, yet more than fit, since I even have room to spare in the toe area. I find that with any of my closed toe 50's shoes, I'm more comfortable in a size 7, although anything opened, like Spring-o-lators, I do better with a size 6 1/2, which might just be a width issue, since I have a narrow foot. With my 40's shoes, sometimes a shoe marked a US size 7 is a bit too long on my foot. I suspect that in the past, since there was such a range of sizes, width-wise, like A for narrow, AA extra-narrow, AAA "slim," and B medium, some women might have bought shoes in different sizes depending upon the availability of the style they wanted. So, if you were a size 6 1/2 medium width, but the store was out of your size, you might buy a size 7 A or AA. Just my two cents' worth.
 

ehappy

Familiar Face
All of my vintage shoes have the same sizing as modern (8 or 8 1/2). There's been some cases in which I have attempted to fit a size 9 AA vintage Spring-O's and although I could fit length, width was a no no no!

Usually, anything vintage marked with a narrow indication, I can't fit and I seem to find many more marked narrow than not.
 

KittyT

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,463
Location
Boston, MA
All of my vintage shoes (mostly 50s) that are marked with a size have the same size that I wear in modern shoes. For example, I have a pair of 50s saddle shoes that are marked 6 1/2M and they fit me just like a modern 6 1/2M.
 

pigeon toe

One Too Many
Messages
1,328
Location
los angeles, ca
Most of my vintage shoes are around 5 - 6 AAA. I LOVE that they made shoes so narrow back then. It's impossible for me to find narrow enough shoes nowadays.

I'm about a 6 in modern shoes, but often wear 6 1/2 or 7 to accommodate my orthotics or other weird things I put in my shoes to make my feet not cry.
 

Sunny

One Too Many
Messages
1,409
Location
DFW
I've got two pairs of 9 1/2 Naturalizers. One is c. 1940, the other probably later but still definitely 1940s. Both pairs are just a bit too long for me, and I wear a perfect size 9.
 

LolitaHaze

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,244
Location
Las Vegas, NV
As a general rule I wear 8 in both vintage and modern shoes. Strangly enough I have always found success with vintage - an 8 is an 8 (10in insole) -- where in modern shoes I can fit anywhere from a 7 1/2 to a 9 depending on the shoe.
 

LizzieMaine

Bartender
Messages
33,825
Location
Where The Tourists Meet The Sea
So it's looking like if there was a change in US sizing scales, it would have happened around 1940-41. In checking my shelf of catalogs, I see that the latest appearance of the thirties-style sizing chart is in 1939, with 8 being the largest size offered in all but a few women's styles. By 1942, the chart is no longer published, and size 9 is the largest offered in most styles with 10 showing up occasionally as well.

I don't have any catalogs representing 1941 -- I skip from Fall-Winter 1939-40 to Spring-Summer 1942. Can anyone fill in the missing info and perhaps narrow the change down even further?
 

Snookie

Practically Family
Messages
880
Location
Los Angeles Area
I just looked at the holiday catalogs on Wishbook Web, and didn't see any size charts in the 40's, just one in the 1945 edition where you could trace your foot and send it in and they would tell you your size, but no chart. I did notice though, that the size ranges offered stayed the same thoughout, from 1940-45, roughly size 3(!) to size 9 for ladies' shoes. But nothing that gave the corresponding measurements.

Also, I think on that same page, they said you could tell them the size from the inside of an old shoe (any brand), and it would match. If we assume that folks may have been going back several years, as they weren't getting new shoes frequently during WWII, this also leads me to think there was no change in the early 40's, if it happened it would have been much earlier. That's only true, or course, if we trust Sears to give us the proper size!

For what it's worth, my vintage shoes (all 40's) also seem to be pretty true to modern sizes. But I'm not gonna be buying shoes based on that any time soon, though!

Lizzie, how about giving us the measurements on your chart? Then we can see if we all run small?

And any ladies that have shoes from the 30's, please chime in!
 

Vintage Betty

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,300
Location
California, USA
I have some earlier shoes and various catalogs.

If you give me time and remind me occasionally to look this info up, I'll see what I can find.

My mind is porous...so I appreciate the reminders....

Vintage Betty
 

LizzieMaine

Bartender
Messages
33,825
Location
Where The Tourists Meet The Sea
Here's the adult foot-length measurements from the 1937 Wards size chart (single scale for both men and women.)

1 -- 8 inches
1 1/2 -- 8 1/8 inches
2 -- 8 3/8 inches
2 1/2 -- 8 1/2 inches
3 -- 8 5/8 inches
3 1/2 --8 3/4 inches
4 -- 8 7/8 inches
4 1/2 -- 9 1/8 inches
5 -- 9 1/4 inches
5 1/2 -- 9 3/8 inches
6 -- 9 5/8 inches
6 1/2 -- 9 3/4 inches
7 -- 9 7/8 inches
7 1/2 -- 10 1/8 inches
8 -- 10 1/4 inches
8 1/2 -- 10 3/8 inches
9 -- 10 1/2 inches
9 1/2 -- 10 3/4 inches
10 -- 10 7/8 inches
10 1/2 -- 11 1/8 inches
11 -- 11 1/4 inches
11 1/2 -- 11 3/8 inches
12 -- 11 5/8 inches
13 -- 11 7/8 inches
13 1/2 -- 12 inches
 

Snookie

Practically Family
Messages
880
Location
Los Angeles Area
So I'd wear a 7 according to that chart, a full size smaller than what I wear now. Interesting...I'll have to start paying more attention to this...
 

Miss 1929

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,397
Location
Oakland, California
Another twist...

I can't remember who told me this - some very old person, who worked in a shoe store in the day!
Ever noticed that in many shoes, the size is not stamped, but written by hand in India ink?
They had all the sizes, unmarked, in the back room. When a customer came in and insisted "I have always worn a size 4!" they would go back there, pick up a size 7, and write "4AAA" on it. Made the customer happy with her vanity satisfied.
Which could explain a lot of the badly fitting shoes we find!
 

Vintage Betty

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,300
Location
California, USA
1926 Shoe Sizing Chart

1926 Shoe Sizing Chart

1926_shoe_chart_small.JPG



Full size download chart available here
 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,640
Messages
3,085,540
Members
54,471
Latest member
rakib
Top