Expand Quote
It would be cool to hear from someone directly involved in the manufacturing what they classify it as... it seems to be one piece, which would mean it's not a vulc. The foxing tape bonding process is literally what vulcanization is.
As I understand it; with a cupsole your foot is on top of the midsole. Whereas with a vulc your foot is submerged within the midsole.
The foxing tape is a by product of attaching the sole and doesn't define a vulc. Cupsole uppers are stitched into the midsole.
That being said I haven't noticed any stitching in recent cupsoles (emerica g6's for example). Maybe emericatm can offer some insight?
Thanks for laying it out clear. I think I understand where the confusion is coming from - but I do concede that Lakai is calling that shoe a vulc, so I can't claim it as a cupsole.
A cupsole shoe is a one piece sole that literally cups the upper of the shoe, and is either stitched or glued in. I believe there can be heat processes used in the bonding as well but I can't site any specifics. But the reason it's called a cupsole is because it forms a cup since the sidewall and bottom are one molded piece.
A Vulcanized shoe is a shoe that has a sole (and some sort of midsole, even if it's just material), bonded to the upper using a strip of rubber and heat. The
heat is required and it's what defines vulcanization. It's an old process and it's how tires are made. This link has a guy from Sole Tech perfectly explaining what vulcanization is in terms of shoes...
Product knowledge meetings in skateshops in the late 90's was where I first learned about the difference. The parts of your quote I highlighted are where you got it mixed up. No big. I was wrong about that Lakai shoe - I guess they heat it on but without a separate wrap? Seems like that would be a weaker bond.
Topic: nakel lotties rant (Read 178826 times)