Frye arkansas vs. Chippewa cap-toe

CaliforniaJones · Post by **CaliforniaJones** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:00 am

Hi everyone,
I'm so excited, this is my first post on the site. I've been visiting, reading, and learning for almost ten years. But haven't posted till now.
I've been looking for a pair of boots, and had narrowed it down to the Frye arkansas, and the Chippewa cap toe after reading about them here on the forum. I was going to go with the Chippewas, but the two places other than LL Bean did not have size 10's(I wear a 10.5 but heard they run big?). And I didn't exactly want to shell out close to $160 for the LL Beans. I like the Fryes too, and they were on Piperlime.com for $95. So I ordered them. Now I guess I'm second guessing myself.
I plan on using these boots for mostly casual wear, some light off road work. I would like some opinions as the durability and comfort of these two different boots. Are the Frye's as durable as the chippewas? I take care of my shoes, but I don't want to baby them. I want something that I can wear and will get better with age? Are the Frye's resoleable? I know the Chips are. I guess I'm wanting to decide if I should return the Frye's and get the Chips. I would even be willing to pay more for the LL Beans if it meant getting a better boot. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:44 pm

Welcome, CaliforniaJones.

Unfortunately, I cannot comment on your choice of shoes, since I only have a pair of Aldens. I used to have a pair of Knapp steel-toed work boots which I wore regularly for many years. They held up fine, and I only had them resoled once.

Mike Bolton · Post by **Mike Bolton** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:44 pm

The chippewas are probably an actual work boot. I've got a pair of Arkansas boots, they're pretty nice, and I like the style, but they're definitly a fashion boot. A bit sturdier than most, and high quality, but they are not something I'd want to go out in the woods with.

CaliforniaJones · Post by **CaliforniaJones** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:14 am

Thanks for the replies guys. Well I got the Frye's, and they were too small. They were a very nice boot, but definitely a casual boot. So I sent them back, and right now I'm wearing a pair of the Chippewas at work. The Chips are a very tough boot that I think will last along time. They are very comfortable, though they feel like they will take a little time to break in. I got them from the Sportsman's Guide for $99.97. I got the 10.5 (my usual size) and they fit well. They are a little roomy as stated, but not enough to order a smaller size. These are factory seconds, and have the LL Bean label inside the tounge. I did not find any flaws at all. There were some very light rub marks, but I don't know if these were why they were deemed seconds, or if it is just from shipping. I put three different coats of Fiebing's on them over the weekend, and they darkened up nicely and dont seem to show rub marks as easily as when I first got them. So the long of the short, I think the Fryes are very nice, and I would have kept them if I was just gonna use them for casual wear. But the Chips are just as nice, and of a tougher, more serious construction. I can't wait to put some off road miles on them. I can only imagine them getting better with age.