|
|
|
Comparative Shoelace Lengths
|
Comparing each lacing method to basic
Criss Cross Lacing makes it easier to know whether a shorter or longer shoelace is needed for a particular
lacing method. This allows you to more easily determine how the shoelace length will be affected if you change to
a different lacing method.
For example, rather than having to measure your shoe, then enter those measurements into my
Shoelace Length Calculator, you can instead tell that a lacing method needs longer laces, or that if you keep
the same laces, it will reduce the lengths of the loose ends.
You can also more easily compare lacing methods with each other. For example, one method may use 5% more length,
while another may use 10% more. |
|
Comparative Length Example 1
|
|
Take a shoe with six pairs of eyelets and with the dimensions measured from the size that these diagrams appear
on my screen (Horizontal: 35 mm, Vertical: 16 mm). Assuming the "standard" 250 mm length of loose
ends, compare the resulting shoelace lengths.
|
Criss Cross Lacing
Exact calculated lengths:
Criss-Cross-Laced area = 455 mm
Each loose end = 250 mm (x 2)
Total shoelace length = 955 mm
|
Lattice Lacing
Exact calculated lengths:
Lattice-Laced area = 490 mm
Each loose end = 250 mm (x 2)
Total shoelace length = 990 mm
|
In other words, the "Lattice-Laced" area uses about 8% more length than the "Criss-Cross-Laced" area on the same
shoe. However, because no extra length is needed for the loose ends, only about 4% longer laces are needed overall.
On the other hand, if you didn't want to replace the shoelaces but instead wanted to keep the existing laces, the
extra length would have to come from the loose ends, which would effectively "shorten" each end by about 7%.
|
|
Laces with Criss-Cross Lacing:
Total shoelace length = 955 mm
Criss-Cross-Laced area = 455 mm
Each loose end = 250 mm (x 2)
|
Same laces with Lattice Lacing:
Total shoelace length = 955 mm
Lattice-Laced area = 490 mm
Each loose end = 232.5 mm (x 2)
|
Here's how these comparative lengths whould be shown on the
Lattice Lacing page:
Comparative Shoelace Length = 108%
Laced area uses more (about +8%)
Longer laces needed (about +4%)
Shortens lace ends (about -7%)
|
|
Comparative Length Example 2
|
|
In the above example, the lacing method uses more shoelace and thus effectively "shortens" the lace ends. In this
example, the lacing method uses less shoelace and thus effectively "lengthens" the lace ends.
|
Criss Cross Lacing
Exact calculated lengths:
Criss-Cross-Laced area = 455 mm
Each loose end = 250 mm (x 2)
Total shoelace length = 955 mm
|
Army Lacing
Exact calculated lengths:
Army-Laced area = 320 mm
Each loose end = 250 mm (x 2)
Total shoelace length = 820 mm
|
|
In other words, the "Army-Laced" area uses about 30% less length than the "Criss-Cross-Laced" area on the same
shoe. This results in about 14% shorter laces needed overall. Keeping the existing laces would effectively
"lengthen" each end by about 27%.
|
|
Laces with Criss-Cross Lacing:
Total shoelace length = 955 mm
Criss-Cross-Laced area = 455 mm
Each loose end = 250 mm (x 2)
|
Same laces with Army Lacing:
Total shoelace length = 955 mm
Army-Laced area = 320 mm
Each loose end = 317.5 mm (x 2)
|
Here's how these comparative lengths whould be shown on the
Army Lacing page:
Comparative Shoelace Length = 70%
Laced area uses less (about -30%)
Shorter laces needed (about -14%)
Lengthens lace ends (about +27%)
|
|
Approximations
|
Note that although these comparative lengths are all based on exact calculations, those calculations are for shoes
with the same measurements as the diagrams. If your shoes have a wider or narrower spacing than the diagrams, or
if they have a larger or smaller number of pairs of eyelets or lugs, these will change the percentages slightly.
The comparative lengths should therefore be considered as a simple, approximate guide. For more exact comparisons,
use the
Shoelace Length Calculator.
|
|
Related Links
|
Accurate Lengths
Determining accurate shoelace lengths from shoe measurements.
|
Shoe Lacing Methods
Different lacing methods on which comparative lengths are based.
|
|
Sponsored Links
|
 |
|
This page last updated: 27-Jan-2013. Copyright © 2008-2013 by
Ian W. Fieggen. All rights reserved.
|
|
