Customer Reviews SoftWalk San Marcos

Another pair by the same brand is perfect but these were so much smaller I couldn't leave them on long enough to walk across the room.

Width was wide like the shoe had been stretched by a wide foot. The heel slipped up with each step. Shoe was comfortable except for this problem.

too hard to walk in these shoes. the back of the shoe is too low to latch on to my heel

Could not walk in these shoes and keep them on my feet. There is not enough lip in the heel to latch on my heel. Great style

Too wide and would start to slip off when I took a few steps. Also kind of clunky looking.

These fit nothing like the first pair I bought about 15 - 20 years ago (which are finally falling apart, but which I still wear around the house because they're still so, so comfortable). I usually wear 10.5 in closed shoes, and occasionally 10M in open shoes. In this new model of Softwalk San Marcos, the 10.5 fit perfectly in LENGTH IF I'm wearing ONLY ONE (NOT BOTH) of the inserts that were included (see discussion of inserts below). With both inserts, the shoes become about a half size too short because the foot just can't quite slide all the way forward. Re: WIDTH, the SOLES runs much wider than the old shoe, and wide compared to most shoes. HOWEVER, the issue of width should not be confused with the issue of DEPTH (an issue which unfortunately Zappos doesn't include in its assessment category). If you're wearing both inserts, they run a little shallow and the top of the foot hurts if you have high arches.//can't tell yet if this band will stretch out or not. With only one insert they run much too deep and look cavernous even if you have high arches. In other words, if you're going to wear one insert, order your regular size; if you're going to wear two inserts, order 1/2 size up in length because with two inserts, the foot can't quite slide all the way into the shoe lengthwise. Some reviewers mistakenly describe this as a width problem, but it's not...just look at the soles which are oversized, especially in the heel area. Again, it's a depth issue, and I don't think is going to helped by increasing width size because then the soles will be too wide, and your foot will be too spread out to get enough support. If you go up on length, the width of the new size will automatically be a little wider anyway. You may be wondering "why not just remove one of the inserts if it will make the shoes fit better length-wise?" Because the comfort level goes down enormously...With just one insert, the shoes are not particularly comfortable, but with two, they're delicious. Incidentally, these do NOT have EGGCRATE inserts like the early shoes had, which is why they require two now to be comfortable.) One of the inserts is removable, one not. I have a high arch...with both inserts in the shoe, there is not quite enough depth to the shoe....i.e. it feels a little tight across the top of the foot (which some reviewers may have mistakenly described as too narrow rather than too shallow). If I remove one insert in the shoe, there is far too much depth, which some reviewers may have mistakenly described as too wide (rather than too deep). Re: width, the SOLES are MUCH wider than my old Softwalk San Marcos (especially in the heel). Visually,the mediums look like wides at least. If the soles are so wide, you may be wondering why some reviewers complain that the shoe runs narrow. Again, the shoes are NOT actually narrow SOLE-WISE--the soles actually run wide. They're justa little SHALLOW (i.e. even though soles are wide, there's not enough leather going around the top of the foot if you're wearing both inserts, and they're too DEEP if you're wearing only one insert. (too much leather going around the top of the foot). In the EARLIEST version of the San Marcos there was no band that went across the top of the foot. That area used to be ALL woven/no band, and was therefore slightly stretchy all the way across the top of the foot, so even with the single insert it fit lots of people, and looked narrower than it was. In the earlier version, if one foot was slightly wider than the other foot, it worked because the woven part could stretch appropriately. This is no longer true because the non-stretchy horizontal band doesn't accommodate differences. Also, the old ones came with one egg-crate inserts, which these do not. The egg-crate inserts were comfortable with only one insert; these require two non-eggcrate inserts to reach the same comfort level. The new inserts do have a little arch support added, and are quite comfortable when double inserts are worn, but not particularly comfortable when only single inserts are worn. Re: your own inserts, I haven't tried this, but I think if you have one that isn't too thick, you could wear it if you took out the removable insert, and just left in the other one. If you have a high arch, this may or may not work, depending on the thickness of your own insert. The other problem with the top of the shoe is that the band is placed straight across the most sensitive part of the top of the foot. The bandless shoe of 20 years ago was instead cut a the more comfortable V-shape, with the point of the V having been about 1/2 inch closer to the toe-box than the new straight-across version. In addition to the new models cutting across the most sensitive part of the top of the foot, the absence of the V-shape that was used in the earlier version make the feet in the new version look much wider. As for the reviewer who said the shoes look "cheesy" I don't think they look bad for a comfort shoe, but I definitely think the old version looked better because they made the foot and shoe look much narrower. It's true that they are shinier than the earliest version, but not as bad/not as overly shiny as the version that came out a few years ago. These do not look plastic as those did.

Not an attractive shoe & not enough arch support for me to be worth the look. (I have a VERY high arch.)

I wear a 10.5 Slim or Narrow so ordered a 10 and an 11 Narrow. 10 was short and 11 was way too long. Had to return both. Loved the look of this shoe however so was disappointed neither fit. I normally wear Munro/SAS/Aravon/EasySprit and can find something from those companies.

This is a beautiful shoe but it was too HEAVY and made my foot feel very warm and uncomfortable. Sadly this will be returned.

these shoes were too stretched out & made them wider than they should be for a narrow width

Nice looking shoe. I found it to run very short.

Nice shoes but a little too tight across the instep.

Much smaller than the same shoe I bought a few years ago. I couldn’t even get my foot in the 8.5 WW, but I have the exact same shoe in that size that has been a favorite of mine for the last few years. Obviously, the sizing has changed over the years which was very disappointing.

very comfortable - i ordered half size larger and wide. but the material above is "cheap" looking, and smells like plastic. i wanted something nicer.

I have purchased and worn Softwalk clogs in a 9.5WW for years. I could order them, and wear them straight out of the box. No more. The last seems to have been changed, and the new pair that I got looked longer and more narrow than the ones I had in the past. I compared the new ones to an old pair, and sure enough, the rubber soles were a full quarter of an inch less wide than the old ones. This is a deal breaker for me. I am sending these back.

Nice looking shoe. However it runs very small.

These are attractive shoes, BUT they are noisy! Both shoes squeaked and popped with every step. Perhaps that would wear off with time, but I did not want to take the chance. Of equal importance was the narrow fit. I would want to be able to wear socks, but the shoes were too narrow to allow that. I am returning them.

These shoes are nice looking but very uncomfortable. They are not an extra wide and the woven leather pinches my foot when I walk, making it a very scratchy experience. Sorry to say but I have to return these shoes.

These used to be good and I have had several pairs of them but the last pair, while fitting well, started coming apart almost immediately. I won't be getting more.

Very unhappy about the fit and material used in this shoe. Having bought this particular brand and style several times in the past, I was disappointed to receive shoes that were a half size too large, and the inner sole of the shoe was made of a cheap and slippery material completely unlike past versions of the shoe and unlike the pictures of the shoe on the website. Am returning them.

has a removeable sole, not as described with eggcrate sole!

Wish I could return them. Scratch easily and almost impossible to cover with shoe polish. Stretched out quickly and now I slide in them when I walk. I'll think twice before I buy this brand again.

These shoes were extremely wide in the heel area. I wear a narrow and these clogs were slipping all over the place when I tried to walk. I was afraid of falling in these shoes, they were slipping so much. These are going back!

Great cool weather shoe that are easy slip on and comfortable for bad arches.

Lovely red color. Cushy insole.