Top critical review
Excellent fit and comfort in right shoe but left is painful to wear (foot arch!)
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 8 July 2018
The "Cat Giles, Men's Open Toe Sandals" are fairly typical of the brand apart from the one very obvious design feature of being sandals rather than the closed shoe or boot of which numerous examples were purchased over a decade or more. Each was very true-to-size and, although most were not 'Wide' fit, they were extremely comfortable to wear and more than wide enough for my slightly wider than normal feet that cause problems with certain brands.
Also typical for the brand is the mesh fabric lining, not necessarily identical in every model but similar, and used on all surfaces that contact the foot. Closure is by hook and loop which is applied in three locations, one just behind the toes and the second mid-foot and the last behind the heal. They appear to be sufficiently adjustable for any variation of fit at toes and heal after hours of wear when a degree of loosening may be required but seemingly less mid-foot where there may be a risk of over-tightening and stressing the outer at that location. Also worrying about the overall design of the straps is that the stitching leaves about 5mm of the loop tabs free within each.
The uppers are not leather (as in most other models) or nubuck (a few) but 'synthetic' although the exact nature is not declared. Cat's shoes are normally very rugged and it is hoped that these will also be. The sole and heel is thick, substantial and heavily treaded using their 'High Traction' rubber compound as do most of their designs. It provides excellent traction on dry surfaces but Cat shoes typically offer a less secure footing on wet surfaces; these will probably behave similarly during a heavy summer shower. Current very hot, dry weather did not provide any wet pavements.
While the right shoe was very comfortable, the left was not, caused considerable pain and became unbearable after a few minutes of walking as there appeared to be a hard, raised area on the inner edge of the foot arch; no other shoes from Cat or any other brand had caused similar issues. The two foot-beds did not appear to be quite a mirror image of each other. In view of the many styles from Cat purchased and worn, some over two or three seasons, these appear to be an odd exception and were subsequently considered unwearable. While now made in China, they are not a 'cheap' product and may require better attention to detail during inspection. They offer sufficient width and some additional length to spare such that it is impossible to understand claims by some that these are majorly undersized. They are labelled as US 10, equal to UK 9 and as true-to-size as any other Cat shoes normally are.
Because of the comfort issue with one shoe, they were speedily returned.