BLUNDSTONE 500 vs 550 | Don't Buy Until You Watch This

[@littlemoccasin5678]

I bought my first pair of Blunnies in Australia 22 years ago. They were made in Australia with Aussie leather. Their boots have never been the same since they moved production to China and sourced materials there. Prices went up & the quality went down. Greed. Like Ugg boots. Rossi and Redback are Blundstone's long time competitors, and still made in Oz last time I checked.

[@sam-ww1wk]

Agreed on all. My first pair was an og pair from oz. Huge quality difference. None of these youtube experts seem to really know much about them. Still my go-to boot, but I'm not married to the brand anymore, the fashion, etc. They just work.

[@ksajak]

Mongrel boots still aussie made as well!

[@Christoph1888]

Rossi recently moved to Indonesia. Shame, they were always better than Blundstone. Mungral & Redback is all that's left.

[@alastairwatson3201]

Bloke, I get what you’re saying and I largely agree with you. I have, however, been wearing Blundstones for fifty years and never, ever, has sole separation been an issue. I’ve had some soles deteriorate through hydrolysis but I believe that highly publicised problem has been rectified. Cheers from the home of the Blunnie! And no, I don’t have an interest in the company; I just live is Tasmania is all.

[@kevinreilly6774]

Both my stout 500s separated at the toe going on the second year. Got the 550s this time has a different sole Hopefully they last longer

[@pattgsm]

I have a pair of 550’s and I concur w/ all points. I picked up my pair for $170 from Sierra (2nd’s). They are going on 4yrs now and they are as comfortable as the1st wear which is to say extremely comfortable. I was surprised that the leather is genuine leather because the uppers are very supple and still in great shape. In the winter w/ salt and slush everywhere I simply rinse the soles off w/ cold water. The TPU is still intact and have not cracked. Blundstone boots are ubiquitous but no more than wheat Timberlands or Dr. Martens were. These are a fantastic general purpose go to casual boots when purchasing for $160-$170.

[@NickElliottOutdoors]

That's because they aren't a genuine leather. They are a full grain chrome tanned leather. The site says genuine leather but the shoes are clearly not a bonded leather. So it's obvious that they're using this as a marketing tool.

[@anneB-bf6xy]

you forgot to mention that the fit of the 500 (original) and the 550 (classic) is not the same. This can certainly influence the choice of one of the two.

[@sam-ww1wk]

After owning and using them both hard for almost 20 years, the 500's are my go-to. Less lining makes them way cooler, and easier to get on/off. The 550's are nice too, but will fit a half size smaller due to the liner. In the desert, I consider them a winter boot ha ha. Both last the same time.

[@1maico1]

Well, they are relatively cheap boots, in the UK they can be had from £104 GBP ($125) and that includes 20% VAT (sales tax) The US importer must think they have discovered a golden money tree.....

[@santauxia]

OK, great review. What better boot could you suggest for the money??? I would take the advise. Thanks

[@thesharpercoder]

I bought a pair of Wolverine BLVD Chelsea boots for just over $100. They are a pretty tight fit to get on your foot. You will definitely need a boot shoe horn. However, they are an excellent fit once I put them on. The tight fit to put them on is a common complaint. There are not for people with a wide foot, not at all. Their side zip boot has a similar tight fit when you put it on. Again, it is a great fit once you get it on your foot. I order the same size as the plain and cap toe boots, which lace up. Going up half a size for the Chelsea will make it easier for most people to put on, but the fit mgiht be a little roomy.

[@adrianloewen9962]

Well done. I will use your counsel for my future purchases! Most of those other brands you list here are akin to wearing a dress boot. Who the heck wants that? I tried them and they look good and feel like shit. My last Blundstones lasted 7 years of hard use. Felt like a running shoe. They (of course)separated at the inseam because they are glued as you pointed out. Seven years. Only a pair of Fluevogs lasted longer. Only because I didn't wear them as much. I won't get another 550 because they are too typical. But they are one of the greatest chelseas you can get.

[@vanessasimmons1175]

I’m new to Blundstone. I’m frazzled by all the numbers! I wear boots a lot….dog walking, shopping, general wear so basically looking for a neat comfy boot. But not clumpy. Which one?!

[@hillskee]

550

[@neilprocter]

I've had two pairs of Blundstones. I've had them many years, but the soles have split on both. In fact on the newer pair the soles suddenly disintegrated. Compare with Meindl walking boots I have had since 1995; the soles are almost worn smooth but are still in tact. I won't buy Blundstones again.

[@layzy24]

My dad works in Landscaping here in Florida. What's a great boot for him?

[@troutbumandsam5394]

nice comparison, buy RedBacks instead of Blundstone for a better Aussie boot...just saying, all the best/troutbumandsam

[@bjmarchives]

Thank you! Direct and to the point.

[@Ahfuric]

would the leather quality matter if the soles are non replaceable. your soles would probably wear out beofre the leather gets a hole

[@ShinyOwen]

Interesting video, wish I had seen it 4 months ago before I bought a pair of 585s and hadn’t watched many of your videos and other’s to learn more about what makes a quality boot. I just looked at my boots to see which I had and was… disappointed to read “genuine leather” on the materials tag. They pale besides the Thursday Captains now beside them in my closet.

[@NickElliottOutdoors]

They're not a genuine leather. They are a full grain chrome tanned leather. The site uses the term genuine leather but it is used as a marketing tool and it is not describing a bonded leather.

[@BootSpy]

I still think you can get excellent use out of your blundstones -- I don't regret buying mine at all. But I use them for dirtier tasks that I wouldn't want to subject my other boots to

[@tamaragolditch972]

Very helpful, thank you!

[@Eunegin23]

They all don't last long (if you walk a lot...): the sole ist soft (yes, comfy) and done very fast. And then try to resole that glued together models... But you mentioned the sole-issue.

[@tleek]

I have a flat foot with a wide toe box. I can’t do pointy shoes. If I size up or wide sometimes my heal slips. Been on the fence between a pair of Thursdays and these. I like the looks of Thursdays better but feel like they are going to be too narrow on the toe. Advice? My most comfortable boots are xtratuffs and Danner bull run in wide to give an idea of what fits.

[@remzi6061]

I would not go with Thursdays at all, great boot horrifyingly narrow. I’m the same as you, it killlllls your pinky toe. I wish they would create wides. I’ve tried 3 different sizes not worth it. I’m looking at potentially getting blundstones. However for lace up boots redwing sells wides and they are comfortable for me.

[@zacharyroy8217]

I’ve tried the Thursday Captains in their wide widths and they are still too narrow for my feet. Tried Blundstones today and they fit much better in the toe. Good luck on your search!

[@elaysason5055]

Would you say they worth it for like 85 90 dollars?

[@angie5life-is-good]

Thanks for posting this video. I decided not to buy Blundstone after watching it. Will check out Thursday boots

[@_iErik]

How does the weight of the blundstone 550 compare to something like the Thursday Duke or Legend? With the very sneaker-like construction of the Blundstone, I would expect it to be significantly lighter than its GYW counterparts, which could be an advantage to a lot of people.

[@BootSpy]

I don't think the weight really makes too much of a difference when you're wearing them. I wouldn't say Thursdays are heavy really, but they're heavier than blundstones. The Thursday legend is a much better alternative to the blundstones. I have a video coming out in a week where I break down the differences between the legend and Duke too, but if you're looking to buy now, I recommend going Thursday legend over blundstone

[@_iErik]

Definitely interested in the upcoming video. Would also watch the heck out of a video version of your “Blundstone alternatives” article.

[@BootSpy]

Yo, not sure if you saw, but your comment inspired me to make a video version of that article. It's the latest video on the channel (until tomorrow night). Thanks for supporting the channel, and thank you for the idea!

[@sixstringriffs]

I've owned the captain boots by thursday..they were a size too big for me but I felt they were heavy and the heel was too high for me. I haven't bought a pair of blundstones yet but ive tried many on and they seem much much lighter.

[@sadfasdf74]

good stuff. Canceling my blunstone order and going redwing now. Thanks m8

[@BootSpy]

Glad I could help!

[@davidcoleman2796]

Wow . I did not know the boots had bad leather . What a let down . I'm still rocking my Thursday boots . I will not waste my money . Thanks .

[@jimlittle5769]

Yup, I got my Captains, about to get my Cavaliers...

[@NickElliottOutdoors]

They don't. The boots are made of a full grain chrome tanned leather. It isn't the highest quality but it definitely is not a bonded leather or genuine leather.

[@MrHYDRO84]

Had a pair of 192 for what 6 months and they are rubbish the soles lining fell apart so had to buy some new soles, now I slid my foot in the boot last night and the leather is perishing and come apart at the heel part, shocking really as I paid a fair few quid for them. I work in a warehouse and am on my feet walking around almost 9 hours a shift on nights these 192 just are not up for the job.

[@Jebro439]

Nice review. I was going to say why buy them anyway

[@mattjones5817]

aren't they direct injection construction rather than cemented???🤔

[@lattetown]

500 also has steel shank

[@fredperry9235]

Mongrel are aussie made and excellent

[@stroudcorr5983]

Where is your flannel from

[@piepiemushroom]

Blundstone 172 are the true blunnies mate! These models are fashion boots for hipsters.

[@fullmetalroyal1216]

Are the insoles the same?

[@BootSpy]

There's a minor improvement in the 550, but it's still pretty thin high density foam

[@SabotPottery]

Blunstones were once really well made, but since 2007 this iconic brand moved their manufacturing from Australia to Thailand and India. With that, the quality standard plummeted, so today they really only survive on their name. I personally would never, ever, buy Blundstones again because their boots fall apart after a few years.

[@TheGlutes]

Ridiculous how poorly constructed the soles are on a so called "premium" boot. Despite extra TLC, all three pairs in our household failed albeit after a decade. T he soles either simply decayed or separated. With the latter, we spend a good amount on resoling which extended the life for another 2 years but ultimately failed. Meanwhile the uppers were pristine. How does that make sense? Wasteful on several levels.

[@Redfeather80]

What activities did you do in them? Just everyday wear or work???

[@TheGlutes]

@@Redfeather80 Every day wear. No heavy duty use.

[@semco33]

William, Blundstone is dead. The competence, i.e. Redback, are way better. The soles are not exactly glued, they are using the technique of "direct attach" (molten polyurethane injected directly on the uppers), which makes it really really stromg and waterproof. The "only " issue is that they are not recraftable and that polyurethane soles suffer from "hydrolisis" if not worn regularly.

[@piepiemushroom]

You having a laugh mate! Blundstone 172 work boots are way better than redbacks! The 500 and 550s are fashion boots mate! Thats why the soles are crappy! The redbacks are workboots with work soles!

[@matttherrien9608]

Explain briefly hydrolysis if you please.

[@NickElliottOutdoors]

No they aren't genuine leather. They are a full grain chrome tanned leather.

[@BootSpy]

Mine both say genuine leather on the inside, so maybe that's a recent change

[@NickElliottOutdoors]

@@BootSpy Yes so do mine. It is a marketing tool. I've just received an email from Blundstone Australia confirming that their boots (with the exception of their vegan line) use a full grain leather. They have also stated that none of their products use bonded or split leather.

[@NickElliottOutdoors]

@@BootSpy I can forward it to you if you'd like? For any future videos etc

[@datfly3034]

The upper is also injection moulded to the boot - not cemented as you state. Blundstone makes no claims of waterproofing.

[@dm9078]

Genuine leather? I will pass!

[@splade18]

hero

[@Dan_Yerlll]

Why?

[@couchsofa2977]

they are not glued. bad info.