Reviewer Hanako
They are a fantastic looking shoe and the color is great and they look very stylish. They don't look cheap but the sole of the foot did not fit the bottom of my foot and after walking around in them they started to feel very uncomfortable. The size was too tight.
Reviewer N0011
Shoe is good but the fit is a little small compared to others in the same size...
Reviewer reviewernc
Puma's are nice shoes that always fit me great. They're also easy to find on sale, which makes them the price/performance king. They look quite nice, as well!
I purchased these to replace some Nike Sweet's that were a little too big for me. I think the Nike Sweet is a nicer shoe (more padding and softer, thicker leather, etc), but they also cost more. These Puma's are tagged the same size as the Nike's, but they run a little smaller (the footprint does appear a little wider, though). I own several pairs of Puma Suede's and these run about the same size as the Suede does.
Even though I think the Nike Sweet is a better made shoe, there's something about these that I just like better. For one, I think they look better and I'm just more comfortable in them. I wore the Sweet regularly as a kid, back when Nike originally released them, so that's why I purchased them first. When they didn't fit, I purchased the Match 74 to replace them and I couldn't be happier with them.
Reviewer K Shields
I only ordered these because I found a great deal on them. Normally I would have passed, but I love Simple brand shoes and figured it was worth the risk. I'm really glad that I did, because I like them much better then I expected. They look better in person then in the pictures and they're very comfortable.
I'd say that they fit true-to-size, although if you're in between sizes, I'd suggest that you go with the larger one. The width is pretty average too. I do wish these had more arch support, but they're not bad as is.
Overall, I'm as pleased as I always have been in the past with this brand.
Reviewer Donald R Mccann
I am very happy with the shoes. You get what you pay for and Mephisto shoes continue to deliver comfort and High Quality.
Reviewer Ferry Lee
I just love them because I can now tie my sneakers with that velcro on top. I've been looking and looking and now I found them. I had a stroke so I've only got one arm to use and their great. Thanks again. Frank
Reviewer John R Gray
Highly recommend!!!!!
Reviewer D Arguelles
My oldest son loves his new shoes.
Reviewer E J Guerrero Jr
As of this review I don't know how much these shoes cost so I have to rate based on construction and comfort alone. I like to incorporate cost when I can but can't this time. These shoes are extremely light weight and seem to be very well constructed. I don't know how they will hold up when worn while running, but for basic comfort they feel good. I like the light gray color and they have a nice, sleek look about them. They don't feel good when worn without socks because of some scratchiness at the back of the heels so if you like go sockless you might not like these shoes. But when worn with socks they are very comfortable. I received a size 9 for review and they seem true to size. These seem to be true to size.
Reviewer tobias funke
I don't know, as of this review, how much these shoes cost, but they are very nice leather shoes. Hubs and I went shoe shopping yesterday to get him a nice pair of dress shoes and we spent a good amount on them and they were on sale. But every man deserves at least 2 pairs of very nice dress shoes. This pair of ankle boot shoes are very well made, and the leather is gorgeous and deep brown. The soles are should last a long time and look very durable. Hubs thinks there should be one more set of eyelets, but I think the two are very attractive and stylish. I received a size 9M for review and usually he wears 9W but these shoes were a little loose on his feet. They are more like 9.5 but he can still wear them. Since they are new and stiff, he can't say they are particularly comfortable right now as they need to be broken in.
Show37-
370(Results:
884)