| Customers Ratings/Reviews (Number of Reviews: 6) Overall:  Comfort: Look: | Read Reviews Below! |
| ||
88% of Fit Survey respondents said this shoe "Felt true to width"
88% of Fit Survey respondents said this shoe had "No arch support"
Customer Rating/Review
Stuart Weitzman Mocnroll
Number of reviews: 6
Average customer ratings:
Overall:
Comfort: Look: 
2009-10-09 08:53:41 Stuart Weitzman Mocnroll
Reviewer: Anonymous from Chicago, IL, USA
Overall:
Comfort:
Look:Beautiful shoe. I bought the bordeaux color and it is a really pretty shade that can go with red, wine, or burgundy colors. Quite comfy, took little break in time. I have worn these only a few times so far, but have gotten multiple complements every time I have!
2009-09-03 10:46:27 Stuart Weitzman Mocnroll
Reviewer: Anonymous from Manhattan NY, USA
Overall:
Comfort:
Look:Shoe Size: Felt a full size smaller than marked
Shoe Width: Felt narrower than marked
Shoe Arch: No arch support
Weirdly cramped toe box. 3 seconds on and I could tell these were definitely going back, pronto. The toe box fit is just plain weird, too small and way too uncomfortable. Too bad; I really liked the color.
2009-01-06 13:35:50 Stuart Weitzman Mocnroll
Reviewer: Anonymous from Boston, MA, USA
Overall:
Comfort:
Look:Shoe Size: Felt true to size
Shoe Width: Felt true to width
Shoe Arch: No arch support
Beautiful shoe but unflattering! This shoe was lovely, well made, and attractive in the box. However, once on, the shoes made my toe area look narrow and the rest of my feet look huge and almost puffy. Too bad, they were comfortable, too. I will return.
2008-11-10 03:15:45 Stuart Weitzman Mocnroll
Reviewer: Anonymous
Overall:
Comfort:
Look:Shoe Size: Felt true to size
Shoe Width: Felt wider than marked
Shoe Arch: No arch support
Stuart Weitzman, what happened? I had only opened the box when it became clear that I would have to return this shoe. First, the smoke color is more blue, than gray. That's okay because I could use another blue loafer/flat. I was disappointed, however, when I looked inside the shoe. It's simply not as well crafted as other Weitzman shoes and the insole was curling up at the edges. As for fit, there is no arch support whatsoever and the shoe is so low-cut in the back that both with and without the orthotics that I wear in almost all of my shoes, my hell slipped out. Finally, on the foot, this shoe is just unattractive. I have a narrow foot, but in this, it looked like I had big, fat sausages at the ends of my feet.
2008-11-09 12:11:36 Stuart Weitzman Mocnroll
Reviewer: Ks from Houston, TX, USA
Overall:
Comfort:
Look:Shoe Size: Felt true to size
Shoe Width: Felt true to width
Shoe Arch: Moderate arch support
Leather is soft as butter! I usually wear mules as a comfort shoe - but everyone is wearing flats this season, so I tried these. The "mocnrolls" were comfortable from the first day - love the elastic back. (Although I don't see how they can advertise these as mules when you press down the backs. I tried it and it just looks like I am stepping on the back of my shoe!) They are true to size - not too narrow like some of the pointier SW styles. My only complaint is there is very little arch support, so I added a small removable arch and now they are perfect for lots of running around town. Very beautiful and expensive looking. These might just be my favorite SW shoes yet!
2008-10-23 20:11:24 Stuart Weitzman Mocnroll
Reviewer: Anonymous from Ohio, USA
Overall:
Comfort:
Look:Shoe Size: Felt a half size smaller than marked
Shoe Width: Felt true to width
Shoe Arch: No arch support
These shoes look more like flats than loafers. They do not fit as generously as many of the other styles in Stuart Weitzman casual shoe line, which I can wear. The toe boxes are very short and as such, simply don't work for my feet at all. The vamp is shorter as well. As nicely as the shoes are made, I must return them because they are not comfortable. The only nice feature to me is the soft elastic back on the shoes, which stretches comfortably as you walk.
Top
 |