Quoc Chelsea Boots review - a promising idea, sadly not great either on or off the bike

Like a sofa-bed, the Quoc Chelsea Boots are neither entirely comfortable nor functional

Image shows the Quoc Chelsea Boots
(Image credit: Future)
Cycling Weekly Verdict

The Quoc Chelsea Boots function as a shoe to cycle in, with their stiff soles. You can also walk in them, albeit somewhat awkwardly. They’re heavy, clunky and, to my eye, don’t look overly attractive. It’s a shame, as Quoc makes some lovely cycling shoes. But to my mind, this isn’t one of them.

Reasons to buy
  • +

    Water-resistant

  • +

    Stiff soles

Reasons to avoid
  • -

    Hefty price

  • -

    Heavy shoe

  • -

    Not quite one thing or the other

  • -

    Clunky

  • -

    Awkward to walk in

Why you can trust Cycling Weekly Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

The humble Chelsea boot is way more than indie fashion, certainly for cycling brand Quoc, who have created this commuter-friendly boot. At first glance, you probably wouldn’t think anything too much of it – a reasonably subtle-looking cycling shoe disguised as a boot – but when you look at it a little bit more, you start to wonder whether one shoe can really have two such distinct functions. 

They are designed for the fashion-conscious commuter who wants to keep their costume changes minimum and have a casual, laid-back commute to the office. What I found with these boots, though, is that of many things designed to be two things - like sofa beds - they’re not entirely comfortable or functional, one way or the other. 

Image shows the Quoc Chelsea Boots

(Image credit: Future)

While the Quoc Chelsea boot comes close, the design lets it down just a little; the sole is thick and bulky, looking more like a work boot than anything else. The two pink straps at the top of the shoes are there to make putting on the boots a little easier, but they do feel a bit much – those tabs really don't need to be quite so large and flappy to achieve the same effect.

The soles feel similarly overblown, too. They really quite thick and, in combination with their rigidity (which I'll get onto further down), the Quoc Chelsea boots feel distinctly clunky and awkward.   

Quoc Chelsea Boots: construction

Image shows the Quoc Chelsea Boots

(Image credit: Future)

Made from suede, the front is waxed and provides a two-tone look which also serves to protect your feet on drizzly days and from the road spray of your front wheel and occasional puddle. The outsole is made from a cork-infused rubber, which Quoc say is more sustainable than the widely used Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate, or EVA, rubber soles. 

The best commuter cycling shoes need to perform well on and off the bike - and so how well do the Quoc's perform in these two contrasting situations? Well, the inner sole of the Quoc's is super stiff, perfect for cycling, and not so perfect if you’re walking around the office or pub. Your foot tends to roll as you walk instead of bending at your toes like a shoe. The functionality of a cycling shoe has overtaken the function of an actual shoe. This is slightly odd. You’re likely walking in them more than riding your bike. 

Image shows the Quoc Chelsea Boots

(Image credit: Future)

There is also a series of reflective dots on the heel of each boot which make up a stripe for extra visibility. Then there is the weight; these size 10’s weighed 557g per shoe, without cleats. That’s a heavy shoe! 

Quoc Chelsea Boots: the ride

The Quoc Chelsea Boots perform perfectly fine on flat pedals and SPD cleats, too. I’d imagine people would use them more on flat pedals, though, as they’d likely want to walk without tapping across the floor. The stiff sole provides excellent resistance to the pedal stroke, ensuring you get the most out of each turn of the crank. 

Being made of suede, they’re not the most breathable shoe, but again, I’d see these as an Autumn/Winter boot that would protect your feet from the elements. However, if they don’t breathe too well, after one year of use, they may end up a bit whiffy and consider the $180 / £180 outlay, which might be too much. This leads us nicely on to… 

Quoc Chelsea Boots: value and conclusion

Image shows the Quoc Chelsea Boots

(Image credit: Future)

I’m struggling with the price of these boots. I’d want to feel comfortable on an evening out. They’re clunky and not the best-looking shoes. 

On the flip side, if I spent $180 / £180 on cycling shoes, I’d expect them to be breathable, which these aren’t. They are, however, stiff and warm, which is what I’d expect from a winter cycling shoe. 

Comparing them to the more trainer-style shoes, such as the Adidas Velosamba ($120.00 / £100.00), is almost like comparing apples and oranges, as they’re completely different styles. Still, we can see that they suffer similar fates. A stiff sole makes them tricky to walk in, and as you’ll likely be spending most of your day walking than commuting, this is something to bear in mind. 

If you want something which is a bit more trainer-like and a bit easier to walk in, then the Shimano AM5 ($115.00 / £79.99) and Fizik Gravita ($149.99 / £134.99) are still cheaper than the Quoc Chelsea boot, and these impressed. 

I can assume the price is slightly inflated because they’re two things in one. 

Like when Homer Simpson designed a car, he tried to put everything into one, which turned out to be a bit of a disaster. While the Quoc Chelsea Boot is far from a disaster as it does function as both, it doesn’t function as well as you’d like them to. 

Thank you for reading 10 articles this month* Join now for unlimited access

Enjoy your first month for just £1 / $1 / €1

*Read 5 free articles per month without a subscription

Join now for unlimited access

Try first month for just £1 / $1 / €1

Myles Warwood is a cycling journalist, automotive journalist and videographer. He writes for Cycling Weekly, Cyclist and Car magazine.