driftwoody
Trail Wise!
Take the path closer to the edge, especially if less traveled
Posts: 15,002 
|
Post by driftwoody on Oct 14, 2016 10:36:35 GMT -8
I've always worn waterproof mid-height boots, but I'm seriously considering switching to breathable low-cut trail runners -- the arguments being that less weight on the feet with every step equates to less fatigue; ankle support is more a matter of a stable heel cup and strong ankles than than boot material around the ankles; and it's better to let your feet get wet with shoes that dry quickly than to rely on waterproofing that will inevitably fail with boots that make your feet sweat and take forever to dry after they get wet.
I understand that fit, fit, fit, are the three most important factors when selecting footwear, but aside from that there are other considerations such as: - How much protection is needed for rugged terrain (both under foot and in the upper)
- Stability for rugged trails (as opposed to shoes designed primarily for road running)
- What kind of lugs are best for muddy conditions
- Heel drop
Given all the above, I would like to hear experiences and recommendations from members who've backpacked significant miles in varied terrain and conditions with this kind of footwear.
|
|
crawford
Trail Wise!
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.--Edison
Posts: 1,775
|
Post by crawford on Oct 14, 2016 10:51:46 GMT -8
I've always worn the ankle high boots, but this year tried out something a little different. I used running shoes (not designed for road running) on a short trek that worked very well. I am now in the market for low-cut trail runners as well.
What I learned is: the less weight was fantastic, the very breathable (and quick drying) mesh was fantastic, they provided solid protection for my feet (though the sole extended behind the back of my heel slightly and that is an option I will absolutely avoid), and a good insole might be required. On very rocky trail I had a few incidents of pain in my arch as my foot center punched small (3") triangular rocks sticking up in the trail. That can be uncomfortable in a variety of shoes, but was particularly painful with the runners on. I will look for a shoe that is only slightly stiffer than my running shoes. I also learned that an extremely aggressive tread wasn't needed. A moderate tread, like my runners, worked just fine. With the flexibility of the shoe I think the tread cleared itself a little faster as I walked, in comparison to my current boot.
Not sure if this helps much.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntpenca on Oct 14, 2016 10:57:18 GMT -8
I've hiked in trail runners for 30+ years, both on and off trail. I even wear them in snow with microspikes if necessary. My ankles are strong and don't need the support boots provide. In fact, I find the trail runners put less stress on my knees over boots. If your ankles are strong, give it a go.
edit: if you are having issues with rocks, just be more careful with foot placement.
|
|
daveb
Trail Wise!
Posts: 589
|
Post by daveb on Oct 14, 2016 11:01:49 GMT -8
I tried both gearing up for our Teton hike. I found that I was happy with trail runners without a pack. Once I added the loaded pack on my back I much preferred my boots after a couple of miles. Granted this was on flat ground but my boots were most comfortable once I was loaded and not as comfortable without the added weight of a backpack.
I suspect if you do go trail runners despite the comfortable running insole that comes with them, if you load up a pack, you may want to replace the insoles with a more supportive insole rather than the running insole.
|
|
zeke
Trail Wise!
Peekaboo slot 2023
Posts: 9,886
|
Post by zeke on Oct 14, 2016 11:09:51 GMT -8
I have stopped wearing my boots for about 5 years now. I wear a good shoe with a solid lug sole. My first ones were Columbia, then 2 pr of Treksta. I am waiting on my Trekstas to die so I can see what else is on the market. Montrail offers some that look good to me, but I have yet to hold a pair in my hand or try them on.
ETA: My pack is usually less than 35# for a 6 day trip, & I hope it never again crosses 40.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntpenca on Oct 14, 2016 11:14:18 GMT -8
I've had good luck with New Balance trail runners; they just fit well. edit: have had no problems with trail runners and a fully loaded pack up to 65 pounds. The 65 pounds is a bear in itself.  |
|
|
|
Post by JRinGeorgia on Oct 14, 2016 12:03:47 GMT -8
Yes to trail runners. I found boots are overkill and much too heavy for my needs. Trail runners dry much faster. Old saying: a pound on the feet is like five pounds on the back.
|
|
markskor
Trail Wise!
Mammoth Lakes & Tuolumne Meadows...living the dream
Posts: 651
|
Post by markskor on Oct 14, 2016 12:04:29 GMT -8
Depends... Fifteen - twenty years ago, High Sierra, heavy Vasque waffle-stompers usually left the footprints under my 40 pound Gregory Shasta. After dropping some serious coinage, losing 15 pounds pack weight in the process, still preferred lightweight "mid boots" - IE - Lowe Renegades ($250) for my extended adventures...ten days - typically ~ 30 - 35 pounds carried, but usually off-trail, fishing. BTW, while super comfortable, right out of the box, these well-touted boots only lasted 400 - 500 miles before total failure...sent back to Lowe...was informed that these boots not meant for use off-trail...  Nowadays, have mixed shoe options depending on destination and trip duration - still always be fishing though: On trail, less than 30 pounds up, 2 - 7 days out...Trailrunners much preferred. BTW, like the Brooks Cascadias ($140)...Solomons too. However, even both these well-made shoe brands only last that same 500 miles. Off trail, 10 - 14+ days out, and ~35+ pounds carried - really like Merrell's Moab Ventilators mids - non gore tex ($125)...light, dry fast, Vibram soles...feels more secure/safer than Trailrunners when extended talus hopping. Once again though, 500 miles is their limit too. Bottom line - while agree fit is always the first priority...(everything else is second)...today, both boots and trailrunners are seemingly made to be disposable (sigh)...one, maybe two years tops and hopefully 500 miles. Realize this and buy accordingly...Why spend $250 for footwear that's not going to last anyway? |
|
talus
Trail Wise!
Posts: 560
|
Post by talus on Oct 14, 2016 12:37:30 GMT -8
I've really never backpacked in boots unless there was snow on the ground. I've had luck with Montrail products but they keep discontinuing the shoes that I liked so I've switched to Saconys. I'm currently using 2 different shoes both with a 4mm drop: the Xodus and the Perregrine. The Xodus has a very protective bottom with a Vibram sole. The Perregrine is similar but has a lighter and more flexible sole. One thing to watch: transition to a lower drop gradually, or you might have Achilles issues. Aggressive lugs are needed in mud, but tend to slide more on slippery hard surfaces-I'd try to get something that is most suited to the typical conditions you hike in.
|
|
|
|
Post by CompassRds on Oct 14, 2016 13:11:48 GMT -8
I have been out of boots (save some deep winter hikes) for over a decade, as most boots I've tried just don't seem to accommodate 13-4E feet and tear me up above the 12 miles/day/35lb+ pack level.
I've sometimes used New Balance trail-runners.
(edit: As to your specific concerns, protection, stability, lugs for mud, heel drop... I hate to say it but as you transition from boots to shoes I think that is likely going to be up to you. There was a transition period where I ended up with a few bruises on the bottoms of my feet and a lost a few toenails in rough terrain. I never really noticed a problem with mud or any changes I would associate with heel drop. But then again I started the transition when I was 30.)
|
|
rebeccad
Trail Wise!
Writing like a maniac
Posts: 12,685 
|
Post by rebeccad on Oct 14, 2016 16:25:42 GMT -8
My sons backpack in trail runners, or even regular running shoes. I use a boot that is just slightly heavier, not for the ankle support (I don't think it makes much difference, given how often I twist an ankle), but for the thicker and heavier sole. And the only reason I want that is because of my foot issues. So I'd think that if you have healthy feet, and pay attention to your footing, trail runners would be fine.
On reflection, I also like my boots because that higher top means my heel slips less, which means I don't wear out the lining in the first 3 miles.
|
|
daveg
Trail Wise!
Michigan
Posts: 565
|
Post by daveg on Oct 14, 2016 20:44:08 GMT -8
I have a variety of footwear for different conditions, including two pairs of trail runners -- New Balance 411 All Terrain and Inov-8 Roclite 295. I bought the Roclites specifically for trips when I expected to encounter wet rock because they have a sticky outsole. The outsole is lugged so it also functions well on other surfaces.
I recently wore my Roclites on a 190 mile trip which included every type of surface but was mostly very rocky. They did an excellent job. Grippy, comfortable, durable, good ventilation, dried reasonably quickly, and light weight. (I wear a size 14 shoe. My pair of Roclites weighs 25.2 ounces.) The only potential problem I had was late in the hike (at about the 150 mile point) when I did a 14 mile day, the first 10 of which were climbing up and down and walking on nothing but rock. I had not experienced any problems up to then but at the end of that day I had hot spots on the balls of both feet. I applied several strips of paper surgical tape to the balls of my feet and no blisters ever developed.
I weigh 155 pounds and my pack weight on this trip was a max of 30 pounds. I don't know how well the Roclites would perform for heavier weights. Heel drop is 6mm which was fine for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Freestone on Oct 15, 2016 5:38:57 GMT -8
Trail runners for me, and as already noted, brand does not seem to matter, they all last about the same, 500 miles or one season, whichever comes first. I do however, have a pair of Zamberlan low-cut leather trail shoes that refuse to wear out, and when the soles finally do, will get them resoled. Even with those, my go to shoe is still the modern well made trail runner that fits my bunioned feet the best.
I only do low cuts now and avoid Gortex. I backpack to fish, and most of the fishing I do is off trail on rock bound lakes and streams, so when hopping rocks, I need as much ankle mobility as possible and the ability to make quick foot adjustments if something under foot suddenly becomes wobbly. For me, an unbounded ankle joint is essential to nimbleness on the trail.
One rant...Trailrunners drying out quickly is sometimes over stated. If you get your shoes wet at the end of the day, chances are, they will not be dry until after a couple of trail hours the next day, so for that reason I still bring camp slippers.
|
|
toejam
Trail Wise!
Hiking to raise awareness
Posts: 1,795
|
Post by toejam on Oct 16, 2016 19:23:35 GMT -8
I swore by boots for ankle protection for a long time, but when I switched to low-cuts it was really liberating. I've used several kinds, but my Salomon X Ultra 2 are my favorite. Good toe & sole protection and rugged tread (XA Pro 3D soles wore out fast). These are tough enough for talus and off trail. I've had Asics and LaSportiva shoes that didn't provide adequate protection. Your results will vary, but you can find deals.
Once you head off into the mountains in running shoes you'll be convinced.
|
|
Hungry Jack
Trail Wise!
Living and dying in 3/4 time...
Posts: 3,809
|
Post by Hungry Jack on Oct 16, 2016 19:31:03 GMT -8
How about cheap Adidas shower shoes?
I had trouble with some new Oboz on the first day of a 3 nighter at Pix Rox. My feet were pretty raw. I decided to wear my camp shoes, which were a light pair of plasticky rubber slides, the rest of the trip. I wore them with socks. My feet felt great. Thes e slides had thick soles, and the shoreline trail at Pix Rox is mostly sand and dirt, and quite flat. I will almost certainly hike in sandals next I do a summer trip in similar terrain.
|
|
