Welcome to the AppalachianTrailCafe.net!
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation

Shoes vs boots?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Shoes vs boots?

      Much of my recent reading is pointing me in the direction of trail tennis shoes over boots. Obviously boots offer more ankle protection, but I have worn tennis shoes comfortably my whole life, less so with boots.

      Can you guys share your preferences and why it's the one over the other? Or if my search sucked (as sometimes they obviously do :p ) , link me to some good, high-quality reading? Thanks!
      www.appalachiantrailclarity.com - Life on the A.T.

      Sometimes you find yourself in the middle of nowhere, and sometimes in the middle of nowhere, you find yourself.

    • I'm really tempted to go that route myself too. I hadn't even considered it until I started reading how common it was. A newbie thought I always had was boots were kind of a necessity for long-distance hiking. I love me some tennis shoes!
      www.appalachiantrailclarity.com - Life on the A.T.

      Sometimes you find yourself in the middle of nowhere, and sometimes in the middle of nowhere, you find yourself.

    • Conventional wisdom has been turned on its head. When I started hiking in the 1970s, almost all "serious" hikers wore heavy leather boots. The change was gradual, and now it's been reversed. Leather boots are not entirely gone, but they are very rare among thru-hikers or serious section hikers.

      In reality the only boot that can "support" your ankles is a ski boot, and you can't actually walk in those very effectively. So the whole idea of ankle support is kind of a joke. Your feet need to flex at the ankle, or else walking is impossible.

      The boot that most serious hikers wear now is called a "trail runner" -- basically running shoes, but with extra-firm soles and aggressive treads.

      Leather boots, properly waxed, may keep your feet dry for a day or more in non-stop rain and wet trail. BUT -- they will eventually soak through, sooner or later. And when that happens, they stay wet, and when the sun finally shines again, they take a looong time to dry out. With tennis shoes or trail runners, you get wet when the trail is wet, but your shoes dry out much more quickly.

      My feet are much happier in trail runners. I gave up hiking in leather boots about 15 years ago.

    • That's the impression I'm getting the more and more I read on the subject. I hate boots, and I've always hated the limited flexibility in my ankles. I'm leaning toward some trail runners. What kind of socks do you prefer with yours? Synthetic, wool"? Padded?
      www.appalachiantrailclarity.com - Life on the A.T.

      Sometimes you find yourself in the middle of nowhere, and sometimes in the middle of nowhere, you find yourself.

    • twistwrist wrote:

      That's the impression I'm getting the more and more I read on the subject. I hate boots, and I've always hated the limited flexibility in my ankles. I'm leaning toward some trail runners. What kind of socks do you prefer with yours? Synthetic, wool"? Padded?


      Very thin wool
      Sometimes you will never know the value of a moment until it becomes a memory.
      Dr. Seuss Cof123

    • I used to wear Vasque Clarion boots at home, to work, and to hike in.
      Then A few years back I switched to shoes. or trail runners, or whatever they are called.
      I've found that the Oboz brand fits my feet really well.

      Now I reserve the boots for hiking in snow or when I suspect there might be a lot of mud.

    • Here's a side by side comparison of my new trail runners vs regular running shoes. The LaSportiva's are more like low-top hiking boots. They are stiff and come up too high on my ankle, causing friction on the backs of my ankles and putting uncomfortable pressure on the side of my left one. Too bad I didn't realize that before I wore them. I also ran in them for about a mile and they felt clunky. The only thing I like better than my Sauconys is the toe protection. I've looked at a lot of trail runners and IMO, these are made more for the hiker than the runner and shouldn't be in the "trail running" category.
      Images

      • image.jpg

        1.51 MB, 2,692×1,534, viewed 487 times

      • image.jpg

        1.12 MB, 2,048×1,756, viewed 477 times
      Lost in the right direction.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Traffic Jam ().

    • This is what AK and I use.

      newbalance.com/pd/new-balance-…=Black_with_Grey_and_Blue

      They come in women's too.

      newbalance.com/pd/new-balance-…tml#color=Black_with_Pink Glo_and_Neon Yellow

      They are only good for about 300 miles in rough hiking. They might last longer down there. :D

      Here is a video. Toss the insoles and get green superfeet.



      Regardless of the shoe, use this stuff.... every day. Put it on in the morning as you put your socks on.

      bodyglide.com/products/skin-glide/


      Non hikers are about a psi shy of a legal ball.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by BirdBrain ().

    • jimmyjam wrote:

      hey TJ if they came from REI take them back and try something different. I took my Brooks Cascadias back after they started falling apart after 60 miles and got some Vasques.


      Thanks for the suggestion! I bought them from backcountry, not REI, and assumed they wouldn't take them back. I just called and they're going to exchange them or give me store credit . gif.014.gif
      I won't be exchanging them, I've learned my lesson about mail ordering shoes.

      BTW, REI is opening a store in Knoxville this month.
      Lost in the right direction.

    • LIhikers wrote:

      I used to wear Vasque Clarion boots at home, to work, and to hike in.
      Then A few years back I switched to shoes. or trail runners, or whatever they are called.
      I've found that the Oboz brand fits my feet really well.

      Now I reserve the boots for hiking in snow or when I suspect there might be a lot of mud.


      I used the same logic on my first "dog thru"... I wore Vasque Sundowner's every day building Golf Courses in Florida, 16hr days, 6 days a week, in rain, mud, muck... The were comfortable, extremely durable, and if you keep them covered in "Bear Grease" almost waterproof(they had one piece uppers) I sill have a pair, but only use them now for any type of snow activity... I am a big fan of Solomon's, the XD version, just fit me perfectly, and here in NE PA, they are awesome on the boulder fields...
      1 Fish, 2 Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish...

    • twistwrist wrote:

      Much of my recent reading is pointing me in the direction of trail tennis shoes over boots. Obviously boots offer more ankle protection, but I have worn tennis shoes comfortably my whole life, less so with boots.

      Can you guys share your preferences and why it's the one over the other? Or if my search sucked (as sometimes they obviously do :P ) , link me to some good, high-quality reading? Thanks!


      I used to think I needed the ankle support but once I tried hiking in running shoes, I realized it didn't make a difference. I also found that stream crossings were easier and in general I had less slips and falls. And I second Birdbrain's recommendation to use Body Glide on your feet.
      Lost in the right direction.

    • TrafficJam wrote:

      Are there sections of the AT that trail runners aren't appropriate?


      That probably depends on your feet and how much weight they are carrying.
      Maybe northern PA thru southern NJ due to the rocks that don't give you much of a surface.
      Even if you don't find it uncomfortable those rocks will probably shorten the life of any shoe or boot.
      How much? Who knows.

    • LIhikers wrote:

      TrafficJam wrote:

      Are there sections of the AT that trail runners aren't appropriate?


      That probably depends on your feet and how much weight they are carrying.
      Maybe northern PA thru southern NJ due to the rocks that don't give you much of a surface.
      Even if you don't find it uncomfortable those rocks will probably shorten the life of any shoe or boot.
      How much? Who knows.


      I have heard from a few that it is rough out there. I wonder how it compares to the Whites. Obviously I don't mean elevation change. I am just curious about the footing.
      Non hikers are about a psi shy of a legal ball.

    • BirdBrain wrote:

      jimmyjam wrote:

      TrafficJam wrote:

      Are there sections of the AT that trail runners aren't appropriate?


      not on the 450 miles my feet have seen. anyone else?


      They have been fine through Maine and New Hampshire.


      I started out on the AT with hiking boots I was already using as a scout leader. Next section switched to Merrill hiking shoes. For the past two summers I have been in trail runners, and do not see myself going back. They are lighter, more comfortable and dry much faster. On the downside they are not as durable (but also not as expensive).

      As for socks I started out with ylon inner and wool outer, but now just thin wool (Darn Tough have been good for me).
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General

    • LIhikers wrote:

      TrafficJam wrote:

      Are there sections of the AT that trail runners aren't appropriate?


      That probably depends on your feet and how much weight they are carrying.
      Maybe northern PA thru southern NJ due to the rocks that don't give you much of a surface.
      Even if you don't find it uncomfortable those rocks will probably shorten the life of any shoe or boot.
      How much? Who knows.


      That's right in my backyard... In the last year and a half, I have hiked PC to Allentown, NOBO and SOBO many times, day hiked the Pinnacle and Pulpit MANY more times, either from where the AT crosses Hawk Mountain road (SOBO) or from the Reservoir gate, where the road crosses Furnace Creek and pick up the AT there (NOBO) over the Pulpit then the Pinnacle... Still wearing my same Solomon's, and none the worst for wear... The traction and "feel" I get going thru those boulder fields in my shoes is important to me, deff gives me more confidence than clunky, heavy boots ever could... Plus, my Leki's help a little :whistling: ...
      Images

      • P1000064.JPG

        4.72 MB, 3,968×2,232, viewed 454 times

      • P1000073.JPG

        4.55 MB, 3,968×2,232, viewed 474 times
      1 Fish, 2 Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish...

    • I've done both places.
      The rocks in northern PA are small. in relation to those in the Whites, and have sharp edges that you are often walking on. That means that your entire weight is on a small amount of square inches instead of large areas of your foot, as in the Whites. So each square inch carries a lot of weight.

    • this is something i've been wondering about.

      except for virginia and maine, i wore mid weight boots with a vibram sole on my thru.

      i had no feet issues during or after my hike,

      from what i've read on the internet, many thrus are complaining about foot pain at the end of their trip.

      i have switched to trail runners. will i notice a difference on the pennsylvainia rocks? i don't know, but i can't wait to find out. (my guess, of course, is that i will. the question is how much.)
      2,000 miler

    • max.patch wrote:

      this is something i've been wondering about.

      except for virginia and maine, i wore mid weight boots with a vibram sole on my thru.

      i had no feet issues during or after my hike,

      from what i've read on the internet, many thrus are complaining about foot pain at the end of their trip.

      i have switched to trail runners. will i notice a difference on the pennsylvainia rocks? i don't know, but i can't wait to find out. (my guess, of course, is that i will. the question is how much.)


      On occasion I have wore my Montrail Fluid Form TR's, and the soles are deff too thin for the rocks in that section, and offer VERY little toe protection, but when I'm with someone new, it is easier because the pace is slow, I only have a small day pack(Camelbak Octane) and its more rock hopping, than hiking... The XD's have a much tougher sole, and excellent toe protection... I have yet to come home with sore feet :D ...
      1 Fish, 2 Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish...

    • I started out wearing leather hiking boots, 12 miles was a long day and it didn't take much of an incline to get me breathing hard. I switched to trail runners and the first time out I noticed that hills that hurt me with boots didn't make me breath hard with trail runners. I'd rather do a 20 mile day in trail runners than a 12 mile day with boots. They work much better in wet conditions also because they dry out quickly.
      I may grow old but I'll never grow up.

    • LIhikers wrote:

      I used to wear Vasque Clarion boots at home, to work, and to hike in.
      Then A few years back I switched to shoes. or trail runners, or whatever they are called.
      I've found that the Oboz brand fits my feet really well.

      Now I reserve the boots for hiking in snow or when I suspect there might be a lot of mud.


      Yep, had a few pair of the Vasque over the years and man were they comfortable. I too am onboard with the OBOZ these days (actually past couple of years) they fit me very well, the only change I make is to switch out the insoles.

    • twistwrist wrote:

      Day off tomorrow means a ride into Atlanta to REI! I'm really psyched hearing how much more comfortable most of you find trail shoes as opposed to cumbersome boots. Awesome!


      Be careful on what you buy. REI is a great store. My comment is not directed at them. It is easy to buy gear and then buy better and then buy better. I do not know a great way to avoid that. It is hard to know what will work for you until you try it. In general, the big 4 (pack, tent, sleeping bag, and pad/mattress) are the most important and expensive decisions you will make. Choose wisely or end up like me (weighing everything and fretting over grams).
      Non hikers are about a psi shy of a legal ball.

    • hikerboy wrote:

      my lasportivas last an average of 500 miles before the midsole starts breaking down. for a thru hike you'd need at least 4 pair. some people finish the whole trail with the same pair of "heavier"boots. army ant switched shoes 11times during the course of his hike.

      I heard there was a section in Maine where his shoes never touched the ground. :)
      Changes Daily→ ♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ ♪♫♪♫♪♫ ← Don't blame me. It's That Lonesome Guitar.

    • hikerboy wrote:

      my lasportivas last an average of 500 miles before the midsole starts breaking down. for a thru hike you'd need at least 4 pair. some people finish the whole trail with the same pair of "heavier"boots. army ant switched shoes 11times during the course of his hike.


      That is about double the mileage I am getting on my New Balance 610's. With all the side peaks I am taking in on my slow stroll, I have worn out 2 pair and travelled 500 miles. I am hoping one pair gets me through the Long Trail next year. I am also hoping my mileage goes up some now that I am away from the top 2 states.
      Non hikers are about a psi shy of a legal ball.

    • BirdBrain wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      my lasportivas last an average of 500 miles before the midsole starts breaking down. for a thru hike you'd need at least 4 pair. some people finish the whole trail with the same pair of "heavier"boots. army ant switched shoes 11times during the course of his hike.


      That is about double the mileage I am getting on my New Balance 610's. With all the side peaks I am taking in on my slow stroll, I have worn out 2 pair and travelled 500 miles. I am hoping one pair gets me through the Long Trail next year. I am also hoping my mileage goes up some now that I am away from the top 2 states.


      you're doing it wrong!!!
      its all good

    • I went to REI today to check out trail runners and they sold me on these: rei.com/product/828400/merrell…proof-hiking-boots-womens

      Due to their liberal return policy, I bought them and plan to do a day hike soon to test them out. Reviews are ok, but there is some dissatisfaction from some folks. I also bought some Superfeet insoles and some wool/spandex socks.
      I spent hours in the store, tried out some packs, perused sleeping items, and spent WAY too long testing out shoes.

      Anyone else have the day off today?
      www.appalachiantrailclarity.com - Life on the A.T.

      Sometimes you find yourself in the middle of nowhere, and sometimes in the middle of nowhere, you find yourself.

    • twistwrist wrote:

      Waterproof seems like it would be a "must" when choosing hiking shoes/boots, right? The crappy thing is when feet sweat, I bet these guys take forever to dry.

      waterproof is fine for short day hikes or short multiday hikes, but for distance, you find that they just never dry out, and add a pound of extra water weight to your feet day after day after day. i wear waterproof shoes when im doing short sections i know will be wet.
      its all good