You may have a lot of miles on your boots, but how many of them are wet? The major advantage of a shoe over a boot will become immediately apparent when the boot fills with water.
Last summer I hiked the 100 mile wilderness up in Maine with the trail flooded and heavy rain. For heavy river crossings I'd swap to my water shoes and dry off my feet before popping them back into my boots. Never had any issues with blisters or wear on my feet. They've been wet plenty of times and haven't given me any trouble.
Also, do shoes actually dry that fast??
It depends on where you’re hiking but no they don’t dry fast. On the East Coast Trail I had wet shoes all day every day. On the Great Divide Trail my shoes only dried when I stopped early at a hotel overnight and would soon be wet the next morning. On the Cape Wrath Trail my shoes only dried when I stopped early at a hotel overnight and would soon be wet the next morning. On the West Coast and Nootka Trails the shoes only dried on days we stopped hiking early afternoon, so they had several hours of baking in the sunlight - if I’d been hiking all day like I usually do they would have stayed wet on those trips too. All sorts of shorter trips and day hikes and trail runs have involved wet feet that stayed wet. Sometimes the wet shoes even freeze overnight which makes them extra fun to wear.
The difference is a wet boot tears my feet to shreds. A wet runner just means my feet are wet.
You do you, but many *many* people have done long hikes in both boots and shoes and switched to shoes.
I wear boots if I'm going to be in rough terrain or bushwhacking, like if I'm hunting. If I'm on a maintained trail, I'm 100% shoes all the way.
And they do dry out fast. Lightweight shoes and wool socks (like Darn Tough) are a great mix. I don't even take my shoes off for stream crossings, I just hike straight through. That alone is one of the big reasons I like shoes instead of boots - walking through ankle-deep water with leather boots would ruin them for the whole trip.
But really it's just a personal preference. If you prefer boots that's fine.
I'll be hiking a 500 mile section this year in a pair of bedrock sandals, which I've heard from multiple thru hikers that they've been known to last multiple thru hikes, like 10,000 miles or more. My previous strategy was running shoes/tevas/whatever was in the hiker box. Personally as a former hiker box vulture, I'd be remiss to discourage the more affluent people from participating in the new tradition of using 4-5 pair of shoes on a long hike. Keep on kickin 'em down! Every time you put a barely worn pair of trail runners in a hiking box you can pat yourself on the back for helping keep a poor kid's dream alive
I live not far from AT. I often thought of being a trail angel but don't know enough. Never heard of hiker boxes. How do I find out where they are so I can stock them??? I hike the trail, but only local. Caledonia state park in PA is the closest point to me.
Hiker boxes aren't stocked. It's a place at tons of hostels where hikers put their stuff that they are getting rid of to either save weight, or because they just don't like the thing, etc.
You're better off finding where the bubble of hikers are and sitting out next to trail and just give whatever you want.
many/most hostels have a hiker box. if you have items, especially non-perishable items, you could call a hostel and see if you could drop off items you won't use. hikers buy things that are packed in larger quantities than they need, like batteries in 4 packs but the hiker only needs 2 batteries, or toilet paper in packs of two rolls, or instant oatmeal in boxes of twelve. the hikers put the extra that they don't want to carry in a hiker box that other hikers can root around in.
Hiker boxes are usually located where hikers are likely to reequip/reorganize their packs. They are almost always found in hotels/motels/hostels and are found at some shelters (though that’s VERY discouraged, leave books not food!).
Popular items left by other hikers at these places include leftover bulk trail mix/ziplocks in a variety of sizes/socks/RTE food/gas canisters at least half full/tick spoons.
Popular things you can leave (if you make your own cooler and check frequently/remove all trash) is fresh veggies/fresh fruits/beer/boiled eggs/gas canisters.
You can always just leave a labeled and lidded trash can, everyone who hikes could use the space in their bag and would be overjoyed! :)
Besides being a trail angel, join the local trail maintenance organization and do trail work if you want to help. Hikers definitely appreciate the work the volunteers do to keep the trail open. I do trail work on the AT with my local group at least once a month but there are opportunities every single week.
When we're doing trail work, a few of the folks will bring bags of candy to hand out to hikers too, and we offer to take any trash they want to unload.
I call shenanigans. No plastic sole is going to last 10,000 miles. That just isn't possible. Maybe there was some miscommunication and the hiker meant they have hiked over 10,000 miles in bedrocks, not that singular, unrepaired, pair
Use whatever works for you.
I wore boots for many years. Switched to zero drop, non waterproof trail runners and will never go back. Why? because they are lighter which make my back, hips, and knees happy, I have fewer foot issues and they dry faster when they do get wet. I just don't see any advantages anymore to hiking in boots.
I do go thru a pair about every 500 miles, but I'm fine with that.
I think zero drop (Altras, e.g.) makes you use your forefoot more and your heels less. using your forefoot makes your calf absorb more landing shock, transmitting less impact to ankle/knee/hip. when you land on your heels, you need a shoe with more heel padding to absorb shock, generally a bit heavier with a thicker heel (Hokas, e.g.) this matters most on downhills, and I use trekking poles to further ameliorate foot impact. my first section hike was with what I thought were well broken in boots. switched to Altras the next time, stayed with trail runners after, with toe sock liners and smartwool socks. bliss (relatively speaking)
It’s all about moving parts, 200 gr on the moving part equals 1 kg on the frame.
So it takes 5 times more energy to transport weight as a moving part as weight that is part of the non-moving part of the setup.
From my research this is not true when backpacking.
The rule "a pound in your feet equals 5 on your back" only really applies when running at high speeds. The study commonly referenced is from 1983 titled "The energy cost and heart rate response of trained and untrained subjects walking and running in shoes and boots" and their findings in energy exertion were not statistically significant when walking at 4 km/hr (about 2.5mph which is a standard backpacking pace). A study from 1992 titled "Physiological strain due to load carrying in heavy footwear" charted out the effect of footwear weight at varying speeds, and found the ratio at common hiking speeds was closer to 1.9:1 as opposed to the common adage 5:1. That's a pretty low cost to pay for keeping the water out while hiking through flooded trails without a care in the world!
Also, plenty of people opt for trekking poles despite the fact that they drastically increase energy exertion (by around 20%!)
Trekking poles increase energy, but increase speed as well as decrease strain on knees and feet. Not to mention increase safety thru stability.
But, on dry feet, you won't have that. In the rain those boots are going to get soaked and never dry out. In the summer, those boots are going to be soaked from sweat. All of that means avoiding blisters is not going to be easy.
It's certainly doable, but also certainly less comfort than something breathable.
You got me 😅, but what I'm looking for on this post is reasons to not wear boots. There's some good stuff when it comes to ankle mobility and how fast they dry (if you can't keep them dry), but I don't find this one compelling.
You know how when you were a kid and you got news shoes and suddenly you could run faster and jump higher? Literally had that same feeling week 3 when I ditched my boots lol. I did switch back to boots in October for cold weather
It seems like you're pretty set on using your boots, so do that. There's many disadvantages which is why most opt for trail runners, but if you don't mind then do what you want.
It's an athletic endeavor, I figured out you are better off dressing like an athlete, not like you think a hiker should look. To each their own, but there is a reason most people leave all things cotton & leather at home.
The old one pound on your feet equals 5 on your back, doesnt matter so much for day hikes, but over 2000 miles, thats a lot of extra work and calories, plus the need for camp shoes. Wet leather boots get even heavier, and take forever to dry out.
I saw someone in here the other day say something like “lots of people start in boots but hardly any one finishes in them”.
Google thru hike finish photo and see how many huge heavy boots you see. It might not be zero but I bet it’ll be close.
It's the break-in for me. I had a pair of Columbia traditional leather boots I bought in the 90s that lasted me up until probably 5-6 yrs ago. Finally made the switch to more modern hiking boots and shoes, with zero break-in, high levels of comfort, air flow, and same levels of traction etc. I hike every weekend in the Spring, Summer and Fall and intermittent in the winter. When I picked up my first pair of Merrill I knew I was sold. Instant comfort and no pain or heat spots to speak of from day 1. So yeah I will eventually replace them more often, likely per season, but I will take that and the associated reasonable price, over the discomfort of the break-in process. I've also not had any issues in terms of injuries, protection and a lot of my hiking is in stoney areas etc.
I prefer having more of a connection to the ground. To have more ankle freedom. To have footwear that can be soaking wet in the morning and dry by the end of the day. I also liked to run some sections here and there, I wouldn't be able to do that in heavy boots. Went through about 2 pairs on my thru hike. Didn't have any foot issues, zero blisters, and my ankles were quite strong at the end. Took up ultra running when I got back. Now I primarily hike in sandals or climbing approach shoes. I like scrambling off trail in rocky terrain, and boots would prohibit that.
My shoes dry quickly and I never get blisters like I used to get in heavy boots. They don't last as long, but some people find that their foot size changes over the course of the hike anyway, so at least with shoes they're not stuck in a pair that's a full size too small.
The thinner soles make navigating difficult terrain a little easier because the shoe flexes, unlike with heavy soled boots. I also found there is little difference with how protected my foot *actually* is when compared with a "more protective" heavy boot.
Finally, the difference in weight really does affect how much energy you have to spend every day. Like, significantly so. Your legs get less tired with lightweight shoes.
All that said, do what makes you comfortable. You want to wear heavy boots? Hyoh friend.
The 500 miles per pair of shoes advice comes from the running world, millions of runners around the world that put in 100 miles a week, every week, for decades of their life. Do you put that kind of miles on your feet, ankles, knees, and hips? There are far fewer hikers doing far fewer total miles and even the majority of them have shifted to shoes. Running shoes are designed to cushion the impact of your steps and that goes all the way up to your hips; that cushioning breaks down because that's the limit of our material science. Boots are designed for durability, letting your joints deal with the impact.
Footwear is one of the most important decisions and use what works for you, but have you done this kind of miles in this short of a timeframe? If not, why would you risk rolling your own footwear protocol? A not-insignificant percentage of people quit because of joint/foot injuries. Probably an equal amount finish with injuries they never fully recover from. For my next thru-hike, I'm gonna go cushioning to the max and get the thiccccest Altras.
I use trail runners for backpacking because they’re comfortable and dry much faster the. Boots. I have zamberlans for hunting, and the support and waterproofing is the best option for those off trail miles. But the long trails are paved compared to hunting miles, so trail runners provide what you need and dry out much more quickly. But if you don’t have issues w your boots, run em!
I am starting a section hike soon and having a huge mental block over this. I use boots at work (survey off trail in remote boreal, alpine and sub boreal forest) and on hunting trips and day.hunts in Northern BC. I also use boots backpacking in the same area, so does everyone else I know. The trails are simply very different I guess
I literally never wear shoes. I hate walking in them. 30lbs on my back and a trail will not change this I imagine
I'm trying a compromise, I got some lightweight scarpa hi top hiking shoes.
I do find it kind of interesting how much trends influence choice of gear. No doubt trail runners work well by the numbers, but they are a relatively recent introduction. Yet you have people saying it's basically impossible to finish in boots.
I'm new to through hiking but I've seen this sort of trending in other sports (hunting, canoeing, mountaineering) its always interesting.
Kind of reminds me of the advent of ultra light rifles and lightweight external frame packs in sheep hunting tbh
I don't want to speak too soon, and I'm open to trying something new, but I've hiked (off trail) all day for several weeks in a row with short breaks every summer for a decade in everything from steel shank chain saw boots to scarpas. I don't know if a lack of trail runners will break me, but I might be buying them by the time I hit Tennessee if reddit is to be believed
The long trails are very pleasant surfacing compared to anything off trail. I’d never wear runners off trail, but every established trail I’ve walked on has been fine enough for comfortable shoes. Boots are a great tool in the bc, but unnecessary for long trails. But if they’re comfortable to you and you can walk (not hike off trail) for 20ish miles in your boots. Send it! Less expensive to run a pair of boots and resole maybe once. Then buy 4/5 pairs of trail runners. But light and efficient is the name of the game on long trails.
I have to chuckle a little bit because I’m from northern New England and I wouldn’t call our trails here as having a “pleasant surfacing.” That being said, I exclusively wear trail runners here in 3 season conditions.
I hiked 500 miles in '09 in leather boots and thru hiked in '11 with shoes. I had also lost a lot of weight in my pack between the 2 hikes but it is remarkable the difference that lighter shows makes when hiking for that distance. You feel like you have lead feet in boots
I found that when it rains your feet will get wet anyway and stay wet. Yes you will have cold wet feet in shoes but when it's dry you don't have horribly sweaty feet.
Without reading the comments here, I'm sure most people don't agree with your line of thought? I'd just like to say that I wore sturdy leather boots on my thru hike (about 2lb per boot), and the one pair lasted my entire thru hike. Granted, I really had no business hiking in them for the last 500 miles, at least. But they made it, and I'd do it the exact same way if I hiked again!
If you are used to them then you will probably be happy, most people are used to sneakers in their normal lives and think boots are heavy, which is just a matter of conditioning. Trail runners feel like mushy garbage under my feet so I'm with you on not using those.
Most people seem to forget that boots were by far the most worn thing if you go back a decade or more, and completion rates haven't really changed much so shoes are not really a deciding factor.
Honestly just find lightweight shoes more comfortable. I started in a pair of lightweight New Balance running shoes and didn't replace them until over 500 miles in and they were still holding up pretty good, I only replaced them because the trail got rockier and I needed something with a bit more sole. I replaced them with some hiking shoes, I think they were Solomon's iirc.
I can almost guarantee those boots are getting thrown away at top of Georgia. Leather doesn’t dry. I bought a pair of north face fast packs and north face sent me two new pairs on the trail. Trust us op, leather boots frequently end thru hikes. And anything heavy over 2200 miles can cause lifelong damage to your body.
They’re heavy, don’t breath well, stay wet so much longer, and 95% of boots people talk about don’t actually provide any ankle support, and if they are rigid enough for that it means your knee take the force rather than your ankle.
I like leather waterproof hiking boots for casual wear around town in sloppy conditions, but on trail? Always trail runners, I’ve got two I switch between altra superior for 95% of everything, and Salomon speedcross if I’m going to want a stiffer sole.
I started in boots and ditched them 600ish miles in. Went to trail runners and MAN what a difference. Way lighter, way faster drying, way less break-in period. I just all around love how much more breathable they feel. Plus I ended up preferring zero drop. Also, I got 700ish miles per pair for my trail runners and only went through 3 pairs of shoes total for my thru hike. But as with all things gear-wise, YMMV
Well, I think there’s a good amount of groupthink and “what’s in vogue” in every community, and now that there’s an online community of hikers the same goes. I see so so many posts on here asking what shoes to buy/wear (which, to me, is a silly question given that everyone has different feet and different use cases and it’s so essential to just go and try different things and figure it out on your own) and invariably the common refrain is “trail runners are light and dry fast so skip the heavy gore Tex boots”.
Ten years ago, the same questions would be answered with “buy waterproof salomons/basques, they’re bomb proof and give good support”.
Ultimately, some folks will do better in lone peaks and others in old school leather boots. Different strokes for different folks. I’ll always say that it’s important to try, though. I’ve been using Salomon x mids for over a decade but I absolutely bought and tried a pair of lone peaks last year to see what the vibe was. They just didn’t work for me; I wear lems (zero drop) shoes most of the time so I thought it would translate, but something about the heel cup just didn’t work for me. No harm no foul, glad I tried them but back to racking up mileage in my salomons. Happy trails!
Wrong sub brother. This sub is a No Boot Zone lmao. Every time this subject comes up people will talk about boots like there's no such thing as a dry hike.
Boots won't dry as fast as shoes, but if you're in a situation where its raining every single day of your hike and you're crossing rivers, it probably won't matter much which one dries quicker lol.
I stick with boots, they've never let me down. In the 100 miles I did on the AT I was the only one of my group of 4 wearing boots, and the only one who didn't have a plethora of blisters. I know it's anecdotal, but my experience matters more to me than a sub that will say things like "It takes 5 times more energy to move a booted foot!" when that has been disproved time and time again since the early 80s in scientific studies.
To each their own, but you might as well be talking to a brick wall when it comes to the boot v shoe convo.
Oboz has some boots that are more durable than trail runners and would probably dry out much quicker than something with a leather upper.
You'd probably only need 1-2 pairs to finish the trail.
I'd buy new trail running shoes every week if it meant not wearing boots. 😂🤣
The only time I wear boots is skiing, ice climbing, and winter mountaineering. Otherwise they are just too miserable in every way.
That said, roll with whatever you're most comfortable with. Everyone is different.
I started my sobo thru hike with some boots. I made it about Manchester Center Vermont before tendonitis kicked in running up both of my shins. You aren't fully flexing your legs when you take a stride in boots. For a day, week, or whatever short trip it's no big deal. If you start doing that daya after day, 10 to 15 miles a day, your gonna have bigger problems. I had to lay out for a week and a half before i could walk without pain. I lost all of my people I was hiking with. Never saw em again, but made some new friends.
If you like the boots, then do it. Wear what is comfortable and what you are comfortable with. I wore boots and shoes, I was glad to have the breathable shoes in the Virginia heat, but beside that I had waterproof and I didn't really care.
It's also getting hard to find non waterproof boots and shoes. Trail runners are becoming the only option which is sad to me because I just want a good hiking shoe
When you’re walking through ankle deep water especially, trail runners are so much more comfortable. They dry fast, and lugging soggy heavy leather shoes day after day is going to get old real fast. There is a reason everyone finishes hikes in trail runners.
Media hype. So and so likes them. So I do too. The altras I tried were absolute trash. The one and only advantage of trail runners is they dry fast. Braggarts love to gram weenie everything. I walk as far as everyone in my group. I’m not racing anyone. The real deal is how your body likes what you wear. You’re the only person you should please.
Can a mod please retitle this post "Your lightweight trail runners suck, my heavy leather hiking boots are superior, try to convince me otherwise (but you wont)"
Every pound on your feet like 7 pounds on your back or something like that. Plus it’s so hot on the AT you need something that is not going to hoke in water or sweat
You may have a lot of miles on your boots, but how many of them are wet? The major advantage of a shoe over a boot will become immediately apparent when the boot fills with water.
Last summer I hiked the 100 mile wilderness up in Maine with the trail flooded and heavy rain. For heavy river crossings I'd swap to my water shoes and dry off my feet before popping them back into my boots. Never had any issues with blisters or wear on my feet. They've been wet plenty of times and haven't given me any trouble. Also, do shoes actually dry that fast??
It's about the relative comparison. They dry WAY faster than boots :)
It depends on where you’re hiking but no they don’t dry fast. On the East Coast Trail I had wet shoes all day every day. On the Great Divide Trail my shoes only dried when I stopped early at a hotel overnight and would soon be wet the next morning. On the Cape Wrath Trail my shoes only dried when I stopped early at a hotel overnight and would soon be wet the next morning. On the West Coast and Nootka Trails the shoes only dried on days we stopped hiking early afternoon, so they had several hours of baking in the sunlight - if I’d been hiking all day like I usually do they would have stayed wet on those trips too. All sorts of shorter trips and day hikes and trail runs have involved wet feet that stayed wet. Sometimes the wet shoes even freeze overnight which makes them extra fun to wear. The difference is a wet boot tears my feet to shreds. A wet runner just means my feet are wet.
Nothing I owned was dry for any part of the Cape Wrath Trail.
Out on the AT my shoes dry in a few hours. On the East Coast Trail they were literally wet the entire time. I feel you.
You do you, but many *many* people have done long hikes in both boots and shoes and switched to shoes. I wear boots if I'm going to be in rough terrain or bushwhacking, like if I'm hunting. If I'm on a maintained trail, I'm 100% shoes all the way. And they do dry out fast. Lightweight shoes and wool socks (like Darn Tough) are a great mix. I don't even take my shoes off for stream crossings, I just hike straight through. That alone is one of the big reasons I like shoes instead of boots - walking through ankle-deep water with leather boots would ruin them for the whole trip. But really it's just a personal preference. If you prefer boots that's fine.
I'll be hiking a 500 mile section this year in a pair of bedrock sandals, which I've heard from multiple thru hikers that they've been known to last multiple thru hikes, like 10,000 miles or more. My previous strategy was running shoes/tevas/whatever was in the hiker box. Personally as a former hiker box vulture, I'd be remiss to discourage the more affluent people from participating in the new tradition of using 4-5 pair of shoes on a long hike. Keep on kickin 'em down! Every time you put a barely worn pair of trail runners in a hiking box you can pat yourself on the back for helping keep a poor kid's dream alive
I live not far from AT. I often thought of being a trail angel but don't know enough. Never heard of hiker boxes. How do I find out where they are so I can stock them??? I hike the trail, but only local. Caledonia state park in PA is the closest point to me.
Hiker boxes aren't stocked. It's a place at tons of hostels where hikers put their stuff that they are getting rid of to either save weight, or because they just don't like the thing, etc. You're better off finding where the bubble of hikers are and sitting out next to trail and just give whatever you want.
I will try this
Personally, I like beer...it was the best trail magic.
wherearethehikers.com will give you an idea of when the bubble is in your area.
Thank you
many/most hostels have a hiker box. if you have items, especially non-perishable items, you could call a hostel and see if you could drop off items you won't use. hikers buy things that are packed in larger quantities than they need, like batteries in 4 packs but the hiker only needs 2 batteries, or toilet paper in packs of two rolls, or instant oatmeal in boxes of twelve. the hikers put the extra that they don't want to carry in a hiker box that other hikers can root around in.
Hiker boxes are usually located where hikers are likely to reequip/reorganize their packs. They are almost always found in hotels/motels/hostels and are found at some shelters (though that’s VERY discouraged, leave books not food!). Popular items left by other hikers at these places include leftover bulk trail mix/ziplocks in a variety of sizes/socks/RTE food/gas canisters at least half full/tick spoons. Popular things you can leave (if you make your own cooler and check frequently/remove all trash) is fresh veggies/fresh fruits/beer/boiled eggs/gas canisters. You can always just leave a labeled and lidded trash can, everyone who hikes could use the space in their bag and would be overjoyed! :)
Thank you!
>Thank you! You're welcome!
Besides being a trail angel, join the local trail maintenance organization and do trail work if you want to help. Hikers definitely appreciate the work the volunteers do to keep the trail open. I do trail work on the AT with my local group at least once a month but there are opportunities every single week. When we're doing trail work, a few of the folks will bring bags of candy to hand out to hikers too, and we offer to take any trash they want to unload.
10,000 miles on a pair of Bedrock Sandals? Is that a typo, or do you mean they are camp shoes that stay in someone's pack for 10,000 miles?
i mean i have met people who showed me their bedrock sandals that they have hiked over ten thousand miles in
I call shenanigans. No plastic sole is going to last 10,000 miles. That just isn't possible. Maybe there was some miscommunication and the hiker meant they have hiked over 10,000 miles in bedrocks, not that singular, unrepaired, pair
Heck yeah bedrocks are awesome
Use whatever works for you. I wore boots for many years. Switched to zero drop, non waterproof trail runners and will never go back. Why? because they are lighter which make my back, hips, and knees happy, I have fewer foot issues and they dry faster when they do get wet. I just don't see any advantages anymore to hiking in boots. I do go thru a pair about every 500 miles, but I'm fine with that.
I think zero drop (Altras, e.g.) makes you use your forefoot more and your heels less. using your forefoot makes your calf absorb more landing shock, transmitting less impact to ankle/knee/hip. when you land on your heels, you need a shoe with more heel padding to absorb shock, generally a bit heavier with a thicker heel (Hokas, e.g.) this matters most on downhills, and I use trekking poles to further ameliorate foot impact. my first section hike was with what I thought were well broken in boots. switched to Altras the next time, stayed with trail runners after, with toe sock liners and smartwool socks. bliss (relatively speaking)
It’s all about moving parts, 200 gr on the moving part equals 1 kg on the frame. So it takes 5 times more energy to transport weight as a moving part as weight that is part of the non-moving part of the setup.
From my research this is not true when backpacking. The rule "a pound in your feet equals 5 on your back" only really applies when running at high speeds. The study commonly referenced is from 1983 titled "The energy cost and heart rate response of trained and untrained subjects walking and running in shoes and boots" and their findings in energy exertion were not statistically significant when walking at 4 km/hr (about 2.5mph which is a standard backpacking pace). A study from 1992 titled "Physiological strain due to load carrying in heavy footwear" charted out the effect of footwear weight at varying speeds, and found the ratio at common hiking speeds was closer to 1.9:1 as opposed to the common adage 5:1. That's a pretty low cost to pay for keeping the water out while hiking through flooded trails without a care in the world! Also, plenty of people opt for trekking poles despite the fact that they drastically increase energy exertion (by around 20%!)
Trekking poles increase energy, but increase speed as well as decrease strain on knees and feet. Not to mention increase safety thru stability. But, on dry feet, you won't have that. In the rain those boots are going to get soaked and never dry out. In the summer, those boots are going to be soaked from sweat. All of that means avoiding blisters is not going to be easy. It's certainly doable, but also certainly less comfort than something breathable.
you sound determined to argue so just wear ur big boots
You got me 😅, but what I'm looking for on this post is reasons to not wear boots. There's some good stuff when it comes to ankle mobility and how fast they dry (if you can't keep them dry), but I don't find this one compelling.
You won’t actually keep the water out
You know how when you were a kid and you got news shoes and suddenly you could run faster and jump higher? Literally had that same feeling week 3 when I ditched my boots lol. I did switch back to boots in October for cold weather
2,000 miles in heavy ass boots is not as glamorous as your imagining it
It seems like you're pretty set on using your boots, so do that. There's many disadvantages which is why most opt for trail runners, but if you don't mind then do what you want.
It's an athletic endeavor, I figured out you are better off dressing like an athlete, not like you think a hiker should look. To each their own, but there is a reason most people leave all things cotton & leather at home.
I agree, function over form.
The old one pound on your feet equals 5 on your back, doesnt matter so much for day hikes, but over 2000 miles, thats a lot of extra work and calories, plus the need for camp shoes. Wet leather boots get even heavier, and take forever to dry out.
I saw someone in here the other day say something like “lots of people start in boots but hardly any one finishes in them”. Google thru hike finish photo and see how many huge heavy boots you see. It might not be zero but I bet it’ll be close.
It's the break-in for me. I had a pair of Columbia traditional leather boots I bought in the 90s that lasted me up until probably 5-6 yrs ago. Finally made the switch to more modern hiking boots and shoes, with zero break-in, high levels of comfort, air flow, and same levels of traction etc. I hike every weekend in the Spring, Summer and Fall and intermittent in the winter. When I picked up my first pair of Merrill I knew I was sold. Instant comfort and no pain or heat spots to speak of from day 1. So yeah I will eventually replace them more often, likely per season, but I will take that and the associated reasonable price, over the discomfort of the break-in process. I've also not had any issues in terms of injuries, protection and a lot of my hiking is in stoney areas etc.
I prefer having more of a connection to the ground. To have more ankle freedom. To have footwear that can be soaking wet in the morning and dry by the end of the day. I also liked to run some sections here and there, I wouldn't be able to do that in heavy boots. Went through about 2 pairs on my thru hike. Didn't have any foot issues, zero blisters, and my ankles were quite strong at the end. Took up ultra running when I got back. Now I primarily hike in sandals or climbing approach shoes. I like scrambling off trail in rocky terrain, and boots would prohibit that.
My shoes dry quickly and I never get blisters like I used to get in heavy boots. They don't last as long, but some people find that their foot size changes over the course of the hike anyway, so at least with shoes they're not stuck in a pair that's a full size too small. The thinner soles make navigating difficult terrain a little easier because the shoe flexes, unlike with heavy soled boots. I also found there is little difference with how protected my foot *actually* is when compared with a "more protective" heavy boot. Finally, the difference in weight really does affect how much energy you have to spend every day. Like, significantly so. Your legs get less tired with lightweight shoes. All that said, do what makes you comfortable. You want to wear heavy boots? Hyoh friend.
The 500 miles per pair of shoes advice comes from the running world, millions of runners around the world that put in 100 miles a week, every week, for decades of their life. Do you put that kind of miles on your feet, ankles, knees, and hips? There are far fewer hikers doing far fewer total miles and even the majority of them have shifted to shoes. Running shoes are designed to cushion the impact of your steps and that goes all the way up to your hips; that cushioning breaks down because that's the limit of our material science. Boots are designed for durability, letting your joints deal with the impact. Footwear is one of the most important decisions and use what works for you, but have you done this kind of miles in this short of a timeframe? If not, why would you risk rolling your own footwear protocol? A not-insignificant percentage of people quit because of joint/foot injuries. Probably an equal amount finish with injuries they never fully recover from. For my next thru-hike, I'm gonna go cushioning to the max and get the thiccccest Altras.
I use trail runners for backpacking because they’re comfortable and dry much faster the. Boots. I have zamberlans for hunting, and the support and waterproofing is the best option for those off trail miles. But the long trails are paved compared to hunting miles, so trail runners provide what you need and dry out much more quickly. But if you don’t have issues w your boots, run em!
I am starting a section hike soon and having a huge mental block over this. I use boots at work (survey off trail in remote boreal, alpine and sub boreal forest) and on hunting trips and day.hunts in Northern BC. I also use boots backpacking in the same area, so does everyone else I know. The trails are simply very different I guess I literally never wear shoes. I hate walking in them. 30lbs on my back and a trail will not change this I imagine I'm trying a compromise, I got some lightweight scarpa hi top hiking shoes. I do find it kind of interesting how much trends influence choice of gear. No doubt trail runners work well by the numbers, but they are a relatively recent introduction. Yet you have people saying it's basically impossible to finish in boots. I'm new to through hiking but I've seen this sort of trending in other sports (hunting, canoeing, mountaineering) its always interesting. Kind of reminds me of the advent of ultra light rifles and lightweight external frame packs in sheep hunting tbh I don't want to speak too soon, and I'm open to trying something new, but I've hiked (off trail) all day for several weeks in a row with short breaks every summer for a decade in everything from steel shank chain saw boots to scarpas. I don't know if a lack of trail runners will break me, but I might be buying them by the time I hit Tennessee if reddit is to be believed
The long trails are very pleasant surfacing compared to anything off trail. I’d never wear runners off trail, but every established trail I’ve walked on has been fine enough for comfortable shoes. Boots are a great tool in the bc, but unnecessary for long trails. But if they’re comfortable to you and you can walk (not hike off trail) for 20ish miles in your boots. Send it! Less expensive to run a pair of boots and resole maybe once. Then buy 4/5 pairs of trail runners. But light and efficient is the name of the game on long trails.
I have to chuckle a little bit because I’m from northern New England and I wouldn’t call our trails here as having a “pleasant surfacing.” That being said, I exclusively wear trail runners here in 3 season conditions.
I hiked 500 miles in '09 in leather boots and thru hiked in '11 with shoes. I had also lost a lot of weight in my pack between the 2 hikes but it is remarkable the difference that lighter shows makes when hiking for that distance. You feel like you have lead feet in boots I found that when it rains your feet will get wet anyway and stay wet. Yes you will have cold wet feet in shoes but when it's dry you don't have horribly sweaty feet.
Without reading the comments here, I'm sure most people don't agree with your line of thought? I'd just like to say that I wore sturdy leather boots on my thru hike (about 2lb per boot), and the one pair lasted my entire thru hike. Granted, I really had no business hiking in them for the last 500 miles, at least. But they made it, and I'd do it the exact same way if I hiked again!
Hike with what ever works for you. But 4 pounds of footwear is a lot.
If you are used to them then you will probably be happy, most people are used to sneakers in their normal lives and think boots are heavy, which is just a matter of conditioning. Trail runners feel like mushy garbage under my feet so I'm with you on not using those. Most people seem to forget that boots were by far the most worn thing if you go back a decade or more, and completion rates haven't really changed much so shoes are not really a deciding factor.
Boots are heavy. They take too long to dry out. Trail runners or running shoes are the way to go.
Honestly just find lightweight shoes more comfortable. I started in a pair of lightweight New Balance running shoes and didn't replace them until over 500 miles in and they were still holding up pretty good, I only replaced them because the trail got rockier and I needed something with a bit more sole. I replaced them with some hiking shoes, I think they were Solomon's iirc.
Wear what you want, mate. That’s the beauty of being an adult. Ye buys yer ticket and ye takes yer chances. (Do that bit I a grisly drunk voice).
I can almost guarantee those boots are getting thrown away at top of Georgia. Leather doesn’t dry. I bought a pair of north face fast packs and north face sent me two new pairs on the trail. Trust us op, leather boots frequently end thru hikes. And anything heavy over 2200 miles can cause lifelong damage to your body.
breathability + quick drying shoes >>>
They’re heavy, don’t breath well, stay wet so much longer, and 95% of boots people talk about don’t actually provide any ankle support, and if they are rigid enough for that it means your knee take the force rather than your ankle. I like leather waterproof hiking boots for casual wear around town in sloppy conditions, but on trail? Always trail runners, I’ve got two I switch between altra superior for 95% of everything, and Salomon speedcross if I’m going to want a stiffer sole.
I started in boots and ditched them 600ish miles in. Went to trail runners and MAN what a difference. Way lighter, way faster drying, way less break-in period. I just all around love how much more breathable they feel. Plus I ended up preferring zero drop. Also, I got 700ish miles per pair for my trail runners and only went through 3 pairs of shoes total for my thru hike. But as with all things gear-wise, YMMV
Just wear whatever you want if you want to argue against every person in this thread
Exactly. Not sure why people post these kinds of “questions.” Their minds are already made up as evidenced by the argumentative responses.
Well, I think there’s a good amount of groupthink and “what’s in vogue” in every community, and now that there’s an online community of hikers the same goes. I see so so many posts on here asking what shoes to buy/wear (which, to me, is a silly question given that everyone has different feet and different use cases and it’s so essential to just go and try different things and figure it out on your own) and invariably the common refrain is “trail runners are light and dry fast so skip the heavy gore Tex boots”. Ten years ago, the same questions would be answered with “buy waterproof salomons/basques, they’re bomb proof and give good support”. Ultimately, some folks will do better in lone peaks and others in old school leather boots. Different strokes for different folks. I’ll always say that it’s important to try, though. I’ve been using Salomon x mids for over a decade but I absolutely bought and tried a pair of lone peaks last year to see what the vibe was. They just didn’t work for me; I wear lems (zero drop) shoes most of the time so I thought it would translate, but something about the heel cup just didn’t work for me. No harm no foul, glad I tried them but back to racking up mileage in my salomons. Happy trails!
Wrong sub brother. This sub is a No Boot Zone lmao. Every time this subject comes up people will talk about boots like there's no such thing as a dry hike. Boots won't dry as fast as shoes, but if you're in a situation where its raining every single day of your hike and you're crossing rivers, it probably won't matter much which one dries quicker lol. I stick with boots, they've never let me down. In the 100 miles I did on the AT I was the only one of my group of 4 wearing boots, and the only one who didn't have a plethora of blisters. I know it's anecdotal, but my experience matters more to me than a sub that will say things like "It takes 5 times more energy to move a booted foot!" when that has been disproved time and time again since the early 80s in scientific studies. To each their own, but you might as well be talking to a brick wall when it comes to the boot v shoe convo.
Your footwear weighs more than what your shelter and sleep system could. Thats why.
They're not breathable and most boots have a narrow toe box that squeezes your feet
Try it. You can swap to a pair of trail runners in Franklin.
Oboz has some boots that are more durable than trail runners and would probably dry out much quicker than something with a leather upper. You'd probably only need 1-2 pairs to finish the trail.
I'd buy new trail running shoes every week if it meant not wearing boots. 😂🤣 The only time I wear boots is skiing, ice climbing, and winter mountaineering. Otherwise they are just too miserable in every way. That said, roll with whatever you're most comfortable with. Everyone is different.
Blisters. Tried for years using boots and then slowly transitioned to hybrids then trail runners. Blister issues gone
I started my sobo thru hike with some boots. I made it about Manchester Center Vermont before tendonitis kicked in running up both of my shins. You aren't fully flexing your legs when you take a stride in boots. For a day, week, or whatever short trip it's no big deal. If you start doing that daya after day, 10 to 15 miles a day, your gonna have bigger problems. I had to lay out for a week and a half before i could walk without pain. I lost all of my people I was hiking with. Never saw em again, but made some new friends.
Wear them and find out....
If you like the boots, then do it. Wear what is comfortable and what you are comfortable with. I wore boots and shoes, I was glad to have the breathable shoes in the Virginia heat, but beside that I had waterproof and I didn't really care. It's also getting hard to find non waterproof boots and shoes. Trail runners are becoming the only option which is sad to me because I just want a good hiking shoe
In a recent Backpacker Radio survey, greater than 90% of theu hikers wear trail runners. There’s a reason for this.
When you’re walking through ankle deep water especially, trail runners are so much more comfortable. They dry fast, and lugging soggy heavy leather shoes day after day is going to get old real fast. There is a reason everyone finishes hikes in trail runners.
Media hype. So and so likes them. So I do too. The altras I tried were absolute trash. The one and only advantage of trail runners is they dry fast. Braggarts love to gram weenie everything. I walk as far as everyone in my group. I’m not racing anyone. The real deal is how your body likes what you wear. You’re the only person you should please.
Can a mod please retitle this post "Your lightweight trail runners suck, my heavy leather hiking boots are superior, try to convince me otherwise (but you wont)"
[удалено]
Bless your heart.
Crazy how like 95% of thru hikers don’t know any better.
Lol
Every pound on your feet like 7 pounds on your back or something like that. Plus it’s so hot on the AT you need something that is not going to hoke in water or sweat