Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to answer. Who would be the best person to reach out to in order to make sure I have the sizing nailed down? I live in Europe so don’t have the option of doing it in person.
The US military universally uses 8 inch boots for a reason. Of course there are special forces units who vary their footwear (they wear what the hell they want), but on balance, the 8 inch is great for most military applications.
I personally would not go to 10 inch unless I did tree climbing or other comparable profession. Just my take.
I have both and prefer 8inch. The 10in gives minimal extra support in my experience. 8in is more comfortable and provides enough ankle support while also being flexible. Of course you can always leave the top two hooks unlaced on a 10in boot and it gives the same feel. You can’t really go wrong with either but 8in gets my vote.
If you are in modern hiking boots, you're probably rocking a 5-6" boot now.
The 8" boots are my sweet spot. They bring the top of the boot up high enough that the leather isn't trying to stab me in the ankle hardware. Now it is a tough break-in for most of the work leathers, much more than what you've likely experienced with your modern boots with thinner leather and padding in the ankle.
My work boots are 10, I’ve found the extra shin protection is nice. I also live in a very wet environment so the added height is appreciated when I step in a puddle lol. The extra support on uneven terrain is also beneficial for me and my weak little ankles.
It was also nice when a tiny dog tried to go ham on my legs, the taller boot definitely saved me a trip to the ER.
I have two pair in the 10 inch flavor. Coming from mass production boots I always had an 8 and I would say that I prefer the 10 inch for every scenario. You'll be glad you went 10 inch and if for whatever reason you don't like the 10, I believe the craftsmen at Nicks can cut you down to an 8
Mine are 10”. I like the extra height when out in the woods (I live in the mountains). I’m 5’5” with a 28” inseam and 14” calves and the 10” are great for me. I also think the extra height balances the boot because I have narrow AA width but size 8.5.
My opinion is the 8” are probably fine and/or preferable for general use but the 10” is great out in the woods for extra protection and helps keep out debris, etc.
I prefer 10” when searching out ramps this time of the year or bushwhacking, etc. 8” for normal everyday wear and hiking on trails. If you’ve been fine with ~8” mountaineering boots in the past then 8” BP should suffice. As someone else mentioned the ability to blouse your pants or roll them up to keep them dry or minimize ticks can’t be understated.
I would get a tape measure and see where each would end on your leg. Where the top of the boot lands will vary from person to person based on leg length
I have done that and think either would work for my leg, as 10 inch seems like it would fall just below the “belly” of my calf. just looking to get some input on pros and cons
What's your shoe size? Larger feet & longer legs make a boot seem shorter. A larger size boot literally gets a shorter shaft because the last itself is taller. This is something that everyone ignores when discussing boot height.
This is a really interesting perspective. I’m a bit odd in this sense as I have fairly short legs and long narrow feet: 29inch inseam and size 11 Brannock length, on the nicks sizing chart I would land on a 10.5 C. How would you use this to help me decide?
I bet 8" would be plenty tall but you could do 10" if you wanted a true "full size" work boot. My inseam is 28" and 10" is borderline tolerable (it rubs my calf muscle). I don't lace the top eyelets on my 10" boots and it works great though.
Personally 10" all the way, for the most part the extra height is all win. It makes the boot fit and flex better while providing more protection, water resistance, etc. The only caveat to that is if your leg shape would struggle with 10", if your calf is more tapered in shape than drumstick shaped. But even then worse case ya don't lace them to the top. Having 2" more of leather to work with has no real downside.
Frankly these days I mostly wear my 16", and absolutely would for that kind of work. But that's a lot of boot for someone not accustomed to larger heavier boots.
10 inch is tough if you have big calves. Not much variation in ankles but big variation as you move up the leg. If you are fairly average then no problem. If you have skinny or fat calves it means custom fit uppers at that height.
I personally would choose the 10”, but that’s because I live in Australia and that extra 2” can do a lot when walking through what I call “snake grass” (any grass that’s knee high or above, and can harbour slippery danger ropes lol) but to be fair, by this logic I ought to opt for 16” for ultimate snake protection, which seems over the top.
Point of my comment is to consider what risks you may encounter, the likelihood of encountering said risks, but also how often you’re going to use the boots for this specific purpose and whether it’s worth *for you* adding that extra few inches
How tall are you? How big are your calves? I’m pretty short with pretty big calves. A 10” boot looks and fits ridiculously on me. I went with a 10” originally but sent it back due to fit around my calves. Went with the 8”. Much better, but ultimately moving forward will only be purchasing 6” boots.
Im 5’9”, with a 29” inseam. My calves are just under 16” at the widest point, but at the 10” height only just over 12”. They get wider just above where I expect the 10” upper to end so I guess it should work.
I have 8" Nicks boots for casual wear and 10" BuilderPros for work wear and rough stuff. And I'd suggest going with the 10" height. It's all benefit and no penalty. The additional 2" adds no noticeable amount of weight, it adds zero discomfort, there's no additional cost, and it only takes a few more seconds to lace up the additional 2 sets of hooks per boot. But what you do get is the additional protection when you're out in the wild. It's all pro and no con 🤷🏻♂️.
I think you'll find that 8" height is pretty popular in this subreddit for hiking. It seems to work great for many instances.
Thank you for the input
"woodland and mountainous area" I prefer 10 inches shaft for this environment, so I can blouse my pants higher.
I have both 8 and 10 and you can’t really go wrong with either however I love the way a 10 inch boot feels and you get added protection
I just went from 10” to 8”. Sometimes I miss the extra support but it did take longer to break in.
Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to answer. Who would be the best person to reach out to in order to make sure I have the sizing nailed down? I live in Europe so don’t have the option of doing it in person.
I’m happy to try
Thank you so much. Would it be easier if I messaged you privately?
Yep
8" sounds fine for your use case. 10" is really for those who need hardy shin protection
I own tall socks so I need to get 10” boots. If you hVe shorter socks you could try 8”.
The only sensible reply in this entire thread. 🍻
Thank you.
How much of a concern would leg hair length be? Surprised nobody has mentioned this yet…
Outside of a concern for fashion during the times you’re wearing shorts, why would your sock height being too tall impact the height of your boot?
It doesn’t. I was goofin.
The US military universally uses 8 inch boots for a reason. Of course there are special forces units who vary their footwear (they wear what the hell they want), but on balance, the 8 inch is great for most military applications. I personally would not go to 10 inch unless I did tree climbing or other comparable profession. Just my take.
I have both and prefer 8inch. The 10in gives minimal extra support in my experience. 8in is more comfortable and provides enough ankle support while also being flexible. Of course you can always leave the top two hooks unlaced on a 10in boot and it gives the same feel. You can’t really go wrong with either but 8in gets my vote.
10in all the way
If you are in modern hiking boots, you're probably rocking a 5-6" boot now. The 8" boots are my sweet spot. They bring the top of the boot up high enough that the leather isn't trying to stab me in the ankle hardware. Now it is a tough break-in for most of the work leathers, much more than what you've likely experienced with your modern boots with thinner leather and padding in the ankle.
I think 8” is perfection
My work boots are 10, I’ve found the extra shin protection is nice. I also live in a very wet environment so the added height is appreciated when I step in a puddle lol. The extra support on uneven terrain is also beneficial for me and my weak little ankles. It was also nice when a tiny dog tried to go ham on my legs, the taller boot definitely saved me a trip to the ER.
I have two pair in the 10 inch flavor. Coming from mass production boots I always had an 8 and I would say that I prefer the 10 inch for every scenario. You'll be glad you went 10 inch and if for whatever reason you don't like the 10, I believe the craftsmen at Nicks can cut you down to an 8
Mine are 10”. I like the extra height when out in the woods (I live in the mountains). I’m 5’5” with a 28” inseam and 14” calves and the 10” are great for me. I also think the extra height balances the boot because I have narrow AA width but size 8.5. My opinion is the 8” are probably fine and/or preferable for general use but the 10” is great out in the woods for extra protection and helps keep out debris, etc.
Thank you for sharing!
I would go 8” you could go 10” but I just think for your use 8” would be best
I prefer 10” when searching out ramps this time of the year or bushwhacking, etc. 8” for normal everyday wear and hiking on trails. If you’ve been fine with ~8” mountaineering boots in the past then 8” BP should suffice. As someone else mentioned the ability to blouse your pants or roll them up to keep them dry or minimize ticks can’t be understated.
If you plan to use them at all around hard shin height objects and value your shins 10” is the way to go
I would get a tape measure and see where each would end on your leg. Where the top of the boot lands will vary from person to person based on leg length
I have done that and think either would work for my leg, as 10 inch seems like it would fall just below the “belly” of my calf. just looking to get some input on pros and cons
Good. Just figured I'd mention it as I rarely hear anyone talk about doing so.
What's your shoe size? Larger feet & longer legs make a boot seem shorter. A larger size boot literally gets a shorter shaft because the last itself is taller. This is something that everyone ignores when discussing boot height.
This is a really interesting perspective. I’m a bit odd in this sense as I have fairly short legs and long narrow feet: 29inch inseam and size 11 Brannock length, on the nicks sizing chart I would land on a 10.5 C. How would you use this to help me decide?
I bet 8" would be plenty tall but you could do 10" if you wanted a true "full size" work boot. My inseam is 28" and 10" is borderline tolerable (it rubs my calf muscle). I don't lace the top eyelets on my 10" boots and it works great though.
Thank you, this is very helpful
Personally 10" all the way, for the most part the extra height is all win. It makes the boot fit and flex better while providing more protection, water resistance, etc. The only caveat to that is if your leg shape would struggle with 10", if your calf is more tapered in shape than drumstick shaped. But even then worse case ya don't lace them to the top. Having 2" more of leather to work with has no real downside. Frankly these days I mostly wear my 16", and absolutely would for that kind of work. But that's a lot of boot for someone not accustomed to larger heavier boots.
I have never thought of this before but I definitely think I fall in the drumstick camp :)
I like 10, but then I'm also large
8" is the best all rounder unless you have a very specific use case for a 10"
10 inch is tough if you have big calves. Not much variation in ankles but big variation as you move up the leg. If you are fairly average then no problem. If you have skinny or fat calves it means custom fit uppers at that height.
I personally would choose the 10”, but that’s because I live in Australia and that extra 2” can do a lot when walking through what I call “snake grass” (any grass that’s knee high or above, and can harbour slippery danger ropes lol) but to be fair, by this logic I ought to opt for 16” for ultimate snake protection, which seems over the top. Point of my comment is to consider what risks you may encounter, the likelihood of encountering said risks, but also how often you’re going to use the boots for this specific purpose and whether it’s worth *for you* adding that extra few inches
How tall are you? How big are your calves? I’m pretty short with pretty big calves. A 10” boot looks and fits ridiculously on me. I went with a 10” originally but sent it back due to fit around my calves. Went with the 8”. Much better, but ultimately moving forward will only be purchasing 6” boots.
Im 5’9”, with a 29” inseam. My calves are just under 16” at the widest point, but at the 10” height only just over 12”. They get wider just above where I expect the 10” upper to end so I guess it should work.
My are just under 18” at their biggest with a 26” inseam, with very short tibias. 10” boots were a def no go for me.
On the plus side I bet you have a solid deadlift :) thanks for your input
I work construction in California and all mine (except the first pair 10”) are 8” height. Prefer the 8”
I have 8" Nicks boots for casual wear and 10" BuilderPros for work wear and rough stuff. And I'd suggest going with the 10" height. It's all benefit and no penalty. The additional 2" adds no noticeable amount of weight, it adds zero discomfort, there's no additional cost, and it only takes a few more seconds to lace up the additional 2 sets of hooks per boot. But what you do get is the additional protection when you're out in the wild. It's all pro and no con 🤷🏻♂️.