Microspike sizing

[audrey]

I got to wear my new 'spikes today and discovered that they were nearly impossible to put on my boots. I had bought them early in the year and they are substantially thicker and less stretchy than our older ones. A medium was always fine for my size 9.5-10 foot, but I'll have to go to a large or build a lot more muscle to pull them on. They do fit fine once they are on, though.

 

[Quietman]

I don't know if the sizing has changed, but the current sizing states M 7-11 W 8.5-12. I tried the medium on my size 11 shoes last year and it was tight enough to curl the toe up . Since the store didn't have any large in stock, I didn't get any.

 

[Chip]

I got to wear my new 'spikes today and discovered that they were nearly impossible to put on my boots.

There would be a substantially different sizing "feel" based on ambient temperature and your situation: eg wearing gloves on a snow pile or bare-handed in a living room ?

 

[audrey]

There would be a substantially different sizing "feel" based on ambient temperature and your situation: eg wearing gloves on a snow pile or bare-handed in a living room ?

Barehanded and barefooted in the living room was plenty tough. I tried my old ones and they are still easy-on, so it's not me.

 

[kiteflyer]

Hi Audrey,
They appear to have updated the micro spikes this year. The spikes are a little bigger and the rubber less stretchy and less pliable. I like the spike part not so much on the rubber change.
Dave

 

[Raven]

I have always thought it was a bad marketing idea to have the medium/large cutoff right at the most common foot size for men (10.5/11). This makes the largest majority of people have the most question as to whether to choose to go up or down if close.

Why they did not choose to change the sizes of the M and L slightly so the cutoff was at a less common size escapes me. I use mediums on boots that are 10.5 and size 11 and have had good luck.

 

[peakbagger]

Sizing will always be a problem as boots are sized for the inner volume, not the outer volume. If someone has a pair of three season hikers, their external boot dimension is vastly smaller than a pair of double plastic boots with the same nominal size. I encountered a similar issue with my first set of hill sounds, the XL were too small for my columbias and they failed. I called them up and they sent me a new set of XXLs. I switch to New Balance winter boots and the XXKs are now slightly too large. The unfortunate part for Audrey and others is that changing sizes mid stream is a recipe for getting confused loyal customers. Given the number of rubber failures I expect they came up with the new material to improve durability.

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

Sixing will always be a problem as boots are sized for the inner volume, not the outer volume. If someone has a pair of three season hikers, their external boot dimension is vastly smaller than a pair of double plastic boots with the same nominal size. I encountered a similar issue with my first set of hill sounds, the XL were too small for my columbias and they failed. I called them up and they sent me a new set of XXLs. I switch to New Balance winter boots and the XXKs are now slightly too large. The unfortunate part for Audrey and others is that changing sizes mid stream is a recipe for getting confused loyal customers. Given the number of rubber failures I expect they came up with the new material to improve durability.

If I'm not mistaken, Hillsound now mentions in their seizing info that bulky winter boots require the next size up from what would fit on three season boots.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

My Hillsounds were XXL initially, based on the sizing chart on the box. These are WAY too big for my size 13 Columbia Ice Dragon IIs. Even the XL can move around a bit more than I would like.

Tim