Trail shoes versus Boots

[daxs]

What are people hiking in - boots or lighter weights shoes? With my short hikes this year, I have been using trail running shoes and have been doing ok with these. I need to watch foot placement sometimes but I have not had any significant problems. The longest hike though has been 6 miles. Does anyone hike with a full pack with trail running shoes? I am debating the weight of a boot versus the reduced weight of the running shoes as I try to lighten what I carry. I have no choice to ligthen up and have reduced weight with my sleeping and pack but I am not sure if I want to go with a shoe with a flexible sole. Any opinions?

 

[jfb]

I backpack with a 35 lb. pack wearing Salomon Expert Low shoes and have no problems.

 

[Danielle]

Last year, I switched from heavy leather boots to Merrell Chameleon Ventilator Lows. They're not trail running shoes, but are along those lines. They do have a nice thick sole, but are light and comfortable, don't hurt my feet, and I was just in EMS the other day and found out they're now making a Goretext version. That will be my next purchase

I wear them dayhiking as well as backpacking, both weekend trips and longer. I probably carry about 25-30 lbs with food and water, and at the end of the day, my feet feel SO much better in the Merrells. They're great, and I've yet to have any problems using them. I don't think I would ever go back to hiking in those big boots!

Happy Hiking! And good luck with the shoe purchase. I definitely think looking at lighter, low hikers or trail runners is worth it.
-Danielle

 

[jbrown]

My pack weight is somewhere below 25 lbs, depends on time of year.

Without giving you my tick list for the past year, I hiked alot last year exclusively in trail running shoes. Last year I wore some cheaper model by Avia, and had to buy orthotics for them after a short time. This year I'm wearing Lasportiva Exum Ridge mountain running shoes, they have a more rigid sole than other running shoes I have. Plus the rubber is super sticky too.

I sincerely believe in the "pound off the feet=5 pounds off the back" philosophy.

Josh

 

[Mark_151]

I have a pair of Danner approach shoes I got from Sierra Trading Post for use as my everyday shoe. They have Vibram soles and are quite comfortable. As an experiment, I did the first part of the Wapack hike in my Alpina Mount mountaineering boots, and the last 8 miles in the shoes. What I found was that I like the ankle support, which I sorely missed with the shoes. I thought the grip would be the deciding factor. I have a set of cheap hiking boots I use in the summer. Great ankle support, but the sole material often slips on rocks. But, I would've rather had them on the final 8 miles for the ankle support rather than the shoes andd the sticky rubber. I thinks it's a very subjective thing.

 

[SherpaKroto]

I switched to NB MA900 (now 901) last year after a Long Trail section hike where I had foot problems that bothered me for months after. I've since done day hikes in them in the 15 mile range with no issues. I now only use my boots in the months between plastics and clear trails, always hoping to put the lowcuts on. Last year, I even used them with gaiters in November! I have had 2 slight ankle rolls, but one was while downclimbing in snow (South Weeks), and neither were bad. Since switching, I do find my ankles have gotten stronger, and I've had no issues whatsoever. One knock: they do not provide the grip that my boots do, but a mental adjustment is all that I needed to overcome this. I particularly like the mid foot stability that this shoe has. It is stiffer than many of the day hikers I've worn. It also dries fast!

My boots will see very little use now that I've switched to the NB's (I just got a second pair even though I have many miles left on the first). I will definitely use them on my summer backpacks (BSP, ADK, LT). If you plan to switch over for backpacking, get some good miles in them on dayhikes to get used to the difference.

I just realized tht I'm wearing them at work today as I do whenever it rains I love these shoes!

 

[spongebob]

I think it is all personal preference and what is right for your body type. If you have ankle problems then the extra support with boots are a must. I like low cut. I have carried packs on several trips all last year with low cuts. I used Merrell Chameleon Gortex like Danielle above. Last year I hiked a sick amount of mountains and they held up for the season.

p.s. Danielle did you go up East Kennebago last Friday? I saw a bunch of Merrell shoe prints.

 

[Danielle]

Spongebob,
Nope, wasn't me. Haven't gotten there yet! But we will
Happy Hiking!
-Danielle

 

[Dugan]

I don't agree that boots necessarily provide ankle support. I sustained an ankle fracture this spring while wearing a pair of stiff mid weight boots with higher than usual ankles. I rolled the ankle again a week later while wearing a pair of light weight boots and sustained a grade 2 sprain. Since then I've stayed in either trail runners or trail shoes and haven't rolled it again, but I've also been doing some ankle specific strengthening and coordination exercises. I've not yet carried a significant amount of weight (+25 lbs) or hiked for longer than a day (longest was approx. 28 miles so far) in low cut shoes, so I don't know if I'd pick trail runners for an extended outing.

In regards to a flexible sole, I prefer the more flexible sole of the runners to the stiffer sole of a boot or shoe. I get a better feel of the ground, which has helped me to recover my footing from what otherwise would have been falls. For instance, in runners I can curve my foot around a wet tree root, but in a rigid boot sole I'd either slide or tip off.

I posted a question about ankle support a while ago that resulted in some discussion regarding boots vs. shoes. Here's the thread:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php3?threadid=2182&highlight=ankle+support

 

[woodstrider]

shoes vs boots

I just tried backpacking with a 45 lbs pack in my running shoes. I have a chronic ankle injury and I am trying to work the joint more to strengthen it.

The three days went well- I enjoyed having less weight on my feet. I'll do this again in the future.

Cheers

 

[Rick]

4 years now with New Balance 800 series (803, 804, 805, 806) instead of boots for most dayhike and light overnight tripas and I am loving it. I save my BP boots for spring & fall mud and snow situations.

 

[Warren]

I have the merrell ventilators, wherever you go people comment on your tracks... They've been good for trail and bushwacking, but I do look at my leather boots and the deepish cuts in the leather and wonder about how the ventilators will hold up in whatever it was that made those cuts.

Haven't really noticed any difference in ankle support, but my feet are way more nimble.

 

[Holdstrong]

After destroying my feet on the Northville Placid trail 2 years ago.... I have decided to try out a pair of North Face Ultra Gore-Tex XCR's for this years hike.

I used a very comfortable pair of Asolo FSN's the firt time around and they still did my feet in so I am just not sure the little bit of ankle support in the heavier boots is worth it for me on a hike of that distance.... especially when sections of it are pretty flat.

I have not yet tested the North Face trail runner witha full pack, but do intend on doing so soon.

 

[theothursday]

I wear asics trail running shoes and enjoy being "light in the loafers". My pack weight keeps getting lighter; about 22lbs last time.

My boots are reserved for winter now.

I even did Chocorua via Champney Falls with Chaco sandals (with wool socks and liners) without a problem. I believe that ankles need support from strong and fit muscles rather than from boots.

 

[Grumpy]

One rule . . .

After 50 years of traipsing around in the boonies on foot, I am persuaded there is only ONE question to ask about footwear: Does it fit well?

If you get blisters, miscellaneous pain, black toenails, and all that other stuff, your footwear does not fit well. If the fit is not perfect, it is not satisfactory. In that case, try something else. When you find hiking kicks that fit and they serve your needs for foot and ankle support, treasure them, enjoy the hike and be happy whether they be big ol' clunkers or fashionable lightweights.

'nuff said.

G.

 

[snowshoe]

I also use the Merril Vent low cut. I like to use the low cuts when the weather is warm. I feel there is no need for high top boot. It gets way to hot for them and besides I can scramble better. I also have a pair of ADIDAS trail shoes but the problem I found with trail runners is the area I live in has too many rocks and the rocks tear the soles off. Trail runners do have the best traction. In the winter I tend to use my Danner light hikers. Wich are 3/4.

 

[Tuco]

I like the high cut boots. Since most of my hiking tends to be around rocks, and I have a tendency to bang my feet on the rocks and smash my ankles off the sides of rocks (not on purpose of course) I like the extra protection a solid boot gives me. I think there is a small support gain in the boot, although as stated earlier its no guarantee you won't roll your ankle over.

If i can do more smooth trails, then I'd switch to smaller lighter shoes.

 

[el-bagr]

My $0.02: I've gone with lightweight sandals for years now, even going barefoot if there's good duff and minimal gravel. (Ledges actually work out OK bare; it's the sharp bits of recently rotted rock that get you.) I use the same sandals for the grocery store as for backpacking. I agree with theothursday that it strengthens the ankles, teaches balance, and develops a "foot-consciousness" -- my ankles just don't roll.

Sandals don't work for everyone; as AlpineSummit suggests, I'm quite a bit shy of 200 lbs! As has been discussed elsewhere, just because one's in sandals doesn't make one underprepared. Listen to others, but I think Grumpy said it best: find out what works for you.

 

[trailbiscuit]

Nike ACG Air Teocallis...they are really U-G-L-Y, but they rock...light, good traction, Gore Tex...but U-G-L-Y. Great for day hikes, and when backpacking I usually don't go more than 30lbs., and they've been great. But...U-G-L-Y, so not great for picking up chicks.

 

[Holdstrong]

Nike ACG Air Teocallis...they are really U-G-L-Y, but they rock

Ha! I debated getting the Nike Tallacs for about the last 2 months... and if the Teocallis look anything like those, then I know exactly what you're talking about. I ended up deciding I just couldnt do it. I always double use my hiking shoes and like to wear them around from time to time and I just couldnt see myself in those.

Bummer, because I've heard great things about them. Maybe next years models will look a little less like some urban moon combat boot from the 70's. he he. Boy Nike can make some ugly shoes.

Nike Tallac - is that graph paper?