Recommend me some durable waterproof boots for rain and snow seasons, should be comfortable enough to hike for 10-15 kilometers/day in cross terrain. Budget is around $200, if they are properly proper I can go a bit higher.
>>2750099Many companies make decent waterproof boots. What's important is that they fit your feet.
>>2750099I went on a trip this weekend with full gear, good hiking boots and all. Then I saw most of the people around me just had like normal shoes on and it really made me question my life choices or if these people just enjoyed pain more than me.
>>2750099My first Asolo boots were like $100 and lasted ten years. When it was time to replace them they were $300. At that price I spent another $100 for full leather Lowas with supposedly replaceable soles.
>>2750157As gear gets lighter, ankle support gets less important. Still, I would only hike in my trail runners on normie trails where rescue is simple.
Oboz Bridger Mid Waterproof Hiking BootsGreat boots, I've gone through knee deep snow, stood in water for 15+ minutes, and have left them outside a tent in the rain. No leaks to speak off. However the included insole and laces are complete trash. $5 laces from Tractor Supply are a massive improvement and the insoles are rock hard and weirdly shaped.
>>2750157If you're on a trail that looks like picrel, then boots are unnecessary. If it's proper backcountry then boots are definitely worth having.
>>2750157Probably more a case of most people wear what they want without regard for what other people want them to wear. If you like boots, wear boots. If people seethe because you wear boots, wear them anyway.
>>2750291>>2750167>>2750289Yeah I guess I was just surprised by it. I also have a big backpack that I keep packed even for day hikes and I heard some women at the parking lot after I made it back once gossiping about how some guy had such a big backpack for the trail.
>>2750157If not wearing boots causes you "pain", you're either fat or have extremely weak feet. Fix it before you shatter an ankle because you stepped on a root wrong.
>>2750297I was thinking more of a pain from the perspective of dealing with water, mud, and in general not having good grip with tread like tennis shoes usually do.
>>2750298Ah, go get your feet wet on purpose next time you're out, it's really not a big deal if you're wearing wool socksI'm probably a little weird in that I really enjoy the game of rock hopping through flooded trails to see how far I can go while keeping my feet dry, but also once it's hopeless, I just shrug and step in the water and enjoy getting my feet cooled Also most people probably aren't wearing normal tennis shoes, but "trail runners" or some hiking-specific barefoot shoes. They have decent tread and really soft rubber, which combined with how flexible they are, grip onto small rocks like crazy, it's why I stopped wearing boots.
>>2750289>>2750167Not true. The only people wearing boots are retards and children.
>>2750340See >>2750291
>>2750340When you're standing on pointy roots or stepping in mud, boots are far better. You probably have never walked off a trail.
I used to wear boots until my first bear encounter. Now I exclusively wear trail runners. Boots make you slow. You need to be agile and nimble to deal with bear attacks.
>>2750099
salewa mid-gtx if you can find a pair, not sure if they sell these in the US anymore but i've put 1000+ miles on them in extremely rough, remote, and wet terrain and they have not failed.
>>2750396apparently these are the successor to the mid-gtx, $80 above your budget but will last you much longer than you need and are extremely waterproof
>>2750396I can also recommend these. Used a pair for years with zero maintenance, I even use them as wading boot when I'm fishing. I would say they are slightly to heavy/stiff for easy hikes but still very comfy.
>>2750298It really depends on conditions. Boots, especially waterproof ones, are excellent for mud and uneven rocky terrain. Trail runners are more comfy and good for dry and forgiving surfaces. Of course, on a lot of trails these conditions vary a lot so it's a game of picking what features you'd prefer and what you can live without
>>2750099If you aren't moving much but need waterproof, then go with rain boots.Goretex is always questionable how well it was put in.Generally Merrell moab is kind of the bottom dollar value.If you want European, a lot of their boots are good. I like Meindl. They now have one in the mid 200s. Lowa has something like that as well with renegade and forgot other one.I prefer boot designs with less stitching and fluff pieces of leather everywhere as more stitching weakens design to a point and allows more areas for water to seep in.Zamberlan makes some with very little stitching. Also Limmer has boots that are stitched down that aren't polyurethane. More expensive, but made by meindl. Honestly works of art how the upper is one piece of leather stitched only at one point. They are heavy though except their lightest new one they have out now. Also worth noting that I generally don't recommend welted boots like limmer because they tend to be heavier. but it is worth noting that polyurethane/direct attach boots suffer hydrolysis if you don't use them regularly. I believe water builds up on the inside since they are a foam and will prematurely break down causing the midsole to crumble apart. make sure you use regularly like every week or so to purge the water. all these idiots by these boots for a rainy day and they fall apart and think its rubber.Someone will inevitably recommend the M77 boot, which is a shell boot meant to dry faster and you can replace insulation inside with sock/insole, etcif you want barefoot id go with vivobarefoot esc. honestly both tracker and forest good. i prefer tracker. i just use half chaps like outdoor research for most debris so don't care too much about length other than some ankle support. Sometimes I just think the ankle support though is there to prevent your ankle from twisting because the boot is already like 3 pounds and stiff enough to force your foot into a position that will fuck it up if you aren't careful with your footing
>>2750205thanks man, after some research I decided to go with them
>>2750099I wore down the treads on these nearly every day for the past 4 years and I only just recently bought a new pair. So damn comfy I wore them more than my regular shoes. Stayed waterproof, too.
>>2750351Preach. I stopped wearing fagrunners because they got wrecked from being submerged in water and thick mud. >>2750353Boots didn't make you slow. Your shitty fitness made you slow. I outhike people in trailrunners all the time.
non retard option:
>>2750340Maybe on your casual hiking trails, fatso
i've always just hiked in running shoes and recently i slid on a rock going downhill and busted my ass on the apex of another rock. i prefer walking in boots as it is so how grippy are the bottoms of most of these? do they provide anti slip like work boots? never owned a pair but after that fall i've considered looking around. side note: i'm about 6'3 200lbs so ankle support of like a full sized boot is usually my go to, don't know if they make them higher than a low ankle cut. also i have wider feet and tend to get blisters on my pinky toe from extended walks, so any of my big niggas with wide feet got any suggestions throw em at me.
>>2753756also worth mentioning it's about a 4 hour drive to any trails near me so a fairly inexpensive pair would be more worth for me, don't care how water proof they come. I've been planning a trip to follow railroad tracks in one direction somewhere so something that feels good on rocky terrain might be ideal
>>2750295I just use a 20l backpack with a gallon of water and take my shirt off then go fast like sanic and leave my friends behind
I got some Moab 3s a few days ago that I really like
If I know I'm going on a maintained trail I'll just use my trail runners. I've carried 33% of my body weight on trail runners with no issue, up 3000 feet a day. If the trail is bad at all I'll use boots, but at that point I have my gaiters on too, which work fine on my shoes too. If I'm on an unfamiliar trail (most of the time, at least these days) I'll be in boots though, as they're good all-arounders. If you only have one or the other I recommend buying the other. Weight on your feet is a big difference.
>>2750099>should be comfortable enough to hike for 10-15 kilometers/day in cross terrainAfter 2 days of that my feet always hurt. ALWAYS. You just get used to it.
Any recommended uk retailers for shoes?
Can anyone give me some opinions on mammut boots? They look dope, thinking of getting a pair to wear this winter, around the city too, and they salt the roads around here.
>>2750157Anon, I used to be like you and can I just tell you something. Trail runners will be best 9/10 times, IF youre dealing with a light pack, and if the weather is warm enough to handle wet feet.I'm from norway and I only use boots when im carrying heavy rucksacks, or when day temps fall below 10°C
I like zamberlan
After doing a couple very steep, grueling hikes, my right heel is killing me whenever I’m going up hill. It’s something internal—not a blister forming. Wtf do I do???
>>2755783do you have flat feet anon? probably plantars fasciitis, need to RICE (rest, ice, compression, elevation) your heel and start doing some stretches in the mornings. I fucked up my heels a while back and it just didn't go away until I finally just took it easy a few days
I find hiking boots to be aesthetically unpleasing. Usually I just wear running sneakers (sometimes even moc toe boots if its colder lol), but if it gets wet and there is verticality in the trail I feel like my footwear gets uncomfortable. Anyone in here has any experience hiking with Vans Ultraranges?Been thinking about buying a pair.
>>2750167Ankle support is a myth, especially for these shitty soft civvy boots. If you go down bad enough to mess your ankle, boots aren't doing shit. In fact you are more likely to go down since you aren't as agile in these clunking pieces of shit.
>>2756106Its not a myth, ankle support is a thing, especially when carrying heavier loads(which you shouldnt do, and thus shouldnt use boots)
>>2756139It absolutely is dude. If your aren't some soi faggot city dweller you will have rolled or nearly rolled them enough times to know when it's bad. And the kind of roll to fuck your ankle is still going to fuck your shit up boots or not. Have to wear proper alpine boots for that kind of protection and there's a good reason no one wears those below the snowline. Seriously, the soft above ankle boots you see retards wearing are absolutely worthless, I would note also that most of the people I see wearing these boots are fat too. Vast majority of people I see out in the back country a day or two beyond the trail head are wearing trail runners.
>>2756106>boots are too soft to protect your ankles>boots are so stiff you aren't agilePick one
>>2756149>back country>trail runnersEither your definition of "backcountry" is Instagram-tier or you're a lying sack of shit
>>2756149>I think my opinion actually means something when I only hike on well-groomed paths like picrel in the warmer months of the year
Going on a hiking trip tomorrow, just a simple overnighter and picked up some hiking boots from walmart fuck it. They felt light and had good support so we'll see how it goes.
>>2756149>Vast majority of people I see out in the back country a day or two beyond the trail head are wearing trail runners.Bullshit. I never see any one carrying a heavy load or bushwacking or hunting wearing trail runners.
>>2756149this is angry and exaggerated to the point of being incorrect. i use both boots and trail runners, and there are conditions optimized for either.
>>2756149It absolutely isnt. If you tie any sturdy material around a joint like that and tie it somewhat tight its bound to give support. It's not meant to be entirely stiff like a slalom boot, but stiff enough to where you break in the normal walking pattern, and then have support for excessive movement like rolling.I see this argument all the time from hikers who think their trail/low terrain hikes are actual wilderness hikes. It's not. Boots are useful for when you simply have to move through untouched terrain, usually with significant pack weight, no matter what, thats why military and hunters often use them. I use both, trail runners for recreational hiking on trails/low terrain, boots for everything else.
>>2752703Those don't work with snowshoes or micro spikes you fish smelling sailor.
>>2750353Lol I hike in steel caps.I ran most of the way of the konigsee trail on the way back in them after scaling the waterfall.
>>2750353>Boots make you slow.>thinks he can run from a bearno wonder you wear tennis shoes hiking lol.
>>2750099hiked about 1500 miles this year with Altra timp gtx
I bought a pair of Herman boots from Walmart 6 years ago for $80. They're my everyday shoes, held up over hundreds of miles, never had a single issue with them. You just need to re-do the waterproofing every year or so. But they're probably the best boot available for the price tag. And if they fail on you, $80 is far from the biggest loss in history.
>>2756099>i have a pair of the ultrarange vans hightops and id say they are decent if you can afford anything better, mine lasted me through different terrain and as an everyday shoe for 3 years, although now they are ripping at the seams due to too much wear and tear. id recommend if you are hiking on trails and less frequently. although they are quite comfy!
>>2750289i got /out/ in either slip on vans or some other canvas equivalent they dry relatively fast and i don't look like some faggot only fairies wear boots
>>2750289why would I walk a trail that I could just bike. boring
My boots I've had for 10 years are falling apart (the sole is coming off). They are also pretty beaten up since I scraped them on some rough rocks during some of my hikes/climbs. The only reason they haven't fallen apart sooner is because I haven't really hiked since covid 19 lockdowns until a week ago. Did some walking and climbing while on vacation in the Italian Alps I think it was the final coffin in the nail for these shoes.I want to get some new shoes but I've been debating between proper boots again or some trail runners. The only thing I'm concerned about is that lots of people mention that trail runners wear out quick and aren't very durable. Ie. I looked up the Hoka Speedgoats and Salomon Speedcross due to recommendations online. In most reviews people mentioned how the threads on the soles wear out pretty fast, especially if you need to walk over some asphalt/pavement to your destination.My usual routine is to just wear my boots out, drive the car/take the bus into the mountains and then start hiking. Depending on how long it takes I might do a stroll in the town and eat something at a local restaurant. I don't swap boots because I find it troublesome to bring two pairs. Especially if I got to the country by air travel.I'm a casual hiker, I've never really done overnight camping on the mountains. The hardest "hiking" I've done were some of the easier via ferrata routes with no harness. Would trail runners still be a good choice or should I just get boots again?
I'm going hiking in the Adirondacks and also either the Green Mountains or White Mountains. Similar terrain I think?Looking for some new boots or shoes. I always just had Merrel Moab 3s but I want to upgrade.I am thinking:>Salomon X Ultra 4 low or mid>Oboz Sawtooth X or Bridger low or midIf anybody has an opinion on either for Northeast hiking for like, 10-14 miles at a time I'm interested. I tried them all on and I honestly couldnt decide.
>>2758499the Whites are my home range but i regularly hike in the Green Mountains and Adirondacks, and yes they're extremely similar terrain wisefunnily enough, my current pair of boots are the oboz bridger mids, and my last pair were salomon x ultra mids. i absolutely hated the salomons and couldn't wait to get rid of them. i found the toe box very restrictive in those boots, and in really rocky and rugged terrain like the northeast has, that was not a good fit. the oboz bridgers have been far better. way more comfortable, waterproofing holds up, and soles grip well on the slab rock up here. only downside has been durability i think. I bought them last august and the uppers have a hole near the toebox already. i have put close to 500 miles in this terrain on them though so maybe my expectations are a little high
>>2758499see >>2750400
>>2754798>IF youre dealing with a light packThis actually isn't true at all. I climbed to a base camp with a pack that was about 1/3rd my body weight with trail runners and felt nothing the next day.
>>2758499>Salomon X Ultra 4I've gone through 4 pairs of these and I love them. They fit my feet perfectly, unlike the other anon. I hike with these and with a pair of water shoes, both from Salomon, both have the quick on and off lace thing. Makes river crosses really easy.
