>>2831651
Do you really want the consensus from an outdoor forum where the user base insists that sunburns are a myth and mice don’t exist?

>>2831651
>3 seasons
trailrunners 100%
>winter season
boots 100%

i'm a milsurp fag and even i know this cardinal rule

File: 5978278.jpg (83 KB, 283x475)

83 KB JPG

>>2831651
trail runners are for the hunted, boots are for the hunter. it depends where you fit into the /out/ hierarchy

Boots are for the weak (ankeld)

>>2831651
Outdoor athlete here. My default is trailrunners but I also own a few pairs of boots for different situations (like winter outings and bushwhacks).

I always laugh at one side saying "muh ankle support" and the other side saying "muh lightweight" when neither is a dealbreaker if you're a strong enough hiker. I could hike in the clunkiest footwear and still leave 99% of hikers eating my dust.

>>2831651
boots with proper insoles > trailrunners > boots with bad insoles
If you plan to actually run than sure go for trail runners, boots are usually too heavy and clunky for that.

>>2831691
>Bro just add 2 extra pounds to each foot it's no big deal
I seriously doubt you go outside.

Unless you are doing serious mountain shit or wading through calf deep snow looking for elk trail runners win. Start with a pair of trail runners and buy a good pair of boots when you start going up scree off trail for fun.

>>2831694
>it's no big deal
Unironically this. It's not a big deal. Are boots my first choice for regular trail hiking? No, but I still outpaced most hikers when I wore boots and still had enough stamina to do big hikes day after day after day in them. Trail runners who cry about weight is just as pathetic as boot wearers who cry about ankle support. It says more about you than it does about your choice of footwear. Git gud.

>>2831651
>you can only have one pair of footwear
derp

>>2831694
>add 2 extra pounds to each foot
Not sure what dogshit calf high milsurp boots you are wearing but the difference between my trailrunners and boots is ~200g per foot. so ~400g total for both if I want boots that day which isn't even 1lb.

>>2831654
ever seen a sunburned mouse? didn't think so!

>>2831703
Then your boots are essentially trail runners with ankle support. Actual good boots for off trail shit weigh a lot. If your boots are that light I doubt they support crampons.

>>2831707
Ah yes, the outdoors man gate keeping what a boot is lmao. Talk about someone that spends too much time online instead of being outside.
>muh crampons
Oh you mean the thing that only is relevant for specific times of the year or on very specific mountains where glaciers and snow is a issue year around? Oh the horror!!!! That's totally a good reason to use extremely stiff mountaineering boots year around just so you can call them "real boots" lmao

>>2831709
You are a fucking moron arguing against yourself.

>how dare you assign concrete meaning to words! boots are what I feel they are!

>>2831699
Yeah, different footwear for different activities. Like when you're backpacking you need more ankle support then if you're just going for a day hike.

>>2831710
NTA but you're an even bigger moron wearing heavy ass boots year round. A pair of Merrill MOABs is good enough.

>>2831654
>mice don’t exist
What did I miss? Probably something really stupid.

>>2831730
No you don’t, lol

>>2831709
Petzl is about the only option for crampons that will work with trailrunners. Generally the soles aren’t stiff enough or the spike suspension is too stiff, but the Petzl spikes have a very flexible suspension. You can get micro spikes for trail runners too, and other kinds of micro spike-like things for runners.

Used to be a trail-runnerfag, now I'm a bootfag. Happened when I stopped with the ultralight cult..

>>2831651
It's should be zero drop then depends on weather.

I wear boots because it's muddy here all the time and the trails are always overgrown

I typically wear shoes for day hikes and boots for longer multi-days or if it’s fucking cold out

>>2831651
>/out/ is a person
Ask three people on here, and you'll get four opinions.
Personaly, I wear running shoes (15€ Feiyue, none of those memey "trail runners") when it's hot and I know I won't be crossing through blackberries, wading through water or climg through sharp rocks, and boots in every other case.
Doesn't really make much difference, as long as the sole is unpadded (padded soles massively increase the risk of hurting your ankles, especially when wearing a heavy pack) and doesn't slip too easily. Boots just offer a bit of protection, but are a lot hotter and heavier.

>>2831651
I'm not sure where you live but anywhere in europe you would have to be retarded to even walk off the pavement wearing the right

>>2831818
Trail runners aren’t a meme or a marketing gimmick. They’re different from regular runners in that they often have:
>a very aggressive tread to prevent slipping
>some kind of toe protection
>a midsole shank (“rock plate”) for protection from rocks and some added stability
>a heel shank for the same purpose
>a design specifically to drain water
The tread alone is reason enough to use trail runners (if you’re not using boots, which also have an agressive tread, generally speaking).

>>2831651
https://youtu.be/wTq3E1hU4uQ?feature=shared

>>2831651
>What is the /out/ consensus on this debate?
I prefer cotton

File: 1695996354133669.jpg (810 KB, 1504x945)

810 KB JPG

>>2831871
Maybe it's just the camera fov but jesus christ those jagged knife edged rocks he's climbing up and down on look suicidal.

>>2831742
I like ankle support if I'm going to be trekking across downed timber or various haphazard rocks. I hate when you're putting your bodyweight down and all of a sudden the thing tilts like 90 degrees while you're balancing on one foot above treacherous terrain and if you fall it's not going to tickle. With an ankle support boot you can just tank it and keep going or soak your foot down on something with less worry to steady yourself.

>>2831876
Oh, it is.

>>2831651
>Boots v Trail runners
If you're homosexual, trailrunners
For the rest of us, boots

File: 0774c62395ac9d0e11acf7334(...).jpg (307 KB, 950x629)

307 KB JPG

>>2831651
>that's a cute unsupported ankles you got there anon. it would be shame if something... happened to them.

>>2831651
You dont run in boots unless you're being shot at.

>>2832000
Let me guess, Rocksylvania

>>2831871
Before anybody starts aping this fucking clown watch a critque of this video by somebody who knows how close he came to death. He's 90% likely to cop it within the next 5 years iif he carries on like this.
>lmfao just throw your pack down the hill while jumping into holes with two feet bro

>>2831839
Wasted post. People don’t know what shanks are and think ankle support only comes from having your ankle s covered and laced in place, and that trail runners are equivalent to being barefoot in this regard.

>>2831651
Boots don't really provide any ankle support unless you're wearing 8 inch uppers that are also extremely stiff. I'm wearing MOABs now but once they wear out (2 years and counting) in gonna get trail runners. The big points for me are weight, comfort and fast drying, the trails here are pretty rough so having a stiff shank that protects my feet from jagged rocks is important.

I know a guy who did the entire PCT in vans

>>2832018
>People don’t know what shanks are and think ankle support only comes from having your ankles covered and laced in place

>>2832023
>Boots don't really provide any ankle support unless you're wearing 8 inch uppers that are also extremely stiff

Pottery

I like my leather boots.
I like the height, for keeping things out if I'm walking in wetland, snow, along the shore, or in sand.
I like that they are unlined, so they dry fast if they do get wet. If I'm going far, I have a spare pair of wool felt insoles and a spare pair of wool socks with me. Worst case worst, I change my socks and insoles and keep on walking, while I've yet to own a single pair of GTX shoes or boots that didn't get positively sodden when wet, and wouldn't dry out very easily.
They aren't much heavier than GTX boot alternatives, even if they are 2.5-2 times heavier than trail runners.
To me, they're worth it, specially after I got some good insoles for them.
Trail runners seem like they would be alright if you don't risk getting very wet.

>>2832050
I'm happy to be corrected if you wanna substantiate anything at all instead of just making smug remarks.

When is the last time you twisted your ankle? Yeah never. Nobody needs boots. It's retarded.

>>2832058
>Nobody needs boots
Nobody "needs" trail runners either. People got by fine before they were ever invented and marketed to urbanite weekend warriors. Very few people would be caught dead wearing them in the rural counties.

>>2831833
I'm European. That's not true lmao. Unless you live in some kind of European shithole. In central and west europe trailrunners are perfectly fine.

Boots are overrated unless you're doing serious mountaineering IN winter or you're trying to d o Denali tier summits. You can get away with trail runners + microspikes for practically most of Colorado's 14ers if you pick the right time of the year. People have done Hood and Rainier in trail runners as well. It's really only winter when you need serious boots for crampon support, or if you're doing some serious shit.

>>2831651
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3943374/

Wear whatever does a job for you.
Muh ankle support is a myth as overload from your ankles goes to your knees.
I like trailer Runner if its summer or spring, they can dry fast an are comfy.
I like boots whenever its winter because they're warm and boots are good for wet land and beaches.
Wear what does a job in certain conditions.

>>2832054
The argument was already made, you’re just too stupid understand it.

A substantial amount of ankle support comes from the sole of the shoe. Hiking shoes provide a ton of support compared to runners without being 8” high.

>>2831651
Boots if you're not a bitch.

>>2832061
>people only wear trail runners in urban areas
lol

>>2832038
>I know a guy who did a shit ton of hitchhiking over thousands of miles then said it was a hike
Any relation to Grandma Gatewood?

>>2832058
ITT: people who have only worn boots arguing with people who have used both boots and trail runners. Yes, it’s quite retarded. Very few people go back to boots because they realize how retarded it was.

>>2832100
>me tough guy!
Just when you think the conversation can’t get any dumber…

>>2832102
Tbf, city parasites also wear them in rural areas on their weekend warrior outings before fucking back to their shitholes. It's a dead giveaway those of us who actually live here.

>>2832105
>me tough guy!
No different than >>2831662 but you didn't call him out

>>2832104
>Very few people go back to boots
citation needed

>because they realize how retarded it was
yes, because having to replace trailrunners every couple hundred miles is a great play. my boots have lasted me five years and i hike at least 10 miles in them every week. you do the math.

>>2832104
I used to use trail runners. But once I started bushwacking and going off trail I switched to boots because they are better for off trail stuff- especially in shoulder seasons that are wetter. I will still uses trail runners for day hikes on trails but never again for cross country

>>2832108
>replace trailrunners every couple hundred miles
this desu. lightweight mid-high boots with good aftermarket insole > trailrunners.

>>2832079
>practically most of Colorado's 14ers
You mean the same dry switchbacked trails that horseriders could use with no problem?

>>2832113
You can horseback most of the approaches. Some of them you can go all the way to the top for very non-technical ones yeah, but not all. For example you can do capitol peak with trailrunners, but there's absolutely no way you can take a horse all the way lol.

File: IMG_7342.jpg (102 KB, 828x600)

102 KB JPG

>>2832108
>citation needed
>source?
>SOURCE!
>I’m gonna need a source!
>what’s your source?
>source?!

https://thetrek.co/appalachian-trail/the-top-footwear-on-the-appalachian-trail-2024-thru-hiker-survey/

>>2832105
There's just not much to wearing boots. Don't overthink it.

>>2832118
Any stats on how many replacements they had to make by shoe type? I often hear AT/PCT hikers switching out shoes or buying new ones.

File: IMG_7343.jpg (170 KB, 828x852)

170 KB JPG

>>2832120
Just click the link. It’s right there. It’s interesting statistics just on footwear. The Trek does an AT survery every year with all kinds of stats; budget, gear, demographics, planning… really interesting stuff. Well, interesting to people who actually care about outdoor retention, not too many people on this dogshit board.

>>2832122
I'm not giving The Trek free views or ad revenue. Nice try.

>>2832122
>"Just click the link. It’s right there."
>posts infographic that doesn't answer the other anon's question

>>2832124
Like I said, it’s probably not that interesting to you.

>>2832126
Keep projecting. I'm not giving you ad revenue and you didn't answer the question anyway.

>>2832125
Sample size is too small for the minutia of detail like that.

As someone who uses both, I ALWAYS take the side of boots in these debates because trailrunner advocates are so insufferable, smug and self-assured. They get all asshurt whenever anyone points out even a single advantage that boots have over runners and have no concept of nuance.

>>2832128
>you
The self importance of this board is always shockingly retarded. No one gives a fuck about this shit hole board. No one is advertising here. It’s a fucking garbage dump where people are still having a god damn boots vs trail runner debate like it’s 2005. Next up: why ultralight backpacking is dangerous!

>>2832132
Yeah sure Schlomo. What next, /v/ is not full of viral advertising as well?

>>2832132
>The self importance of this board
see >>2832132

>>2832131
I've only ever use boots. Trail runners might be perfectly fine for the trails I run but they're not good in all circumstances. Try hiking Yellowstone without boots, you're going to get burned.

>>2832135
I mean, I hiked the Mt. Washburn summit trail in runners but would opt for boots in the actual backcountry areas.

File: IMG_7344.jpg (96 KB, 828x438)

96 KB JPG

>>2832118
Ouch!

>>2832137
Yes, going on a 2200 mile in boots wouldn't be the most satisfying. Who knew?

Wear boots cause I don't like those little prickleys and stuff. Whatevs

>>2831651
Are you walking through snow and mud or going for a jog?

File: IMG_4214.jpg (211 KB, 907x907)

211 KB JPG

>>2831651
For me, something in between. Hiked in both and neither were ideal. Now I wear barefoot “boots”
>boots
Lots of portection, ankle support, dry… way too heavy and didn’t breathe well
>trail runners
Light weight, lots of air, tiny puddle makes my feet wet

Now I hike in picrel, light weight, good support, when it’s hot I just loosen the laces and enjoy air flow without them hanging off my foot.

>>2832262
ain't no way a leather boot is giving you good air flow

>>2832264
Its much better than you'd expect if you are walking around with the top laces opened up wide, of course less ankle support but being "barefoot" puts your actual foot only a few mm from the ground, making it less likely to roll your ankle.

I'm in boreal forests (Ontario), never so hot I can't wear them. If I was south I'd get a different version of the same boot.

My only gripe is they look ridiculous, but who cares.

>>2831657
/thread
Obviously depending on seasons, but if youre running into temps where wet feet can be dangerous(near 0°C), I'd switch to leather boots with goretex.

>>2832262
Have a pair of old vivobarefoots, easily one of the most comfortable boots Ive had. Might try Jim Green barefoot boots one day.

>>2832292
>wet feet can be dangerous(near 0°C), I'd switch to leather boots with goretex.
/out/ told me before that goretex kills and you're better off able to let your feet dry out than risk waterproof boots that can still get waterlogged

File: vivovsjg.png (1.71 MB, 1176x885)

1.71 MB PNG

>>2832294
I have both. I love my jim greens, but man, too heavy and almost too rugged. If I could do it again I'd order barefoot african rangers with a single layer of leather and a leather toe cap instead two thick layers of leather at 2-3mm each.

I use my Jim Greens in the winter/late fall/early spring as they are quite literally indestructible and never wet my feet so far even without gortex

File: 20250731_215111.jpg (1.24 MB, 1816x2917)

1.24 MB JPG

>>2832301
Unfortunately there are very few /out/ists who go out during near freezing or below freezing. At that point you may risk frostbite if you attempt to "walk your socks" dry like you can do during most temps above 10°C. Leather is naturally water repellent, and goretex just adds on to that - especially nice in snowy conditions.
Obviously you have to engage with the enviorment differently. If youre actively wading in water during those temps, and stomping around in wet socks, then goretex is the least of your issues.
>>2832314
Single layer african ranger is what I was eyeing, as well as some type of forming to the toe. My only negative with the vivos is that they some times rub the top of my toes. Good thing hearing theyre rugged despite the extra weight, I dont mind that for a leather boot.

File: vivo mocs.png (1.23 MB, 724x970)

1.23 MB PNG

>>2832328
>worn vivos
those look so damn comfortable. I'm in the process of wearing in my full leather mocs I got for stupid cheap, very happy with them so far.

Dyed them black and soaked them in the jim green leather conditioner with a hair blower, pretty water proof.

everyone i have ever seen wearing trail runners looks like a fag so i will stick to boots.

>>2832314
>>2832328

I hike in barefoot african rangers, super comfy. I do sometimes miss having a real tread when off trail in mud but apparently JG is coming out with a chunkier barefoot outsole later this year. My ankles are indestructible from years of barefoot footwear and skateboarding.
If everything I've seen online is true I should be able to custom order a pair of their new moccasins with an updated anatomical barefoot last and a lugged sole later in the year; should be close to the perfect boot for (me).

File: Sc PSA for Barefoot Boot (...).png (2.39 MB, 1000x1242)

2.39 MB PNG

>>2832384
>lugged sole
In the last boot thread another anon suggested the Vibram Kletterlift for a barefoot sole. My JG have the tyre wedge non barefoot and will switch to the the Kletterlift once they need a redo. Their JG last is close enough to the barefoot last I don't think it'll pose an issue.

File: 1486692715194.gif (153 KB, 494x419)

153 KB GIF

>>2831651
very much a sliding scale where you could autistically place dozens of styles of shoes based on the conditions you're in. If you had to pick 2, trail runners are good for dry and forgiving terrain, boots are good for the opposite, but regardless they both have a shit ton of overlap. I think boots are a better choice in most situations I hike in, if only slightly. Its one of those things where I'd rather have the benefits of the boots and not need them than be sorely missing them if I wore runners. And for easy conditions you don't even need trail runners, any regular pair of trainers will do.

>>2831707
>hiking boots and mountaineering boots are the same thing

>>2831657
So i should only be buying insulated boots for winter?

>>2831742
>mice
I remember it.

>some anons claimed they never hung their food because there are no bears where they camp
>another anon said they always hang their food because other critters can get to it (such as mice)
>the no bears Anon said that doesn’t happen
>other Anons joined him, stating that hanging is pointless if there aren’t any bears
>the board is too slow or too inexperienced to know better
>hence “mice don’t exist”

>>2832573
Where did you get insulated from?

>>2832585
Isn't that what people wear when winter hiking? I'm a pussy I've only hiked April to November. I wear uninsolated boots because I dont trust trailrunners in the mud or crossing streams. I was looking into it and people were saying you should be wearing boots with at least 200g insulation for subfreezing temps

File: salomon.jpg (3.05 MB, 3024x4032)

3.05 MB JPG

found this pair of salomon speedcross 5's at the thrift store today for $9 im pretty excited to give em a try. i've been wanting a pair of salomons but the price point was too high to justify. i've tried hiking boots, sandals and tend to get pretty gnarly blisters on the sides of my toes and pads of my feet so here's hoping these are right for me.

File: ab67706c0000da840e687f7c4(...).jpg (38 KB, 281x300)

38 KB JPG

>>2832601
>boomer juice
crack
sip
gulp
ahh

>>2832602
nothing like a well balanced breakfast my friend. that's a working mans torque

I pretty much only ever wear boots because I'm a fucking spaz and roll my ankle all the time. My feet don't sweat a lot so that's never been much of an issue, but also probably because every time I get to camp and set up I air out the dogs for a little bit as well as my socks. Never had a blister on my feet before this way. I prefer full leather boots because I can waterproof them myself with snoseal and the like.

File: Screenshot_20250802-103144.png (1.21 MB, 773x1543)

1.21 MB PNG

How did Roman niggas hike hundreds of miles in these

>>2832616
Give it 10 years some backpacking influencer is going to start shilling these

File: Screenshot_20250802-111500.png (1.24 MB, 887x1089)

1.24 MB PNG

>>2832617
>10 things we couldn't live without on our Gaul to Judea thruhike

>>2832626
Unironically would love to recreate the route Jesus travelled if that part of the world wasn't such a shithole

>>2832573
All up to you, brah. You could wear unlined boots and wear extra socks, or you could get some insulated boots.
My winters are typically at, or just below freezing, and there is slush and heavy wet snow to deal with, so I prefer the former. That also works for the very cold dry winters, except you might wear more socks, find an insole that insulates better from the cold, or wear overboots if you're just slogging through snow.
Insulated boots are alright until they get wet (not just damp and clammy, you can largely mitigate that with wool socks), like if you step through the ice or something and they get sodden. They take much longer to dry out, and even if wet boots aren't the automatic death sentence some people believe it is (unless you're out hiking in extreme climate), it's still enough to make your hike miserable.

>>2832653
>>2832626
>named Jesus
>doesn't have long hair
wasted name

>>2832599
Very much depends, but I prefer non- or light insulated boots, and then I insulate my feet using thick sock(s).

>>2832601
Worth it for that price. Im not a massive fan of Salomons, mainly because of the tight toe box. But they work. Had a pair of the assault version, used them in the grand canyon.

>>2832328
>At that point you may risk frostbite if you attempt to "walk your socks" dry like you can do during most temps above 10°C. Leather is naturally water repellent, and goretex just adds on to that - especially nice in snowy conditions.
>Obviously you have to engage with the enviorment differently. If youre actively wading in water during those temps, and stomping around in wet socks, then goretex is the least of your issues.

You don't get frostbite unless it's a actually freezing. If it's above 0c your feet are just a bit stiff and numb until you get the blood flowing. Wool socks also help keep the warmth even if soaking wet.

>>2832704
Issue is that many forget about the dropping temps. It can be 5°C during the day and youre walking around getting trench foot, and when temps drop below freezing you now have a higher risk of getting frostbite.

>>2832616
>flexible sole
>brethable
>very little if any ankle support
>quick drying
>zero drop
They also wore socks when walk-in long distances and in cold weather to prevent chafing and for warmth.

>>2832720
Sandals are generally very good, its not exactly a big leap between trail runners and sandals, but people are put off because its regarded as a leisure beach footwear. Reminds me of how mindblown people were seeing Cody Lundin walk around barefoot/with socks during winter

>>2832700
yeah figured I cant go wrong for $9. went for a walk in them today after putting some new insoles in them and I can see what you mean, it was a pain in the dick just fitting in those soles. gladly they fit my foot pretty good, super light too it's nice

>>2832653
>Jesus travelled if that part of the world wasn't such a shithole
???
It's one of the most beautiful places on earth and is pretty damn safe now that Gaza is handled and Syria has settled down

>>2832710
>>2832704
Yeah not going to lie I think frostbite is the least of your worries when Trench Foot is way worse if you're walking around in soaking wet feet constantly

>>2832748
>Syria has settled down
Loooooool! Ok Hilary

>>>>2832102
obviously not a 100% guarantee, but yes trail runners are overwhelmingly worn by day trippers driving in from more built up areas.

>>2832000
>checked
E-stone-ia

>>2832000
I fucking hate talus fields. Even in mountaineering boots they suck ass to walk through.

>>2831651
For me ->
mountains = boots
countryside = sneakers

I guess this is the thread to ask. Are 'barefoot' shoes a scam or not? Any anons felt a difference using them? I walk an hour to work 4 days a week wearing trial shoes but i go through two pairs a year because the rubber sole wears out fast

>>2832779
Thru hikers almost always wear them these days. Actually the day tripper and thru hiker demographic is pretty similar.
A very different demographic, climbers and mountaineers, will also use trail runners or approach shoes for everything that doesn't need crampons or real climbing shoes. Hauling heavy boots on your backpack when you swap to your mountaineering boots would be stupid, and wearing mountaineering boots when you're doing miles off snow and ice is also stupid.
I only see boomers and some casuals wearing boots these days, unless it's winter (but if it's winter I usually don't see anyone).

>>2831651
Sandals

>>2833296
>boomers and casuals
This board is the latter. Trail runners are superior for hiking.

File: CD9D22FA-D627-4BDC-B633-9(...).png (374 KB, 828x1792)

374 KB PNG

>>2831651
Might cop. Thoughts?

>>2831651
Flat shoes like converse or vans. Tenny shoes

>>2832010
it's just a random pic. but I heard pennsylvanian part of AT is indeed much fun haha

File: 1745923573739903.jpg (130 KB, 1060x1590)

130 KB JPG

I enjoy my keen sandals

>>2833416
And yet more people chose to hike it in trail runners. How do they manage?

>>2833428
Counterpoint: I have done big hiking and backpacking trips, every month of the year, in a wide variety of terrain and conditions, in boots, and managed to be comfortable the entire time. How did I manage?

>>2831651
sandals

File: 1975274.jpg (26 KB, 370x333)

26 KB JPG

Trail runners or approach shoes for most mountain hiking. I used to always go with heavy, high-top hiking boots and that really isn't necessary unless in winter.
Picrel is my go-to shoe for everything now.

>>2832886
>>2833428
I have no idea. those fields are really dangerous when wet. at least in europe, they are often covered with lichen which makes them extra slippery.

>>2833597
96% not rock fields.
4% rock fields.
And yet I should hike in heavy boots in your opinion? Just be careful and you're fine.

rock strewn high paths you say? Scarpa Mescalito (non gtx) these things are fucking amazing and will end your struggle.
/rocks

File: 1651455339801.jpg (88 KB, 334x334)

88 KB JPG

>>2833651
>>2833549
Mio negro.

Haven’t seen a pair of trailrunners that don’t look like overdesigned, gaudy trash.

>>2833660
Look past the overpriced normie trash the likes of Salomon, Salewa and co.

>>2832748
>now that Gaza is handled

Shalom.

File: IMG_3831.png (1.06 MB, 1125x2436)

1.06 MB PNG

>>2833661

Danner to the rescue, again

>>2833639
>And yet I should hike in heavy boots in your opinion?
if you are 100% certain there's talus field incoming, yeah, duh. it saved my ankles countless times. but then, idaf about your life choices really.

>>2833436
>this is all I’ve ever used so my opinion is valid
It’s not.

Unbeknownst to most, there was an outbreak of polio years back, causing an entire generation of people to require braces around their ankles if they’re doing more than just walking on pavement.

>>2833228
Not a scam in the sense that they offer more room for your toes to naturally spread, as well as having a flexible sole. The biggest difference you might feel is the switch to a 0 drop shoe. If you havent already done that itll take some time to adjust, and id recommend gradually switching over. Its insane how much a change from some heel height to zero drop makes.

>>2833228
I know people who swear by them for everyday and mountain hiking use. Not a scam.

>>2832314
I've never heard of Jim Green before but I'm going to have to get a pair of those barefoot rangers. I've been hiking in lowtop Altama Maritimes and those look infinitely better. Thanks anon

Just got back from a hike where I was wearing army boots and my buddies were wearing hiking trainers. We’re all fine on the way up but it starts chucking it down on the way down. We started running down the mountain very carefully due to lightning going off very close by + the deluge of rain (although we’re all waterproofed), meaning we had to fuck off pretty quickly down a muddy and somewhat steep incline. By the end of it my boots and socks were perfectly dry excepting a bit of sweat, and I was able to get downhill much faster (probably due to better grip meaning less need to be as careful on the way down, not fitness, but still) and was leading the group down the whole way and stopping to let them catch up. My takeaway is that trainers are comfier, lighter, less prone to blistering, and probably better for chill weather, but when shit hits the fan boots is what I want. Awesome hike though, we were all in great spirits all the way through and I thought the chaos at the end was great fun. I’d also caveat and say they’re both much fitter than I am.

>>2834495
To clarify - my boots were dry on the inside, whilst their shoes and socks were soaked through.

File: IMG_2046.jpg (41 KB, 500x500)

41 KB JPG

>>2834495
>>2834496
These are the closest image I could find to my current boots off a british milsurp retailer

I have a pair of waterproof hiking boots. I hike in the mountains and sometimes need to cross a creek. I can wade up to my ankles in my boots without any leaking. Which will get me where I want to go most of the year. I don't cross them from November to February when runoff is highest and they're flooded out. When I'm not expecting to go anywhere I need to worry about water, I have a pair of lightweight military style boots. They're nice and light and have good tread/grip. But they're sponges! I found that out while hiking through some dew covered grass. My feet were soaked all day! It was miserable! Waterproof boots can be a bit hot though in the middle of the summer. I don't like hiking in boots or shoes that expose my ankles. I walk through a lot of grass and brush and always get stuff poking me in my ankles with short footwear.

File: 1751667610867113.gif (2.45 MB, 374x374)

2.45 MB GIF

>>2833356
> Mid top
> Gore tex
> Trail running
> 230 Dollary-doos

lmao

>>2834499
>>2834495
Rule of thumb:
During summer, wear non-waterproof, lightweight trail running or hiking shoes with wool socks. You'll be much more comfortable.
And when they do get wet, the wool socks will still keep you warm.

Gore-text boots are for when it's cold.

>>2834510
A followup question then - when are goretex (or otherwise waterproof) socks worth it, if ever?

>>2834605
My guess would be if you want to make extra-extra sure to keep dry feet and sweat is not an issue. Cold and wet climates.

>>2834509
It's CAD. That's like half the price in euros

>>2834624
I fear wet boots and wet feet more than I fear skinwalkers and the woods at sundown.

>>2834509
your point? if its about the price ive got money to spare. i like it cos it looks cool and fits my aesthetic

>>2831651
PAfag here. I can't really imagine walking some of the trails I do in trail runners. so much mud, muck, overgrown shit. boots work good for me. I can just plow right through it

File: 1018051094044.jpg (144 KB, 1000x794)

144 KB JPG

>>2831651
Highly situational I think.
When I am guiding I always wear boots with ankle support because I can't take an extra risk of being injured to justify a bit more comfort, especially when I'm walking off trail or over uneven terrain. It's also way easier to roll your ankle when carrying a pack, too. Modern hiking boots with good ankle support like the Scarpas I have aren't much heavier anyway, and are almost as comfortable as sneakers (pic).
For the extra protection against injury, prickles, puddles, snakes, whatever.... I go boots if I'm not sure.
If I know the area we'll, and it's an easy access trail, then I wear some salmon trail sneakers.

>>2835289
Well*
Also, forgot to add, boots last longer than sneakers. I don't want to have to fork out 300 bucks for another pair every 6 months!

>I’ve never done the other thing
Opinion discarded
>Im in Europe
Opinion discarded
>waterproof
Opinion discarded
>”sneakers”
Opinion discarded

>>2835289
footwear like this is just more practical on the east coast

>>2833228
You get the same benefit and a better sole wearing beach sandals.
The key difference is that the beach sandals has a good foam core, where the barefoot shoes kinda force you to do the movements you could be doing with the beach sandals(change toe position to increase stability and grip)

File: file.png (249 KB, 561x401)

249 KB PNG

I bought these "running" shoes to try them. Was like 50% off. they look goofy as fuck tho and stand out. BOA is nice tho, luv it from cycling shoes.

>>2835300
Based

File: image_2025-08-15_233433115.png (294 KB, 793x779)

294 KB PNG

/thread

>>2835440
>/feet

>>2835300
I only write off the European opinions I see here. I don’t know if it’s the same few people or if /out/ specifically attracts retarded Europeans because it’s attached to their only means of free political speech, but other forums have a much better representation of European outdoor enthusiasts.

>>2831651
I wear boots simply because they're more comfortable for me. I have high insteps and shoes rely too much on tension right on top of the foot to stay put while boots spread it out more.

In my experience good trail runners out perform equivalent boots for the first 300-400 miles of walking/running you do in them. Then they start to wear out. Decent boots may not be quite as comfortable, but they generally last twice as long and twice as many miles. Now, the question is what your tolerance for replacing footwear is; for those of us with a decent middle-class paying job, I 100% recommend trail runners all the way. If you're a poorfag I recommend learning to love your boots.

File: 81lpO4ThdfL._AC_SL1500_.jpg (107 KB, 1500x1103)

107 KB JPG

>>2831651
I wear my aku tribute ii ltr all the time (especially during work), though I might get some jim greens once these wear out

>>2835766
Hiking shoes are more comfortable than boots and more durable than trailrunners. The best of both worlds. Also, they look less faggy than trailrunners and less incel-ly than boots.

>>2834665
kek

There comes a point when sweat will be more of an issue than water from the outside. I don't know anyone who uses gore-tex socks.

>>2831651
Barefoot

>>2831657
but it's muddy in the spring

>>2835835
What gives you the impression that hiking boots look "incey-ly"?

>>2831651
Running shoes with vibram rubber. The easier it is the better.

File: pantofi-sport-s-karp-trav(...).jpg (144 KB, 1280x1280)

144 KB JPG

I have a pair of S-Karp. A Romanian brand made in Romania at Brasov.

https://www.s-karp.com/cumpara/pantofi-sport-s-karp-travel-pine-11781

Their site. Made in European Union.

When i ordered mine, the company was bankruptcy and production stopped, selling all the remaining shoes for a tiny price, i paid 50$ for mine, now they are 100$. But somehow they managed to mot close and continue production.

>>2836534
One of the oldest shoe production company from Eastern Europe. "Clujana" took the S-karp brand after bankruptcy.
Was the biggest production shoe in the 80's from eastern Europe. But somehow the are in bankruptcy too and stopped production and evacuated the production facilities and somehow the other bankruptcy company they saved, S-Karp is still alive.

>>2833416
I hiked the PA portion of the Tuscarora Trail (originally developed as a bypass for the AT before it became its own thing) which cuts through private land easements that I swear to god were lovingly crafted to maximize your time on hillside rock fields. It was some of the most miserable hiking I've ever done but I got it done with trail runners with no problems.

You'll be fine as long as you give yourself time to build the ankle strength. The bushwhacks through overgrown to shit portions of the trail were deeply unpleasant though. Some boots would have been nice there.

>>2836535
That beimg said, i higly reccomend them, long lasting shoes. I would buy myself another pair from this brand, some winter boots i desire, but only if they go in to bankruptcy again. Cause i am not going to pay those western european prices for a shoe made here.

>>2831651
I just wanted to come ITT and say have the exact boots in OPs pic, Scarpa Kenesis Pro GTX. I've had them for almost 5 years, never had a boot last that long and will probably re-sole them when the tread wears out. Completely warn in they're insanely comfortable. Literally never had a blister after the first 100 miles. Waxing them makes them totally waterproof. Heavy, sure, but I will never go back to synthetic boots with plastic hardware and planned obsolescence use-for-400 miles "durability". Poorfags seethe.

>>2831651
boots.
but...if you know the weather, the conditions, the trail and such then trail runners.
on a school trip years ago we did a 20km part of an old pilgrim route. we where bussed in with camping gear and they bussed out our gear in the morning we just had to carry enough for the hike.
i checked weather forecast, maps, route descriptions, choose trailrunners and big fat me ran the entire trail this way being the second out of 30 to arrive at the destination. they got wet shure but it was just a few hours who cares?
there where fit guys in my class who came sogging in hours later due to them using heavy af leather boots or even rubber boots.
>>2831662
this is why i prefeer boots, only im not weak ankeled anymore after i got it titanium reinforced (i broke it)

>>2831657
It is more or less this simple, and this thread didn't need many more replies than this. The only addendum is that you prepare for the likeliest conditions based on the best information you can get.

Are Lowe worth the money?

>>2832262
I have a pair of these memeboots and love them

>>2832626
Fucking kek

>>2831659
hilarious
my mountain village relatives are always bitching at me for wearing heavy boots even though the weight difference is what a few hundred grams now i know what to say

>>2836937
The one thing that matters above and before all else is the sole of your shoes. The very best are made by an Italian company called Vibram. Any sole they make has a yellow tag with their brand name on it. Yes they're costly and yes they're worth it. If you're going to buy Lowa (or any other brand) make sure to check the soles first.

>>2831651
I always hike in Adidas running shoes unless it's no more than 2°C. My feet would be sweaty and stinky if I did otherwise.

>trail runners
What if I need to go off the trail?

>>2831657
>>3 seasons
>trailrunners 100%
>>winter season
>stay the fuck indoors

My little alteration.

>>2833426
>Newport H2s

My go-to summer footwear.

>>2837367
Why do you retards thinks trail runners are just Nikes with an aggressive tread?

File: Polish_20250826_195725485.png (2.82 MB, 1080x1620)

2.82 MB PNG

>tfw climbed a 2500 m asl mountain with trail chains in basic (non trail) running shoes cause I didn't know it's impossible
Should I feel bad about it?

>>2837367
False premise. You’re never going to do that.

>>2837440
What if I need to pee?

>>2837789
Squat behind a tree
>but I’m a boy
I stand by what I said

>>2837319
This. Vibram for shoes and YKK zipper for clothings.

>>2831651
i have been looking for running shoes since i ran my last pair literally trough the soles, im not kidding either my feet literally came trought
i then bought expensive new versions of the older shoes because they were nowhere to be found and they are just awful
i put down 200 euros for something that make my feet ache on a fucking shopping trip and made my every toe develop callouses, i used to jog with 20kg worth of weights on my daypack now i can barely manage to get the mail without having blisters

>>2831651
Barefoot boots. You'll walk all day without fatigue, fall less and you won't roll your ankles. Check out Jim Green's African Trooper boots

>>2831651
Technical terrain boots, established trails trail runners.

File: 20250830_185900.jpg (3.7 MB, 4000x1800)

3.7 MB JPG

Asics

>>2831651
>Boots v Trail runners
are you a beginner?
if yes, actual hiking boots are the only sensible answer

if not
and the season permits it, you walk below the tree line and only on trails
you can opt for trail runners

going to the alpine region and above with trail runners is incredible stupid though
and even below
literally the most common type of injury in the (european) alps are strained / broken ankles
which you can almost completely avoid with a well fitted boot

if you don't mountaineer, it doesn't matter

File: 20250831_151420.jpg (2.91 MB, 4000x1800)

2.91 MB JPG

>>2838358
S-karp on top.
Assics in middle.
And a pair of german army officer parade shoes.
All three are good for trails

>>2831657
What types of boots should I check for snow?

>>2838363
>going to the alpine region and above with trail runners is incredible stupid though
Everyone does this. It’s fine. Turns out you’re the beginner.

File: images (16).jpg (5 KB, 225x225)

5 KB JPG

>>2831651
depends on the trail. if your trails in your area are more rocky, than its almost necessary to get ankle support. if you have smoother trails, then you can get shoes.
Personally i have approach shoes. these are designed for hiking and light climbing. I would recommend them. trail runners are gay IMO. i have had a pair of approach shoes and put probably over 100 outings on them from hiking to walks on dirt paths trails in the park and gardening over 8 years and they are still going strong. i feel like trail runners would have died after 3 years.

File: IMG_20250905_075804098_AE.jpg (249 KB, 1229x1632)

249 KB JPG

God damn, I keep catching my heel on this bit when walking, on both sides. What can I use to patch this? Ideally it should be more resilient after.

>>2839111
If you think trail runners are gay then why did you use them?

>>2839126
are you retarded? trail runners are very different from approach shoes despite the similar appearance to morons.

>>2839130
I wasn’t talking about the picture you posted.

>>2839133
nta but those are approach shoes.

>>2839134
Yes, and I wasn’t asking about them. I was asking about his trail runners.

>>2839134
Theyre trail approachers

>>2838565
I ran the walking society at my uni for 3 years - fortnightly 8-12 mile walks, often muddy, we'd always get one person turning up in bright white trainers, we had one girl in pink wellies, and apparently for one walk someone in heels but I wasn't there for that. International students were often clueless, especially the Chinese ones who would turn up wearing designer clothes.

>what's better? a coat or a tshirt?

File: michael-shanks_1488.jpg (125 KB, 967x1450)

125 KB JPG

>>2832018
>People don’t know what shanks are

File: BS7966-Reebok-BUTY-ROYAL-(...).jpg (91 KB, 1024x682)

91 KB JPG

always hunting down some discounts to get these for as low as 35 eurodollars and then proceed to abuse them for next 5 years until sole is worn out almost completely. Even in cold weather sole is everything, having a good insulation and quick drying materials will protect you more than outdated boots. FOAM BOI get with time you rubber/leather ship anker wearing boomers.

I remember how no matter how fancy pants of boots I tried I couldn't last a day with constant sweat and blister danger. Having to stop just to rest your feet so you won't get injured is beyond fucking stupid when cheap runners exist.

Also people used to walk the globe in slippers and somehow boomers make a big deal around the "importance of good boots" these people don't do serious hiking, fucking RV dwelling pieces of shit

>>2839218
I agree with you. Easyer to walk in running shoes. But when you are km's in the mountains, slippery rocks, and no one can hear or see you. You don't want to risk and a good rubber makes the diference and gives you peace of mind.

File: Screenshot_20250910_00264(...).jpg (477 KB, 1080x2408)

477 KB JPG

>>2831651

Treck sandals and kevlar socks

File: Screenshot_20250910_00381(...).jpg (945 KB, 1080x2408)

945 KB JPG

>>2839859

>>2839858
>Our research shows regular trail runners aren't gay enough for the even gayer generation of gays that's coming out right now. We need to make something even gayer but we're out of ideas.
>Say no more

>>2832139
>who knew boots would suck?
People itt saying not to use them seem to know this pretty well.

File: 20250822_060441.jpg (3.83 MB, 4032x1816)

3.83 MB JPG

>>2839220
Im currently moving towards sandals, tho it will probably be until winter comes around at its moving below 5°C

>>2840133
I did the northwest ridge on Mt Belford and a bunch of less challenging Colorado hikes in Crocs back in August of 2023. It was hilarious watching people get whiplash looking at my feet. I had wrecked my regular hiking shoes in a dirtbike accident a couple weeks before the trip and collected some (by the time of the hike, healing) burns that made it hard for me to tolerate shoes with a conventional upper, but I wasn't going to just kick aground the hotel either. It was easy, and I had some insulated booties in the day bag if things went to hell.

Your feet are meant to step on things, if you don't protect them from discomfort at all times, they get pretty good at it. I've never hurt myself walking as bad in soft soled shoes as I have in heavy soled boots.

>>2832616
Protip the secret of Rome was roads. They fucked every rough trail they found into submissive road and then moved on.

>>2840179
Agreed. My feet has been cushioned for most of my life, but for no purpose, because at the end of the day I still get a bunch of blisters and pain from walking in shoes. I robbed me of that natural foot splay, but at least ive been lucky enough to not have those bad cases of strong overlap in the toes. Think it was a few years ago I began to slowly adapt into zero drop/barefoot shoes, and lately more into barefoot sandals. Goal would be to eventually go entirely barefoot for most of the time.
I have had a similar experience with people, especially now during autumn, of people thinking im crazy for walking around in shorts and sandals. But it really doesnt bother me at all, its actually quite refreshing. I usually carry a pair of wool socks in my pack if needed, but I have yet to be needing them.

File: reebok-classics_bs7967_8_(...).jpg (159 KB, 1800x1800)

159 KB JPG

>>2839849
there are like 5 models of the same shoe. I tried all of them and find this model to be the best for outdoors

>>2840287
Sure, f gravel roads are the most technical surface you encounter.

>>2831651
No debate, 1 pound on your feet is "like" 8 pounds on your back.

>>2840526
literally live in the wettest and most steep part of Spain you can now stop being passive aggressive whore

>>2831651
>Boots v Trail runners
Two very different things for 2 very different activities.

I scramble in high alpine granite and canyon country sandstone all the time and I only bring boots when its really cold or cold and wet. 3 season/1 season. I dont understand all the bitching about trail runners useless in rocks. I spring lightly like legolas across boulder fields and grip on angled sliprock like bighorn sheep. I fear nothing but snow and sleet and can outrun any forest janny.

>>2832058
>Yeah never.
Because I wear boots.

File: 175.jpg (20 KB, 300x100)

20 KB JPG

>>2832058
>Nobody needs boots. It's retarded.
Put me in the screen cap.