|
0 members (),
71
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
 Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 155 Likes: 1
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 155 Likes: 1 |
"the boots will keep your feet more comfortable and resist fatigue due to the support" Shoes are not supposed to provide support. Your foot/ankle muscles (yes, including your arch) are supposed to be developed to the point that they can handle your body's load. How the notion that our feet/legs are somehow defective, and need support/other aids/tools, is a question for the advertisers & marketing men who popularized these concepts back in the day. Your feet & legs are NOT defective. They are the result of 2 million years of evolution on the African plains. That we choose to wrap them up and let them atrophy is a mystery. Again, who would apply the same measures to their hands? What about rock climbers? Oops, my hand is too weak, I need some kind of fixed claw device to drag myself upward. LOL You'll know your feet are in their proper state of development when they are as strong as your hands. They should be thick & muscular; an easy way to condition your feet without first toughening your soles is to wear these: http://www.lunasandals.com/Look, I don't want to come across as banging my own drum, but I'm the same general age as you guys, and while I've always been a strong hiker (aren't we all if we're still doing it today?), the last few years of training have really upped my game.
Last edited by Hobbes; 07/31/14 11:13 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 172
|
|
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 172 |
Again, who would apply the same measures to their hands? What about rock climbers? Oops, my hand is too weak, I need some kind of fixed claw device to drag myself upward. LOL
LOL. Um, couldn't that be called "gloves"? I almost always wear some type of glove whenever I use hiking poles to protect my hands. As far as my feet I am still in the boot camp and wear Asolo but not the full grain leather heavy ones.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 453 Likes: 1
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 453 Likes: 1 |
Oh please just get off your pedestal, skip the sandals and go barefoot then. Who said anything about feet being defective? Yes, shoes are supposed to provide support, especially if you're lugging a heavy load backpacking, and especially if you're on rough terrain. Before I was in a bike accident, I was trail running 9 miles a day in my approach shoes, but that doesn't mean boots don't have their place, or that everyone's feet are the same. BTW, climbers do wear gloves once in awhile, or tape our hands, and the fixed claw device is called an ice axe. LOL indeed. "the boots will keep your feet more comfortable and resist fatigue due to the support" Shoes are not supposed to provide support. Your foot/ankle muscles (yes, including your arch) are supposed to be developed to the point that they can handle your body's load. How the notion that our feet/legs are somehow defective, and need support/other aids/tools, is a question for the advertisers & marketing men who popularized these concepts back in the day. Your feet & legs are NOT defective. They are the result of 2 million years of evolution on the African plains. That we choose to wrap them up and let them atrophy is a mystery. Again, who would apply the same measures to their hands? What about rock climbers? Oops, my hand is too weak, I need some kind of fixed claw device to drag myself upward. LOL You'll know your feet are in their proper state of development when they are as strong as your hands. They should be thick & muscular; an easy way to condition your feet without first toughening your soles is to wear these: http://www.lunasandals.com/Look, I don't want to come across as banging my own drum, but I'm the same general age as you guys, and while I've always been a strong hiker (aren't we all if we're still doing it today?), the last few years of training have really upped my game.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,037 Likes: 6
|
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,037 Likes: 6 |
Oh please just get off your pedestal, skip the sandals and go barefoot then. Agreed. Soapbox. As for feet evolving on the African plains for 2m years, a similar toughness might be said for Sherpas ,although this next example is just use, not genetics: Their hands are like tough leather, thick enough to pick up hot metal pans or lanterns. Ask me how I learned that lesson, thoughtlessly did the same and felt skin sizzle at 18,000 ft. With my surgically repaired left great toe and a nutcrackered compression fracture in the mid-foot, I cannot even wear tennis shoes around the house. Lots of individualization here. Mid-weights + a stiff carbon under-insole is what I must use. Take a look at Salty's salty comments earlier. Spot on.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261 |
"the boots will keep your feet more comfortable and resist fatigue due to the support"
Shoes are not supposed to provide support. Your foot/ankle muscles (yes, including your arch) are supposed to be developed to the point that they can handle your body's load.
How the notion that our feet/legs are somehow defective, and need support/other aids/tools, is a question for the advertisers & marketing men who popularized these concepts back in the day.
Your feet & legs are NOT defective. They are the result of 2 million years of evolution on the African plains. That we choose to wrap them up and let them atrophy is a mystery.
Really? Got news for you, buddy: If I were there in the "old country" loping along in the plains, I would not be able to walk without a serious limp, because believe it or not, some people -- lots of people -- ARE born with defects that without boots, orthotics, et al (one of my legs is one inch longer than the other, and I have nearly no arch development at all, medically documented.) Your attempts at, um, neutrality, have fallen solidly flat. There aint nothing sissy about wearing whatever it takes to get you from here to there.
The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day. 
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,529 Likes: 107
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,529 Likes: 107 |
> There aint nothing sissy about wearing whatever it takes to get you from here to there.  Reminds me of the desk-jockey ranger who once told me I couldn't have a true wilderness experience if I carried a Spot or other electronic device on my back-country trip. ...Hmmmm... I'm going to start telling everyone they can't have a true wilderness experience if they hike only on trails.  Edit: But I do want to give Hobbes credit here: He told me about the sandy beach at the middle Crabtree Lake. That turned out to be a sweet place to spend a night.  
Last edited by Steve C; 07/31/14 04:04 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572 |
So , what kind of pack weights did they carry back there on the African plains? And what kind of rocky, stepped and switchbacked trails, talus and scree did they climb, and descend, 15 or 20 miles a day for three weeks to six months?
Wherever you go, there you are. SPOTMe!
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,037 Likes: 6
|
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,037 Likes: 6 |
So , what kind of pack weights did they carry back there on the African plains? And what kind of rocky, stepped and switchbacked trails, talus and scree did they climb, and descend, 15 or 20 miles a day for three weeks to six months? I'll pile on some more... They did not even live long enough to wear out their feet, or it did not matter anyway. (Got eaten by lions or killed by next door neighbors, died of malaria or precursors to HIV and Ebola). They lived long enough to reproduce (14) and did not make it to most PCT-er's age.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 584 Likes: 13
|
|
OP
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 584 Likes: 13 |
Well it looks like salty steered it into a different debate entirely, the classic "Evolutionary anthropologic podiatry" discussion.
@jjoshuagregory (Instagram) for mainly landscape and mountain pics
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572 |
Well it looks like salty steered it into a different debate entirely, the classic "Evolutionary anthropologic podiatry" discussion. I steered it? I just asked a follow-up. To the rather interesting assertion that since our feet evolved to gather seeds and chase antelope as teenagers in the Serengeti they don't need any support to carry 10 days worth of food, shelter, insulating clothing, bedding and navigational aids up the Golden Staircase and along the Sierra Crest. As actual adults.
Wherever you go, there you are. SPOTMe!
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,529 Likes: 107
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,529 Likes: 107 |
To quote Charlie Brown;
Aaaaaaaauuuuuugggggghhhhhhh! Not the Boots vs Trailrunners debate! I thought you were going to ignore this thread, s-dog!
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572 |
To quote Charlie Brown;
Aaaaaaaauuuuuugggggghhhhhhh! Not the Boots vs Trailrunners debate! I thought you were going to ignore this thread, s-dog! I tried. But my purpose was preempted by the Applied Pedagogy of Paleolithic Podiatry: plainly too perfect to pass up.
Wherever you go, there you are. SPOTMe!
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 908 Likes: 2
|
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 908 Likes: 2 |
The was an old saying: "every pound on your feet is an extra five pounds on your back".
I've used low-top hiking boots (Merrills are mine) for back-packing, ankle-high Gore-Tex, and heavy leather boots. It's all a trade-off: weight vs. support.
Another factor is wet-weather protection. Ankle-high boots provide better rain protection, but using gaiters is advisable regardless of what kind of boot is worn. I forgot my gaiters this week and ended up with soggy feet...LOL.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,253
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,253 |
"last about 100 to 200 miles" First of all, that's not entirely true. If you follow the accounts of this year's crop of PCTers, they're getting 400-500 miles per pair of shoes. Secondly, so what? Trail runners cost $100+. It costs me more than $100 in gas every time I head to the Sierra from SoCal. For many numbers of out-of-state & foreign visitors to Calif, they're spending $1,000s to come out & visit. I have never understood the allure of false economy & attempted savings. You'll spend way more than $100 for a single night in a flea-bag hotel + dinner before/after your hike. Your shoe is a key component - why not spend the money on a quality trail runner that will do the job? Here are the biggies worn on the PCT. As far as I'm concerned, 20-somethings averaging 30 miles/day for 4 months are experts on what and doesn't work when it comes to hiking: http://www.amazon.com/Brooks-Cascadia-Trail-Running-Shoes/dp/B00B1JJBVIhttp://www.amazon.com/Altra-Lone-Peak-Trail-Running/dp/B00CM3AJG8PS While Zpacks are nice & light, this is the go-to UL pack for most: http://www.ula-equipment.com/product_p/catalyst.htm My mistake. I should have said starts breaking down. I got 300 or 400 miles on my Garmonts lows and they have been toast for a while. EVA breaks down quickly...sorry, that is just a fact. I just use them to save my boots. We are not talking about a trip to the Sierra, we are talking about shoes and how they are used. I know I am going to buy shoes whether I go to the Sierra or hike locally. I paid about $180 for my boots, I have had them resole once. With my boots, I am not limited to trails, which I am with trail runners. They will last at least 1,500 miles, 2,200 if I resole them a second time. I have found those who use trail runner to be evangelical religious about their use. Me, I don't care one way or the other what others use. I own 3 pairs of hiking footwear...I use all of them depending on what I plan.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 671
|
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 671 |
These are lightweight Salomons. No break in period whatsoever.
I gave a pair of these to my father-in-law last fall. He wore them for a half day walking around the Zoo, then wore them for Cactus to Clouds (23 miles, 10k elevation gain) the next day, no blisters! For a while Salomon advertised them as the 'lighest backpacking boot in the world.' I really wanted to keep the boots for myself, but the soles are narrower than my other Salomons. I have very weak ankles, so I like as much support/stability as I can get. One of my friends that has a pair of the Conquest boots compares them to wearing high top basketball shoes because of how light they feel. When people ask me for advice on what to wear, I usually to tell them to use the lightest shoe/boot they can get away with.
When I finally did see a podiatrist...
Good to hear you have a good doc. I went to a podiatrist once. When I told him what I was dealing with, he told me to find a new hobby. When I told him I also have to walk for my job, he told me that I may want to think about a career change...
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,253
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,253 |
Bee,
It is funny how that works. I was talking to wifey the other day and said my body is now paying the price for all my youthful stupidity...football, softball and basketball day after day on concrete or asphalt.
As for Hobbes statement...it's correct in a limited sense. To those individuals and cannot be applied to the general hiking population. Personally, I have no desire to go 30 miles a day for one day, let alone 4 months. My style is smell the flowers and take a bunch of pictures...30 miles a day leave little time for either.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,529 Likes: 107
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,529 Likes: 107 |
These are lightweight Salomons. No break in period whatsoever.
I gave a pair of these to my father-in-law last fall. They sound like ideal shoes. If only they came in 4E widths! 
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 584 Likes: 13
|
|
OP
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 584 Likes: 13 |
They sound like ideal shoes. If only they came in 4E widths! Steve, I have owned two pairs of Saloman Quest 4D backpacking boots (for four years now). My first pair (I bought em for the JMT) lasted the JMT plus two years, nearly 2000 miles of use. Never lost their grip and never lost their waterproofing. They were threadbare and coming loose at places, but to date were the best boots I've owned (plus the lightest high-tops I'd found). I didn't get a single blister on the JMT, and aside from stepping in creeks depper than my boots were high, i never got wet feet. I bought em a size up and the toebox was plenty big enough so long as I laced correctly. My only gripe is that they were an ugly rust orange. I bought another pair about a year and a half ago. Better color, same general look, but now the ball of the feet is broken down, I'm getting heel blisters, and the waterproofing is worn thin. They are still the grippiest boot, I just don't know if I feel like taking a $230 bath again
@jjoshuagregory (Instagram) for mainly landscape and mountain pics
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 671
|
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 671 |
Steve, I have owned two pairs of Saloman Quest 4D backpacking boots (for four years now) Those are 'MY' boots! I got my first pair (the ugly orange color) for $175 and luckily scored my second pair (olive green) for a few dollars less. When I bought the Conquest boots (that are my father-in-laws now), I was hoping they'd be a cheaper alternative. I probably could get by with them, but the soles are a good .5" narrower than the 4Ds. When I was debating what to do, a sale popped up on the 4Ds, bought them, and gave the Conquest's away as an early Christmas present. For comparison sake (IIRC), the 4Ds are advertised at about 23 ounces each and the Conquests at 18. I'm not sure what size they use for the weigh-in, but I'm guessing they're not whatever size SB or Steve wear! I've tried a couple of different hightop, lightweight boots, but I keep coming back to the 4Ds.
|
|
|
Re: Boots v. Trailrunners
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 654 Likes: 54
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 654 Likes: 54 |
I wear what the conditions dictate. I've done Whitney in trail runners, lightweight boots, and mid-weight boots. Last January, I wore plastic mountaineering boots. I didn't meet anyone who summited barefoot or wearing sandals on that trip.
|
|
|
|
|
