hiking boots vs. hiking shoes

A

andrew7978

Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
664
After posting some debatable topics, I enjoyed reading people's opinions and justifications. With that being said here is a new debate: hiking shoes vs. hiking boots. I have always used hiking boots because that what I had when I was young, but I just picked up my first pair of hiking shoes. I think the sole stiffness is comparable. Hiking boots do provide more ankle support, but shoes are lighter and easier to tie and untie. Considering I haven't actually used my shoes yet, I can't say which I like better, but I will update you guys in a few weeks. What do you all think?
 
I have always had ankle problems, so I stick to boots when the hike is rough or I have any appreciable weight on my back. For light hikes on hot summer days, I stick to Keen Newports or Targhee lows. Both suck if you are on wet trails on rainy days though, so I would much rather have some boots and gaiters on those days.
 
My experience says:

Shoes are fine with loads below 35, 40 lbs (I'm 160 for reference).

If you go above that load and/or are hiking on scree or the like, go with boots.

Also when I am in the latter situation, I hike with a "third leg:" a 70 or 75 cm ice axe, which I use like a cane (and I'm not talking about a snow/ice terrain). The idea (if you don't know) is to always leave two of your "three" legs put; i.e. move one leg or the axe at a time. Its AMAZING how much stability you get; and if you do slip, you don't go far. The worst fall I've had is landing on my butt, sitting down. I prefer the axe over hiking poles or a hiking cane (yes, they make this; I use it when I don't want to look like a moron with an ice axe in July) because you can hold the tip and grapple roots with the claw to pull yourself up a slope or lower yourself down. Also, its obviously stronger.

If I had a 60 lb pack, and I had to choose between shoes with the axe or boots and no axe, I'd take the axe and leave the boots.

I'm assuming the issue is support and/or ankle injury.
 
For me it really depends on the trail, how long I'll be hiking, and what kind of pack I am carrying. In general, I am a boot person. I have tried shoes and they are OK for dayhikes with a small pack, but even then on rough terrain (i.e. rocky), sometimes the sole isn't stiff enough or the ankle support isn't there. I haven't had problems with my ankles, but I like the support. I go for boots for almost everything, shoes for some shorter, easier hikes.
I have a friend that has been a shoe person forever and he had to get a pair of boots for a caving trip we were taking. He figured he would get his money's worth, so he wore them for everything and he's a convert now.
Nick
 
Five Ten makes the most wicked hiking shoes ever. Their Stealth rubber is the most amazing thing I've used on my feet. Their mountain bike shoes are awesome. Since them, I often keep my boots at home. They collect more debris than high tops, and don't offer as much protection for off trail hiking, or provide as much support as far as weight carried, but they sure are great for thrashing about in the woods for a few hours. The boots are on my feet if I'm building trail, cruising potential lines or carrying my tools. I wouldn't do a multi day trip in shoes either.
 
Shoes all the way for me. Less weight on the legs. Feet can breath better. Just plain more comfy for me what can i say. Also easier to climb or rocks and trees but thats me. Now if i were in the cold weather then i would wear boots to keep the feet warm. But rather be light on my feet. Oh yea i like to use a walking stick so im sure that helps too.

Sasha
 
Boots, or at least high-tops, to keep out the trash. And a wading staff. Passing a 4 wheeler on a desert mining road, the driver said "Wow! You've got at least 60 miles to the next trout stream." :D s.
 
I went on an alpine hike. I met this guy who was in running sneakers, who had done the whole pacific crest trail and the appalachian trail. He said, the only time he used boots was up high in the Sierra mountians.

I prefer flat shoes. Think about it the higher the platform the more dramatic the twist of the ankle. There is no scientific evidence that certain shoes offer more support.
 
I too use hiking boots instead of shoes. I need the ankle support that the boot gives me and I like not feeling every rock I step on while on the trails.
 
I vote for hiking boots in rough terrain with rocks.

Hiking shoes are great for that town park and state park with a easy trails.
 
Boots all the way. They give ankle support plus protection. If you buy a decent pair of boots and good socks like smart wool, your feet don't get hot and sweaty. Feet and ankles are really vulnerable to scrapes on rocks or by brush. I like the protection and support they afford. Finally, having bought several pair of approach shoes thinking this would be good - they always fall apart on me.

I love it when I see people wearing flip flops on trails. Its like they are daring nature to stub their toe. Then when you ask them why they have that little slipper on - they either say my feet get too hot or pose the question - what if I am going to walk in water? As though all water is underlaid by a nice sandy beach....
 
I dont actually have hiking boots or shoes

I used to wear only sneakers , dunlop kt26 , till I couldnt get them in a big enough size anymore

now its makita work boots

I do not understand the thinking that says the boots I wear must be swapped over cos now Im hiking , instead of just walking and carrying stuff ...

but this is just my opinion .
 
Not that a lot of people on this forum respect Bear Grylls, but I notice he is always wearing some type of shoe, whereas Les usually wears boots.
 
chrisaloia said:
I went on an alpine hike. I met this guy who was in running sneakers, who had done the whole pacific crest trail and the appalachian trail. He said, the only time he used boots was up high in the Sierra mountians.

I prefer flat shoes. Think about it the higher the platform the more dramatic the twist of the ankle. There is no scientific evidence that certain shoes offer more support.
Click to expand...

Back in '98 I was backpacking in Glacier and ran into two guys who were working for the USGS. They were part of a study to genetically identify/count all of the grizzlies in the park. Their job was to set up and tend bear bait sites; they would place an attractant in an out of the way area, then ring the site with a strand or two of barbed wire. When a bear came to check out the scent it would leave behind a hair sample on the wire that could be collected for DNA analysis.

Needless to say their pack loads were immense, one because they were out for a week at a time, and two because they had to carry all their personal kit plus all of the study supplies. Hiking in Glacier is pretty much a never ending cycle of up and down. Rare is a full day of hiking that does not involve traversing at least one pass. And you also have to add in that half of the time spent hiking in that park is above treeline, pretty much on solid rock.

Both of these dudes were wearing sneakers.

Turns out they had been doing this all summer and in the process they had both destroyed their boots so rather than destroy more pairs of expensive boots they were going with the cheapest and easiest option.

I honestly don't know how they did it. I can understad how their leg strength might allow them to get away with no ankle support, but all of that time carrying load over solid rock with minimal padding had to get damn painful.

I'll day hike in lightweight shoes if I'm staying on trail, but one I'm carrying a full pack or going off trail its boots for me.
 
In the early 90's, I bought a great pair of hi-top cabela-ish gortex boots. I wore them all the time. Then, I got into Merrels and Hi-teks hiking boots. I have been on long hike Cascades, Glacier, Taos, etc.

Now, I have changed my approach totally, I am into flat converse style sneakers. I believe in feeling the ground and being more mindful when I walk. I take more secure steps and don't take as much chances on rocky terrain like I was in thick boots which did not let me feel the ground.
 
I've always used good quality boots, but after this weekend, I might try shoes. I did a good 10 mile hike in the Rockies, and coming back down the trail, the boots really started digging into my ankles/shins, causing a lot of pain.
 
If you haul a light load (say 20 pounds) and you use trekking poles, you can use trail runners for hiking shoes. My biggest issue with too light a shoe is stone bruising the bottom of my feet rather than ankle problems. I've found trail runners a little too flexible for my weight and load, so light hiking shoes and low boods usually do the thrick. Montrail, Vasque and Salomon are my favorites. The Montrail Namche is light yet protective.

It does make a difference at the end of the day-- you move that weight thousands of times getting up a hill.
 
I like wearing hiking shoes, boots are too cumbersome for me (the leather ones) they are good and proven but too bulky for my tastes. Although I have tried some light weight boots that feel more like shoes and they were okay, but I still like shoes better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top