Hiking/Backpacking MB (shoes vs. boots)

[ismellbacon]

I have heard two different schools of thought on the subject of: "Is it better to wear hiking boots, or shoes while hiking?"

My troop is gearing up for working on the Backpacking MB this summer, and the scouts have planned several hiking excurstions for us to do...

My question to those that have had some experience with hiking and trying different footwear is: which are better, boots or shoes?

I read a link to a scouter's thesis for UoS on backpacking and the author has some great ideas in it.

But, one item he brought up was to wear shoes instead of hiking boots since they weigh less and make the hiker more nimble in dealing with rocks and whatnot.

I spent my late teens and early 20's in the Infantry, and of couse we wore boots (the nice heavy stiff ones)... and it seems like a light hiking boot with a sturdy sole is the best approach.

Any thoughts on the subject are welcome! And, any product placements are welcome also!

Thanks in advance!

[FrankJ]

What ever you wear it needs to fit properly with good socks. For actually backpacking I would go with sturdy boots. There are plenty inexpensive light weight options.

I know a few people in the utlralight camp that wear something lighter. But they are experienced & I am not responsible for their mistakes. They also have invested in ultralight gear that the typical scout will not have.

Suggestions: Keen boots (not sandals) HiTech. Most army/navy stores have a good selection.

[wagionvigil]

Go somewhere that will fit you properly. Each foot has a different shaped foot bed that works better for it. There is a store I frequent that spend at least an hour fitting you properly and have been know to give you boots of two different sizes one left and one right It also depends upon the type of terrain you will be hiking on.

[ismellbacon]

Thanks for the replies thus far!

Sounds like boots are in the lead! I currently wear the army style tan colored jungle boots, they have good soles, moderate weight, and let my feet breath.... but, the downside to them are they are not waterproof and provide near zero insulation.

[smtroop168]

Go somewhere that will fit you properly. Each foot has a different shaped foot bed that works better for it. There is a store I frequent that spend at least an hour fitting you properly and have been know to give you boots of two different sizes one left and one right It also depends upon the type of terrain you will be hiking on.

Actualy this is a critical point in Hiking. Your left foot must know what your right foot is doing. Otherwise you might as well be on a tandem.

[wagionvigil]

LOL actually this outfitter is not too far from you.

[ronin718]

Go somewhere that will fit you properly. Each foot has a different shaped foot bed that works better for it. There is a store I frequent that spend at least an hour fitting you properly and have been know to give you boots of two different sizes one left and one right It also depends upon the type of terrain you will be hiking on.

Actualy this is a critical point in Hiking. Your left foot must know what your right foot is doing. Otherwise you might as well be on a tandem.

Is that a tandem that was welded yourself?

[RWSmith]

Actual[l]y this is a critical point in Hiking. Your left foot must know what your right foot is doing. Otherwise you might as well be on a tandem.

Is that a tandem that was welded yourself?

<WMF> If I hear the word, "tandem" one more time... I'm gonna ban somebody for snark abuse! </WMF>

I mean, just because you should be able to go on forever while on a tandem, that doesn't mean you should! (Oops! -- Guess I now have to ban myself!)

[FrankJ]

How about a two person human powered personal mobility device? (PHPPMd) Not to be confused with a rickshaw.

[smtroop168]

Okay...I'll change it from Tandem to pick on Climbing MB needing to know Right from Left.

[FrankJ]

No partials.

[razor_strop]

Getting slightly back on track, I'd say...wait for it...my son loves it when I say this...it depends.

Seriously, I'd recommend using this as a teaching moment for the Scouts. Have them do a quick analysis of the terrain--not just elevation changes, but the condition of the trail/off-trail ground. Lead them through figuring if the chance of rolling an ankle, stubbing a toe or not having enough traction warrants wearing boots. If not, then sneakers it is. We just had three of our older Scouts do their Hiking MB 20-miler in sneakers, as they (IMO, correctly) determined hiking a "rails to trails" rehabbed railroad bed would be easier and more comfortable in sneakers than heavy boots. No ankle injuries, no blisters.

[ismellbacon]

Getting slightly back on track, I'd say...wait for it...my son loves it when I say this...it depends.

Seriously, I'd recommend using this as a teaching moment for the Scouts. Have them do a quick analysis of the terrain--not just elevation changes, but the condition of the trail/off-trail ground. Lead them through figuring if the chance of rolling an ankle, stubbing a toe or not having enough traction warrants wearing boots. If not, then sneakers it is. We just had three of our older Scouts do their Hiking MB 20-miler in sneakers, as they (IMO, correctly) determined hiking a "rails to trails" rehabbed railroad bed would be easier and more comfortable in sneakers than heavy boots. No ankle injuries, no blisters.

Thanks for the input!

[ThunderingWind]

I agree with the terrain assessment. I do 10K walks via the AVA.org program in my crocs with wool socks.

I do have good quality hiking boots when the situation dictates.

[topshot]

I read a link to a scouter's thesis for UoS on backpacking and the author has some great ideas in it.

But, one item he brought up was to wear shoes instead of hiking boots since they weigh less and make the hiker more nimble in dealing with rocks and whatnot.

I spent my late teens and early 20's in the Infantry, and of couse we wore boots (the nice heavy stiff ones)... and it seems like a light hiking boot with a sturdy sole is the best approach.

That would have been my dissertation.

To me terrain is irrelevant. Quite a few off-trail backpackers and mountain climbers use shoes rather than boots. I highlighted the benefits in the paper, but will focus on just ergonomics of it here. You want your feet and ankles to be used like they were designed to be. Stiff boots don't allow that so you can never have as good a purchase on poor terrain as you could with shoes.

However, there are situations boots are helpful. I'm sure you'd agree that the load you carried in the infantry was far from lightweight. Plus there were other hazards of a combat zone that make heavy duty boots the logical choice. If someone insists on carrying loads of 40 or more pounds, you may need to stick with boots.

I also mentioned this isn't something one should rush into. You can't just go from wearing heavy boots to shoes and expect good results unless you walk on really nice trails. You should strengthen your ankles by walking along hillsides, uneven ground, training hikes, etc.

If you'd like check out this more in-depth read on the subject.

[wagionvigil]

There was a guy several years that did the AT All the way in Chucks.

[topshot]

There was a guy several years that did the AT All the way in Chucks.

That is essentially what Grandma Gatewood did in 1955. Went through 5 pairs of Keds I think.

[FrankJ]

Look long enough & you can find some one that hikes successfully in crocs. Doesn't make it a good idea.

Heavy stiff boots & shoes are two ends of the spectrum. Neither is the best choice for the backpacking & skill level of your typical scout.

[ismellbacon]

Thanks for the input everyone!


On a side note... I've taken up barefoot running. ...it's so easy, a caveman can do it

[Reasonable Rascal]

Thanks for the input everyone!


On a side note... I've taken up barefoot running. ...it's so easy, a caveman can do it

It has been said that the pun is simultaneously both the lowest and the highest form of humor. Therefore, sir, I congratulate you on a job well done.

RR