[pct-l] Heavy Leather Hiking Boots

Sat Feb 27 05:57:10 CST 2010

Interesting perspective on foot wear.

That probably works today.

It was contrary to the trend when I walked the PCT in 1980.

Of course, back then, the trail wasn't completed, there were several sections in Northern California when we had to bush-wack, guided by ribbons tied to vegetation that marked where the trail was going to be cleared but wasn't yet. We spent a lot of time slogging through the snow where the trail was "supposed to be" and, yes, there were many stretches where we had to walk along the highway.

Of course, I even carried a tent the entire trip so I obviously wasn't as concerned about weight as a lot of hikers are today.

If I was hiking the PCT this year, I probably wouldn't wear high-topped, Vibram-soled, leather hiking boots if the trail was as perfect as it is now puported to be.

Ernie Castillo
erniec01 at hotmail.com
248 884 5201

> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 14:09:26 -0800
> From: steeleye at wildblue.net
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Subject: [pct-l] Heavy Leather Hiking Boots
> 
> Good afternoon, all,
> 
> 
> Lately there’s been a barrage of posts advocating the use of traditional,
> high-topped, Vibram-soled, leather hiking boots. I believe this advice is
> ill-advised because following it offers few real advantages, and it imposes
> a very substantial burden on a trail hiker. For 99% of the PCT boots are
> just a solution in search of a problem.
> 
> 
> 
> While I hike in running or trail shoes I also wear heavy boots a great deal
> -- and have for the last 60 years. I wore them while serving in the Army; I
> wore them while working around heavy equipment; I wore them while on a USFS
> engineering crew; and I wear them while performing PCT maintenance in N.
> Oregon and S. Washington. I wore boots then because I was required to do so
> as a condition of employment. Currently, I choose to wear boots only while
> cutting and logging timber for my season’s firewood, or when I travel
> cross-country over steep, rough terrain. I do that only because sturdy
> boots provide the kind of protection I find necessary for my feet and
> ankles.
> 
> 
> 
> Historically, most people who wore boots on the trail did so because that’s
> what they wore in their everyday lives. Look at old photographs and note
> that instead of wearing dedicated hiking attire they were probably dressed
> in worn or shabby business suits; often including a necktie. When the
> backpacking craze of the early ‘70s arrived thousands of inexperienced
> people headed for their outfitter. What was popular then was the U.S.
> spin-off of the relatively light, leather, Vibram-soled European walking
> shoe, except our version became the ubiquitous, heavy, stiff,
> lace-to-the-toe “waffle-stomper”. Since there were few alternatives
> available at the time -- except for tennis shoes and a few field hockey
> shoes -- the “waffle-stomper” became most commonly used shoe. After all,
> “everybody’s doing it”.
> 
> 
> 
> Trail hiking is entirely different from walking cross-country hiking or
> wading through brush and logging slash. The tread of the PCT is
> substantially flat and level, with grades rarely exceeding 15%. In my view,
> the relatively rare instances of rough trail do not justify the penalties
> associated with stiff, heavy boots; and I wouldn’t wear boots just for a few
> short sections of steep, side-hill snow-pack any more than I would wear
> snowshoes the entire way just to avoid the occasional chance of postholing.
> Similarly, I wouldn’t carry a bow saw, a shovel, and a Pulaski for 2,663
> miles just to help myself across a few obstructed stretches of trail that I
> could otherwise slow down to negotiate or avoid.
> 
> 
> 
> More specifically:
> 
> --- Decent quality leather boots, particularly the lighter imported European
> varieties, are ruinously expensive. When you select a style and size you
> better guess correctly because most of us can’t afford to experiment by
> trying a dozen or more pairs to find just the right item. Overall, a hiker
> wearing sneakers will probably pay as much for his/her five pairs compared
> to possibly one pair of heavy boots. In my view wearing out more -- but
> less expensive -- shoes is a good thing. I prefer the ability to change my
> style and/or size while in-route rather than having to gut-it-out with one
> expensive pair for all conditions.
> 
> 
> --- Sturdy leather boots typically weigh between 4 and 7 pounds per pair. 4
> pounds is twice what my sneakers weigh, and 7 pounds equals the base weight
> of my pack. Then again, anyone who carries a traditional 65-pound load
> probably won’t notice an additional 5 pounds on their feet.
> 
> 
> --- Breaking-in heavy boots is usually a long and often-painful process,
> particularly if you try to hurry. With rare exceptions, if you bought boots
> now they would not be broken-in and trail-ready by the Kick-Off. In the
> process you can expect to develop blisters in places you didn’t even know
> you had places.
> 
> 
> --- Contrary to some inference, wearing boots will not obviate the
> possibility of having foot/leg problems such as plantar fasciitis,
> tendonitis, shin splints or any of the other maladies that trail pounding
> produces. In one important respect boots are worse: Because of their
> stiffness repetitive force is applied to limited areas of the foot
> localizing and concentrating the damage.
> 
> 
> --- Ankle support provided by boots is not what it’s cracked-up to be. While
> trail walking, the force of one’s leg goes directly into the heal and
> forefoot without a tendency to turn the ankle. A low-top sneaker will move
> on the foot to comply to trail irregularities without torquing the ankle
> sideways. Off-trail, my ankles don’t turn either, but the shoe could easily
> turn sideways off my foot. That’s not desirable but, again, PCT hiking
> isn’t about cross-country travel.
> 
> 
> 
> --- Stiff boots with Vibram soles, laced tightly at the ankles, are great
> for kick-stepping and “edging” on slick side-hill snowpack, however, this
> very rarely needs to be done. Most of the time a hiker is following the
> tracks of numerous previous hikers so useable footprints will be in place. I
> can’t remember more than a few times over the years when I broke a fresh
> track across slick side-hill snowpack, and even fewer times when I really
> “had to” vs. “wanted to”. Being generous, I would estimate that an average
> thru-hike would involve possibly 100 meters of un-trod, slick, side hill
> travel. In my mind that doesn’t justify wearing heavy boots for thousands
> of miles.
> 
> 
> 
> --- Typical boots – particularly boots with high, distinct heels – are much
> worse than sneakers in potential postholing situations. Sneakers usually
> have longer and wider soles for a greater total area, plus those soles are
> somewhat flexible to provide a better “feel” of the surface and to more
> evenly distribute the step force across the entire area. Stiff boots will
> concentrate step force -- first at the heal, then at a forefoot edge – to
> locally crush the snowpack and cause the hiker to posthole.
> 
> 
> 
> --- Boots with high, distinct heels are pretty good when charging down
> steep, loose grades. I’ll keep that in mind if I ever find a significant
> stretch of steep, loose grade and I feel that I simply can’t slow down for a
> minute or so. Remember though, heel-stepping down steep grades is a major
> cause of shin-splints, and it doesn’t take very long to do the damage.
> 
> 
> 
> --- The hard plastic Vibram soles are a hazard on hard, wet or frozen
> surfaces. Smooth wet logs are a particular treat, as are slick rocks in a
> river crossing. For a lasting remembrance of the resulting antics be sure
> to have someone standing by with a movie camera before you cross.
> 
> 
> 
> --- I recommend wearing shoes while fording, and leather and GoreTex boots
> are the very best at keeping the water in. Both dry much more slowly than
> regular sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> Overall, it’s good to remember that the nearly-total movement of PCTers to
> hike in lightweight running shoes did not evolve in a vacuum. It evolved
> over many years when bright, thoughtful, innovative, and experienced people
> looked at whatever became available and asked, “Why not give it a try?” What
> they found was that ultra-lite gear works.
> 
> 
> Enjoy your planning,
> 
> 
> 
> Steel-Eye
> 
> Hiking the Pct since before it was the PCT – 1965
> 
> http://www.trailjournals.com/steel-eye
> 
> http://www.trailjournals.com/SteelEye09
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-l mailing list
> Pct-l at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
> 
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/

_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469229/direct/01/