sturdy hiking boots

[nlt82]

G'day all.

last week I joined the forum and posted on the 'who are you' page where I got some good ideas for overnight hikes.
Now I have a question regarding boots I am hoping to get some views on.
I am about to purchase some hiking boots and have come across the following two boots that I like.
the first are Scarpa Kinesis Gore-Tex Hiking Boot and the second are the Vasque Bitterroot Gore-Tex Boot.

I am interested in hearing from people that have used either boot.

I intend to go on a few overnight hikes over the warmer months and will aim for at least one hike a year of at least 4 to 10 nights.
It would be great to know if either boot has any durability issues.
Also suggestions for other boots are welcome.

cheers

[Strider]

I have no experience with either of these boots. However, there was another thread about the Kinesis quite recently and everyone there seemed pretty happy with them.

viewtopic.php?t=14747

[wayno]

they are both good quality brands, i doubt there would be durability issues in either

[wayno]

those boots will be pretty hot in the warmer weather.... they are more for colder environments and around a lot of sharp rocks

[Strider]

those boots will be pretty hot in the warmer weather.... they are more for colder environments and around a lot of sharp rocks

I'd argue this one Wayne. Most of us only have one pair of boots for all conditions. It is normal to spec these to the harshest conditions one might expect to encounter, summer OR winter.

[Happy Pirate]

those boots will be pretty hot in the warmer weather.... they are more for colder environments and around a lot of sharp rocks

I'd argue this one Wayne. Most of us only have one pair of boots for all conditions. It is normal to spec these to the harshest conditions one might expect to encounter, summer OR winter.

True Strider but the question needs to be asked if boots are the most appropriate footwear.
I still like boots for mud and slush and pointy things and will clump around in my Columbias for long walks but many walkers would argue the point the shoes have advantages.

nit82
Have you conclusively decided on boots instead of walking shoes? Goretex boots are a fair outlay so be sure it's the foot wear of choice.
Just beware of Hi-tec and Trezeka boots whatever you choose.
cheers
Steve

[jacko1956]

Boots like those will last for years.

However I wouldn't use any boots unless hiking in below freezing temps.
Anything above freezing and I will use trail shoes (non waterproof).
They are easier on feet, lighter and dry out quickly.
Having said that I seem to have stronger than average ankles and don't miss the ankle support.

[Scottyk]

Boots like those will last for years.

However I wouldn't use any boots unless hiking in below freezing temps.
Anything above freezing and I will use trail shoes (non waterproof).
They are easier on feet, lighter and dry out quickly.
Having said that I seem to have stronger than average ankles and don't miss the ankle support.

If you carrying a pack for overnighters and longer most people will get over the 10kg mark on their back. This means boots are a very good idea. The chances of rolling your ankle increases a lot with a bit of load.
Get boots, they will last you along time.
Scarpa boots are generally excellent. I own Scarpa SL's and they are they are good for me. Others will give advice on the Kenesis.

[wayno]

debateable. if you havent worn heavy boots in the past, be aware it can take abt of getting used to lugging the weight around on your feet... build up the walks you do in them befre trying an overnighter in them....

[jacko1956]

I have over 4500kms of hiking with packs around 12 - 18kg usually.
I haven't worn anything more than hiking shoes for over 4400 of them.
I don't see a reason for boots unless you have weak ankles or very cold weather.
In cold weather I would choose waterproof instead of non waterproof, but would probably stay with shoes.
But it's all personal preference.
If you think you need boots, then wear them.
I think too many people wear boots because they are told they need them.
Someone hiking an easy trail in fair weather doesn't need the same boots as someone hiking Tassie in winter temps.
Far too many wear boots because that is part of the "look" or the "expectation" not the "need".

[Strider]

I, for one, cannot handle more much than a gravel footpath in approach shoes or similar - the soles are just too soft and my feet fatigue very quickly.

In Tassie "winter temps" can occur at any time of year. You would be mad to walk anything beyond a day trip here in shoes IMO. Take note, however, that the OP has not stated where they plan to use said footwear. If anywhere warmer than Tassie, I suspect GoreTex will become total sweat boxes - they are bad enough down here in our relatively cool climate!

Also consider that boots are generally of more durable construction. It is far less likely that you might destroy one 3 days into a 6 day walk, for example.

P.S. There is no such thing as waterproof boots.

[Happy Pirate]

I, for one, cannot handle more much than a gravel footpath in approach shoes or similar - the soles are just too soft and my feet fatigue very quickly.

In Tassie "winter temps" can occur at any time of year. You would be mad to walk anything beyond a day trip here in shoes IMO. Take note, however, that the OP has not stated where they plan to use said footwear. If anywhere warmer than Tassie, I suspect GoreTex will become total sweat boxes - they are bad enough down here in our relatively cool climate!

P.S. There is no such thing as waterproof boots.

Strider
in his intro he said he was going to be hiking in the W & S Gipsland region.
http://bushwalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=14874&p=197539#p197539

nlt82
As I said - determine what you need before purchase. There are a range of footware and even more opinions!

There is always going to be an argument between boots and shoes; between more water-resistant but slower drying and less water-resistant but rapid drying.
These different conditions will determine your final choice and in my experience these determining factors change about 27 time during an average walk.
Walk in both and decide from experience because there is no right or wrong.
And even experience is probably more about personal choice than definitive fact.
Enjoy the roller-coaster
cheers
Steve

[jacko1956]

As I said - determine what you need before purchase. There are a range of footware and even more opinions!

There is always going to be an argument between boots and shoes; between more water-resistant but slower drying and less water-resistant but rapid drying.
These different conditions will determine your final choice and in my experience these determining factors change about 27 time during an average walk.
Walk in both and decide from experience because there is no right or wrong.
And even experience is probably more about personal choice than definitive fact.

My point exactly!
The OP indicated a lack of experience and that fair weather hiking was involved.
Good boots are expensive and to my mind the OP appears to have been told that they are needed, but I believe that not everyone needs them.

How many people who think they would like to try hiking a few days have been convinced that they need $300 boots that give them blisters and a poor intro to the outdoors when all they needed was a $100 pair of shoes or even some sports shoes they already had in their cupboard?

I am sure I would have some excellent boots if I lived in Tassie but I don't.
Here in the West, I cannot imagine anywhere or when in this state I would ever wear boots again.
I don't wear gaiters either but do wear long lightweight trousers in all weather conditions.
Everyone should find out what suits them and their hiking needs and not just assume because one person has a lot of experience their choices are correct for everyone else. I think the OP should really do his/her first couple of overnighters in whatever he/she already has in his cupboard that most equates to a hiking shoe and determine what suits BEFORE purchasing specific footwear for a longer hike. On an overnight hike the packweight should be quite low and the need for boots versus shoes is reduced. It is just a walk after all.

[neilmny]

Forgive my off topic dumb question but what is an OP?

[Scottyk]

original post

[wayno]

original post

in the thread topic

[Happy Pirate]

As I said - determine what you need before purchase. There are a range of footware and even more opinions!

There is always going to be an argument between boots and shoes; between more water-resistant but slower drying and less water-resistant but rapid drying.
These different conditions will determine your final choice and in my experience these determining factors change about 27 time during an average walk.
Walk in both and decide from experience because there is no right or wrong.
And even experience is probably more about personal choice than definitive fact.

My point exactly!
The OP indicated a lack of experience and that fair weather hiking was involved.
Good boots are expensive and to my mind the OP appears to have been told that they are needed, but I believe that not everyone needs them.

How many people who think they would like to try hiking a few days have been convinced that they need $300 boots that give them blisters and a poor intro to the outdoors when all they needed was a $100 pair of shoes or even some sports shoes they already had in their cupboard?

I am sure I would have some excellent boots if I lived in Tassie but I don't.
Here in the West, I cannot imagine anywhere or when in this state I would ever wear boots again.
I don't wear gaiters either but do wear long lightweight trousers in all weather conditions.
Everyone should find out what suits them and their hiking needs and not just assume because one person has a lot of experience their choices are correct for everyone else. I think the OP should really do his/her first couple of overnighters in whatever he/she already has in his cupboard that most equates to a hiking shoe and determine what suits BEFORE purchasing specific footwear for a longer hike. On an overnight hike the packweight should be quite low and the need for boots versus shoes is reduced. It is just a walk after all.

We are of agreement here. Advice can be good.
Assuming, of course, that the OP didn't know what he needed and hadn't posted his location and had no experience to determine his requirements and required a multitude of divergent but informed opinions as his sole source of information and could sort through the conflicting advice not based on his personal needs to come out with one dominant value without any background information.
Other than that of course. ...Other than that forums are brilliant!!!

ARE YOU STILL THERE nlt82 ?????
It's OK, really, we always do this...
C'mon li'll fella. Its OK... come back to the light....
Everythings OK, lets talk about boots....everythings... just... hunky... dorey...
all in good fun
Steve

[Ellobuddha]

HIJACK HERE

Can anyone recommend a set of very sturdy lighter style boots?

I have very weak ankles from football so high ankle support in the way of boots is needed.

I have a pair of Mammut Mt Cascades ( Raichle) which are great GTX boots. They are big, sturdy, waterproof but also heavy. They were great for recent Tassie walk and other snow/wet trips Ive done. They are too hot for coastal or summer use.

Im looking for some recommendations for high cut boots that would run a little cooler. My closest stores are 3 hrs away so it makes it a bit harder.

[nlt82]

I'm still here. I have just been enjoying a nice Sunday drink with friends in St kilda. Thanks to everyone who contributed. I welcome all options and appreciate all advice.
Sounds like a few things to consider.
I have a week or so before I need to purchase.
Thanks guys.
nlt82

[nlt82]

...and I'm comfortable spending a little more if it means the boot/shoe lasts longer.
Cheers
nlt82

[wayno]

@Ellobuddha
different brands can fitt differently, some brands work for some peoples feet but not others
I use Salomon cosmics, just over 600gm each... great supportive full height boot.
but you could use any of their full height boots, the conquests are lighter with a more flexibble sole.
i also have the x ultras, mid height boot, 450 grams each, depends if you want to consider a mid height boot or be safer with ankle support with a full height boot, ideally go to the shops and try different brands to see which is the most comfortable and find a model in that brand/s that work for your feet...

[stepbystep]

those boots will be pretty hot in the warmer weather.... they are more for colder environments and around a lot of sharp rocks

I'd argue this one Wayne. Most of us only have one pair of boots for all conditions. It is normal to spec these to the harshest conditions one might expect to encounter, summer OR winter.

I'd argue with that. Most of the walkers, that regularly go bush that I know have multiple boots/shoes to match the different terrain we walk in. It extends the life of them too.

A good all rounder though is the Zamberlan Vioz GTX. Very comfortable and reasonably sturdy.

[nlt82]

Thanks stepbystep.
I guess I am looking for an all rounder at this stage.
As I mentioned in my post

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=14874&p=197539#p197539

I am getting back into bush walking after 12 years.
For the benefit of others who have given advice here I will be starting out with something easy. 30km overnight on a well established track. Over the next 12 months I do intend to hike in all conditions and along trails of varying levels of difficulty.
I guess the plan is to get as many hikes under my belt, or boots, as possible.
And I can say that I am looking forward to it.
nlt82

[slparker]

http://www.amazon.com/Salomon-Mens-Syna ... B0054PIGA2

about 100 bucks delivered. probably a good starter boot until you decide:
1. I need sturdier full leather goretex lined boots, or
2. trail shoes will do just fine, or
3. these are perfect.

The advantage of the Scarpas, IMO, is the excellent vibram sole - which is also found on many other boots. They will stick to rock even when wet which is an excellnt trait in any boot.
IMHO boots like the kinesis pro are pretty much for hiking over unformed or very rocky areas as they have a laterally and longitudinally stiff sole and very thick leather. ie they offer great protection against rock pinching (ankle protection from rock abrasion) and bruising from rock points. Be aware that these boots can be less than comfortable on a hot day on formed tracks - although many of my colleagues swear by them for all types of walking.
I think that the gore-tex lining AND the thick leather is overkill on the Kinesis pro, i would look at the kinesis pro without goretex, which is available at Paddy Pallin. I don't see the point of a htick leather boot with goretex... the advantage of goretex is that it can snowproof and water resist a boot that can be made very light and flexible.
http://www.paddypallin.com.au/scarpa-ki ... -mens.html this is the non-goretex version with a beautiful leather liner.

I don't own the kinesis pro but just tried them on at paddy pallin in Canberra. Unfortunately the distributor only sees fit to import full sizes and not half sizes, so if you want the best fit you may have to import from online (which is cheaper anyhow). I think they are too much of a boot unless oyu're seriously considering rockhopping with a pack on over scree and boulder fields in which case the very high protection from the leather and the stiff sole might be useful, but not essential. I've gotten by with much less sturdy boots without crippling my feet. If you're planning a couple of weeks walking in SW tas or NZ or Via Ferrata or alpine walks in Europe these might be the ticket. They are ultra-expensive but very light and well made for their degree of protection. I am seriously thinking of getting a pair myself but i fall between sizes.
Have you also thought of or tried these:
http://www.campsaver.com/sl-active-boot-men-s

these are 300 bucks or so delivered from the states, have the same last (same sole and very similar fitting) and are not goretex lined (but highly water resistant apparently).


Anyway good luck in your quest for boots. I would try the boots on again (if you haven't done so already) after a morning walking and walk around the shop with them on for some time to get a feel for them. Boots (in my experience) tend to shorten somewhat over time as the sole unit bananas so what (just) fits in the shop might end up cramping your toes in the long term. At $500 bucks a pop it is an expensive mistake to make - make sure your toes have sufficient room to move...

[nlt82]

Thanks for that slparker.

I have tried a few pairs on and the staff at PP on little Bourke Melb have been fantastic.

I have enough info now and think I'll be ok finding the right pair.

Now to set a date and settle on a walk.
Maybe a summary of that in another post to come.

nlt82

[Joomy]

http://www.amazon.com/Salomon-Mens-Synapse-Hiking-Shoe/dp/B0054PIGA2

about 100 bucks delivered. probably a good starter boot until you decide:
1. I need sturdier full leather goretex lined boots, or
2. trail shoes will do just fine, or
3. these are perfect.

The Synapse is Salomon's "natural motion" style shoe, so not sure it's that great for your average backpacker. It has very little in the way of torsion control, and no rock plate.

I would think a better option from Salomon for most people would be the XA Pro 3D, with or without the higher ankle, with or without Gore-tex. Personally I am dubious about how much support any soft soft or boot offers. Most stability comes from the sole unit and unless it has a really high ankle cuff I would suggest using a cheap ankle-brace with a trail runner.

[wayno]

xa pro 3d teh soles dont last on hard ground, got the shortest lifespan out of those soles that i have from any footwear i've worn
also remember in the heat your feet will swell so as slparker says make sure you have a decent amount of room in the boot. a hot day in an ageing boot that is just big enough new will be an interesting exercise to walk in.... the synapse boots are good chap starters you could do worse

[slparker]

Joomy wrote;
"Personally I am dubious about how much support any soft soft or boot offers. Most stability comes from the sole unit and unless it has a really high ankle cuff I would suggest using a cheap ankle-brace with a trail runner."

the xa pro 3d sole is too slippery in my experience - low tread height + wet rock = titsup. Otherwise a great shoe. Have you tried the synapse, Joomy? I have read various review for it and a few pros and cons.

Anyway, without wanting to revisit the stability argument, I am doubtful that a high ankle or a stiff sole = 'stability' unless you define what 'stability' means or, more importantly, what factors lead to 'instability'.

[stepbystep]

Thanks for that slparker.

I have tried a few pairs on and the staff at PP on little Bourke Melb have been fantastic.

I have enough info now and think I'll be ok finding the right pair.

Now to set a date and settle on a walk.
Maybe a summary of that in another post to come.

nlt82

Start a post on boot advice and the advice will never stop coming!!!

Enjoy your return to the bush.

[whynotwalk]

A good all rounder though is the Zamberlan Vioz GTX. Very comfortable and reasonably sturdy.

+1