Trail Runners vs. Boots

imported
#1

Hi All,

What are people’s thoughts on boots versus trail runners?

I’ve searched this forum and found a few posts under the AT on this topic, but wondering what people thought for the CT through hike. Most of the AT posts suggested that for through hiking the AT trail runners are much better. But they are talking about months on the trail versus weeks. My main concern is that the trail runners won’t provide enough support or foot protection. I’ll be going ultralight with a base weight around 16 pounds.

Thanks for any advice,

Prometheus

#2

Light pack = light shoes.
There is really no question of what are better to wear unless you’ve got medical issues that prohibit you from wearing sneaks. Boots are old school and mostly overkill for a summer hike on the AT. You want footwear that will dry fast and breathe well to prevent blistering and boots aren’t that.
Take a research hike in trail runners and you’ll be amazed.
As to support, the only footwear that provide true support to your ankles ae paratrooper boots and rigid plastic ski boots. Everything short of that is playing with mental blocks. Liberate yourself from the tyranny of boots.

Brooks

#3

I have a minority opinion. I wear a pair of modern Danner combat boots. Please don’t think of the old black boots and don’t think of the old hiking boots. These are made of leather that is like suede, and they were comfortable right out of the box. They are the most comfortable footwear I’ve ever worn.

I’ve walked/hiked over 2,000 miles in these boots. (I keep a log.) They don’t show any signs of wear. I keep the bottoms covered with Gorilla tape, and put small patches on the soles each day. The Gorilla tape has surprisingly good grip on rocks and snow. (Think microfiber.)

They are completely waterproof and I just walk through streams if it’s more convenient. I’ve never had water soak through in the rain, although that could be a consideration on the AT.

I’ve never had a blister in them, or even a hot spot.

The key to these boots is an energy return system that really works. They also provide a stable platform for the feet. My feet are never tired at the end of the day.

The only disadvantage is they are a little hard to get on for those night-time trips outside. Just loosen the laces well before going to sleep.

In summary, this boot is the only footwear I’ve ever worn that doesn’t feel good to take off at the end of the day. My feet feel as good at the end of the day as they do at the beginning.

Gershon

#4

I went with about the same weight as you and wore Wildcats; boots are overkill for me these days (these years). The only real protection I need is the EVA layer between me and the ground - the much vaunted ‘ankle support’ argument is bunkum.

edh

#5

The footbed on the CT is, for the most part, very well maintained and relatvely flat and rock/root free. Trail runners and a light pack are the preferred combonation. I have been hiking and backpacking since the early 70s and have used many types of foot ware and in my opinion the ankle support argument is not “bunkum”. I notice a slight but noticible difference in boots. I definitely get a lot less ankle rolls with a boot then with a trail runner.

Big B

#6

We think it is also a function of the time of year and how much you value dry feet in cold weather. We will wear boots in snowy conditions and in very cold weather. When it warms up, there is no question but to go with trail runners, or Keens in the case of Rocky.

rocky & swamp fox

#7

Thanks everyone for the replies. I think I will do a test weekend or two with some trail runners. I do like the boots for winter hiking and kind of a must for snowshoe camping. Once the snow is gone though, I’m guessing I’ll be leaning towards the light weight and comfort.

Prometheus

#8

Okay, follow on question now. If I switch to trail runners, should I continue to use the same Merino Wool hiking socks, or switch to a thin running sock?

Prometheus

#9

Footwear ultra important. Blisters debilitating. Ankle rolls can easily end one’s trip.

Ankle rolls, for me, nearly ceased when I began using TREKKING POLES. I find trekking poles help my ankles way more than boots.

On Track

#10

DeFeet Charcoal Wooleator socks are thin, made of a merino wool blend, and are an awesome combo with the trail runners I use. Learned about these socks from reading “The Ultimate Hiker’s Gear Guide” by Andrew Skurka.

Bernard

#11

I learned how to backpack on a cruel trail (the AZT) which had me switching from shoes to boots after about 300 miles and two rolled ankles. I don’t know how the tread of the Colorado Trail compares - I will after this summer :slight_smile: - but I saw an iffy picture in a CT journal, so I’ll be going with boots.

I must add that it’s utter nonsense to say that boots don’t provide a substantial amount of extra ankle support. It’s your choice to use shoes versus boots, but don’t play down the usefulness of boots just because you prefer the weight/quick drying aspects of trail runners. They both have their advantages and disadvantages, and the prime advantage of boots is no rolled ankles. That’s all it comes down to: which aspects of footwear you feel are your priority.

Pockets

#12

There are some rought patches and scree scattered throughout the trail. I use boots as well as hiking poles. I personally feel it’s better to have the extra protection and hopefully you wont find yourself in the middle of the San Juans with a rolled ankle and 30 miles to the next road. But, that is one of the precautions I take hiking alone.

adios!

Stephen

#13

hiked the ct in asics running shoes with no problems

floater

#14

I started the CT last year with Lowa Renegade light boots.

I finished it in cheap Columbia running shoes.

In the past I have backpacked in heavy custom Limmers.

Although I was initially a skeptic of hiking without boots, I am going to stick to shoes. Much of the CT is excellent tread, but there are also plenty of rocky sections - the Collegiates, Jarosa Mesa to name a couple and my shoes worked fine.

I found that my feet could “feel” the trail much better in shoes. If anything, I felt more stable on rocky sections, since my legs seemed able to “read” the terrain better than when wearing heavy boots. I think heavier boots can potentially protect your ankles but make you less sensitive to your steps. Is that a good trade-off?

I sort of liken it to 2WD and 4WD vehicles. When I am in my car, I am more mindful when the roads are slippery. When I am driving my truck, not so much. And you can end up fishtailing in either vehicle - just like you can roll your ankles wearing boots. In fact, with the stiff footbed of heavy boots, I’m sort of wondering if you are more likely to get a significant sprain if you DO manage to roll it.

I don’t like the fact that shoes wear out more quickly from a sustainability perspective, but as I lighten my load even more, I hope to keep hiking in them.

Paddlefoot

#15

I have hiked it twice …Both times montrail …The hardrocks…oh how I miss u ! I will b out again and wearing my trusty sawtooths obozs…boots r over kill for me

yappy

#16

Here is some research into the energy used while wearing heavy backpacking boots: www.researchgate.net/publication/19462906_Energy_cost_of_backpacking_in_heavy_boots

Bernard

#17

The abstract indicates no relation to the reality of hiking in boots or shoes.

"We therefore investigated the effects of increasing boot weight by 5% of body weight "
Really? For a 160 lb person that is 8 lbs ! Are they assuming the hiker is wearing lead lined socks?

George Bondor

#18

Since I tend to be hard-headed, it took me a while to convert from boots to shoes. Since converting, I noticed I am less fatigued at the end of the day, and have yet to have any blisters, even when hiking with wet feet.

Have heard from other thru-hikers and industry people that if a person is looking for complete ankle support, to hike in downhill ski boots.

Your experience may vary.

Bernard