View Single Post
  #90   Report Post  
Old 25-02-2010, 04:26 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
SMS SMS is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 30
Default walking boots-- which are good?

Phil Cook wrote:
SMS wrote:

Phil Cook wrote:

Suede is leather with the best bit thrown away. It is the inner side
of the skin with the outer taken off. Nubuck is the outer that has
been abraded to resemble suede.

Why would they bother to abrade full grain leather to create Nubuck? I
suspect that Nubuck is from lower grade leather which doesn't look good
unless it's abraded. Or maybe it's to decrease the weight?


Fashion. Suede looks trendy but is as porous as a sponge, hence the
need to add a membrane to boots and shoes made of it if you want water
resistance. Nubuck looks like suede but has some water resistance, not
as good as full grain leather though.


Then Nubuck boots should cost more, not less, than full grain leather
boots. This is not the case (at least in the U.S.) where the most
expensive boots are full grain leather, with GoreTex membrane, and a
Vibram sole. Give up any of those three key features and the price comes
down.

I bought my 11 y.o. son a perfectly good pair of full grain leather
boots at Wal-Mart for $30. No GoreTex, no Vibram, but fine for his easy
boy scout treks. The next boots though will have to be better as the
weight of the packs and the difficulty of the trips increases, and they
don't care about the weather. Boots are required for safety; they won't
allow anyone the backpack trips without boots that have ankle support
and sufficient traction.