walking boots-- which are good?
 

Scott Bryce wrote:

Phil Cook wrote:

You only need a waterproof membrane in your boots if they are made of
materials that are not inherently waterproof. Treated leather is
already a breathable waterproof material.

You only need a waterproof boot if you intend to walk for long periods
of time in wet conditions or in mud.

Hmm... Pretty much mandatory for the UK then.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

walking boots-- which are good?
 

Paul Saunders wrote:
Scott Bryce wrote:

Phil Cook wrote:

You only need a waterproof membrane in your boots if they are made of
materials that are not inherently waterproof. Treated leather is
already a breathable waterproof material.
You only need a waterproof boot if you intend to walk for long periods
of time in wet conditions or in mud.

Hmm... Pretty much mandatory for the UK then.

Plus you can't always plan when you might end up in wet conditions.

Actually a waterproof membrane is not required, you can take full grain
leather boots and seal them with Sno-Seal or other similar product. The
down side to this is that you're blocking all the pores of leather so
the leather can't breathe and you end up with sweaty, stinky feet and boots.

It's almost a non-issue these days anyway. Only the lowest end hiking
boots lack a GoreTex (or competing product) breathable waterproof
membrane. There's no real down side, the membrane is more breathable
than the leather, so even with no membrane you won't get any more air
circulation.

It's popular to bash GoreTex, especially since their early products were
not very durable or long-lasting, but the past several generations of
GoreTex don't have the problems that their early products did.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"Andy Leighton" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:40:52 -0800, SMS wrote:

That is complete rubbish. My Zamberlans (don't know the model) don't have
goretex and they were definately not a low-end boot.


Ditto my Scarpas.....

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"SMS" wrote in message
...

That's why GoreTex works especially well in boots. It _is_ protected
properly. For jackets, the early ones had the GoreTex membrane
unprotected.


But it is only capable of breathing as the leather that protects it
breathes...

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"SMS" wrote in message
...

Today, it would be exceedingly foolish to purchase hiking boots or trail
shoes for wet conditions that were not GoreTex.

ABSOLUTE RUBBISH!

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"SMS" wrote in message
...

1. GORE-TEX® lining (or other breathable waterproof membrane lining) for
breathable waterproofness (nearly all mid to high end boots have this).
NEVER buy hiking boots that lack a breathable waterproof membrane lining.


Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need them?
As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is restricted by the
ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...
SMS wrote:

Bottom line is that all the experts agree that you should _never_
purchase a pair of hiking boots, walking shoes, etc., that do not have a
GoreTex (or competing product) membrane, if you expect to have them ever
get wet.

Sorry, that's just plain wrong.


I agree. In my experience most water ingression in a good pair of proofed
leather boots either comes over the top or wicks down un gaiter-protected
socks...

walking boots-- which are good?
 

Gordon wrote:

Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need
them? As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is
restricted by the ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with
the goretex?

Fortunately, _you_ stating something over and over again does not make
it true! You need to understand how leather works. If you don't clog up
the pores with beeswax (like Sno-Seal) it does breath. It's not a
waterproof material.

If you're hiking or walking in wet conditions you want to be certain to
never buy shoes or boots that lack a breathable membrane. GoreTex is
one. In order of breathability, the ratings a

eVent
Gore-Tex XCR
Gore-Tex (standard)
HydroSeal (The North Face)
Membrain (Marmot)
Sympatex, Conduit (Mountain Hardwear)
OmniTech (Columbia).

There are some other private label ones as well.

It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

Keep telling yourself that. Ignore all the scientific evidence.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"SMS" wrote in message
...

If you're hiking or walking in wet conditions you want to be certain to
never buy shoes or boots that lack a breathable membrane. GoreTex is one.

Rubbish. In my LONG experience (including Infantry service) the main reason
for water ingressing proofed leather boots is either when it comes over the
top or it wicks down socks.
In neither case will ANY sort of breathable membrane stop it.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

SMS wrote:

In any case, the bottom line remains the same when buying walking
(hiking) boots. First look for the necessary design elements which a

.... the same as the other day. Goretex, stitchdown, full grain leather
weren't "necessary" then, and that won't change by you repeating your
particular chorus again and again while ignoring the countless users
doing Real Hiking in boots and shoes that lack one or more of those of
things you keep on saying they /must/ have.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

walking boots-- which are good?
 

SMS wrote:

Hmm... Pretty much mandatory for the UK then.

Plus you can't always plan when you might end up in wet conditions.

And yet lots of folk hike here in boots without waterproof liners. By
informed choice.

It's almost a non-issue these days anyway. Only the lowest end hiking
boots lack a GoreTex (or competing product) breathable waterproof
membrane.

Again, do you really think Scarpa SLs and Manatas are "low end"?

There's no real down side, the membrane is more breathable
than the leather, so even with no membrane you won't get any more air
circulation.

If you back up one breathability limiting barrier with another it works
in series, not parallel. Plus not everyone is in thick leather, despite
"needing" to be.

It's popular to bash GoreTex, especially since their early products were
not very durable or long-lasting, but the past several generations of
GoreTex don't have the problems that their early products did.

But it's still sweatier inside them than if they're not there.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On 28 Feb, 17:22, "Gordon" wrote:

Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need them?
As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is restricted by the
ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

I've long thought that myself, and never noticed any significant
difference between leather boots with and without gore-tex. Fabric
ones, of course, are a different story.

Given that the socks are at least as important when it comes to
disposing of perspiration, You'd think that all the sales blurbs on
expensive boots would tell you which socks to wear, or at least which
they were tested with. They never mention it.

(I go for socks with as much wool and as little man-made fibre as I
can find. I used to wear pure cotton socks inside the wool ones, but
can't get them anywhere now.)

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On 1 Mar, 14:32, bobharvey wrote:
On 28 Feb, 17:22, "Gordon" wrote:

Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need them?
As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is restricted by the
ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

I've long thought that myself, and never noticed any significant
difference between leather boots with and without gore-tex. *Fabric
ones, of course, are a different story.

Given that the socks are at least as important when it comes to
disposing of perspiration, You'd think that all the sales blurbs on
expensive boots would tell you which socks to wear, or at least which
they were tested with. *They never mention it.

(I go for socks with as much wool and as little man-made fibre as I
can find. *I used to wear pure cotton socks inside the wool ones, but
can't get them anywhere now.)

RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On 1 Mar, 15:22, FenlandRunner wrote:

RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!

Never heard of 'em. Just been to look at the web site and could not
find any socks at all!

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"bobharvey" wrote in message
...
On 1 Mar, 15:22, FenlandRunner wrote:

RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!

Never heard of 'em. Just been to look at the web site and could not
find any socks at all!

http://www.ronhill.com/product-popup...otion-sock.htm

walking boots-- which are good?
 

bobharvey wrote:
On 28 Feb, 17:22, "Gordon" wrote:

Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need
them? As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is
restricted by the ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother
with the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

I've long thought that myself, and never noticed any significant
difference between leather boots with and without gore-tex. Fabric
ones, of course, are a different story.

Given that the socks are at least as important when it comes to
disposing of perspiration, You'd think that all the sales blurbs on
expensive boots would tell you which socks to wear, or at least which
they were tested with. They never mention it.

(I go for socks with as much wool and as little man-made fibre as I can find.

I dont, I dont got for no man made fibre, they dont last
as well as those with say 30% of the right man made fibre.

I used to wear pure cotton socks inside the wool ones, but can't get them anywhere now.)

They're still around, from china.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 07:22:38 -0800 (PST), FenlandRunner wrote:

On 1 Mar, 14:32, bobharvey wrote:
On 28 Feb, 17:22, "Gordon" wrote:

Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need them?
As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is restricted by the
ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

I've long thought that myself, and never noticed any significant
difference between leather boots with and without gore-tex. *Fabric
ones, of course, are a different story.

Given that the socks are at least as important when it comes to
disposing of perspiration, You'd think that all the sales blurbs on
expensive boots would tell you which socks to wear, or at least which
they were tested with. *They never mention it.

(I go for socks with as much wool and as little man-made fibre as I
can find. *I used to wear pure cotton socks inside the wool ones, but
can't get them anywhere now.)

RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!

If they're like the Tracksters, they'd keep ones feet cool! My last GF and
I agreed that Tracksters were to keep warmth out - we were less cold in
shorts.
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On 1 Mar, 19:01, PeterC wrote:

RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!

If they're like the Tracksters, they'd keep ones feet cool! My last GF and
I agreed that Tracksters were to keep warmth out - we were less cold in
shorts.


we seem to have frightened off our Original Poster. Has anyone seen
hide nor hair of him?

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"bobharvey" wrote in message
...

we seem to have frightened off our Original Poster. Has anyone seen
hide nor hair of him?

Well it HAS been a bit of a mega-thread!

walking boots-- which are good?
 

bobharvey wrote
PeterC wrote

RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!

If they're like the Tracksters, they'd keep ones feet cool!
My last GF and I agreed that Tracksters were to keep
warmth out - we were less cold in shorts.

we seem to have frightened off our Original Poster.
Has anyone seen hide nor hair of him?

He hanged himself on the first day. Wota wimp.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On 1 Mar, 21:02, "Rod Speed" wrote:
bobharvey wrote

PeterC wrote
RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!
If they're like the Tracksters, they'd keep ones feet cool!
My last GF and I agreed that Tracksters were to keep
warmth out - we were less cold in shorts.
we seem to have frightened off our Original Poster.
Has anyone seen hide nor hair of him?

He hanged himself on the first day. Wota wimp.

But shouldn't it have been about Gardening boots?
David Hill

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On 1 Mar, 21:17, Dave Hill wrote:
But shouldn't it have been about Gardening boots?

Don't know about you, but walking is the method I use to get from my
house to my garden.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

bobharvey wrote
Dave Hill wrote

But shouldn't it have been about Gardening boots?

Don't know about you, but walking is the method
I use to get from my house to my garden.

I usually do too, but rarely wear boots, just when I am digging, which isnt often.

I dont even bother with boots when digging up the evening's new potatoes either.

And I wear my walking boots when I do wear boots in the garden too.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

Vic Smith writes:

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 12:45:10 +0000, Geoff Berrow
wrote:

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:49:00 +0000, Peter Clinch
wrote:

Take them orienteering instead and they'll be on rougher terrain with
more need of good soles, and hardly anyone will think they're best off
in boots with Vibram soles and ankle support. Certainly almost all of
the experts won't be in them.

I've been walking 3-4 miles a day on pavements to keep in trim and in
the recent snow, I wore my boots instead of my usual North Face shoes.
As I only have short legs, I found it harder to walk as fast with the
boots because of the extra weight. This isn't usually a problem when
doing day walks across country or up hills as my pace will be more
relaxed. I can see, however, that someone concerned with speed would
prefer lighter footwear.

Speed isn't the only concern with weight.
After some miles of walking in comfortable but heavy boots, a knee
became painful and slightly swollen. I didn't connect it with the
boots at first, but when I doffed the boots the knee problem very
quickly disappeared.
It's possible my gait in the above ankle boots was a factor, but I'm
guessing it was mostly the swinging weight of the boots.

The knee is basically a hinge. It can move through nearly 180
degrees, but only in a single plane. The ankle has a more limited
range of motion but is also more tolerant of movement in different
planes, especially in combination with the feet -- there's a whole
collection of joints down there. What sometimes happens when you
restrict the mobility of the ankles and feet is that any sort of
lateral or twisting movements that these would normally handle are
transferred to the knees, which don't appreciate them. For an
excruciatingly detailed discussion of this, see

http://www.tmuscle.com/portal_includ...-training.html

Then again, it could just be the swinging weight.

--
Jim Janney

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On 1 Mar, 23:39, "Rod Speed" wrote:

I usually do too, but rarely wear boots, just when I am digging, which isnt often.
I need to wear Wellies to go into my garden at the moment. I wish I
had waders.

When we moved here the "orchard" bit beyond the bank was under water
from November to June most years. I created raised banks to plant the
apple trees into. For 15 years the back's been squidgy, but not
immersed. This year is like travelling back in time.


I dont even bother with boots when digging up the evening's new potatoes either.
I can only plant things that have snorkels.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 18:11:52 -0700, Jim Janney
wrote:

Vic Smith writes:



Speed isn't the only concern with weight.
After some miles of walking in comfortable but heavy boots, a knee
became painful and slightly swollen. I didn't connect it with the
boots at first, but when I doffed the boots the knee problem very
quickly disappeared.
It's possible my gait in the above ankle boots was a factor, but I'm
guessing it was mostly the swinging weight of the boots.

The knee is basically a hinge. It can move through nearly 180
degrees, but only in a single plane. The ankle has a more limited
range of motion but is also more tolerant of movement in different
planes, especially in combination with the feet -- there's a whole
collection of joints down there. What sometimes happens when you
restrict the mobility of the ankles and feet is that any sort of
lateral or twisting movements that these would normally handle are
transferred to the knees, which don't appreciate them. For an
excruciatingly detailed discussion of this, see

http://www.tmuscle.com/portal_includ...-training.html

Then again, it could just be the swinging weight.

It's very complicated. I attributed the pain to the weight because it
was most painful at the top of the swing. As if my gait and muscles
propelling the boot weight upward were more than my knee joint liked
in reversing that momentum. Perhaps hyper-extending the joint.
I don't reject the other suggestions here about the boots changing my
gait, though my gait seemed entirely natural and fluid to me.
It does make sense that the boot binding of the ankles and their
weight did adjust my gait.
Some years later I had pain in both knees, and had x-rays, then a cat
scan, then a session of physical therapy. The x-ray guy suggested
possible arthritis, the cat scan analyst found nothing wrong.
Mind you, the pain wasn't debilitating until I walked a bit, but
painful enough at other times that I wanted to address it and remove
it
I did the therapy exercises at home for a week or so with no result.
Then my wife came home from the rummage store with an ottoman, and
said, "Get your damn legs off that table, and use this."
Some months earlier I set up my computer paraphernalia on a large,
sturdy table, and began working from a reclining easy chair with the
keyboard on my lap, and my feet extended to the table, heels or heel,
depending if my legs were crossed, carrying the weight of my legs.
This was the most comfortable work position I've ever found, giving
total back support, and I never suffered any knee pain sitting like
this.
But my knees were suspended in mid-air, and were hyper-extending.
I did as my wife demanded, and all knee pain was gone in a few days.
No doctor has asked about this seating position, and I never thought
to mention it.
Just one of the countless ways a wife is handy.

--Vic

walking boots-- which are good?
 

bobharvey wrote
Rod Speed wrote

I usually do too, but rarely wear boots, just when I am digging, which isnt often.

I need to wear Wellies to go into my garden at the moment. I wish I had waders.

When we moved here the "orchard" bit beyond the bank was under water
from November to June most years. I created raised banks to plant the
apple trees into. For 15 years the back's been squidgy, but not
immersed. This year is like travelling back in time.

We're still in a 10 year drought. And even when not in one, I dont ever
get standing water in the garden except when I have watered too much.

I dont even bother with boots when digging up the evening's new potatoes either.

I can only plant things that have snorkels.

Sooner you than me.

I've only just got back into growing vegys after 50 years, mainly
just because its more convenient to get them out of the back
yard than to run around town for them roughy weekly etc.

I dont bother with lawns at all and just let the backyard turn
into a jungle, tho it didnt grow that much due to the drought.

When I watered the area where the vegys were to go, just small
patch, so I could actually turn the dirt over with a fork, the weed
thought that all their xmases had come at once and they ended
up well over 6' high very quickly. Some have turned into small
trees, bigger than the neighbours brick shed, 10' high at least.

Last time I said that in one of the gardening groups
everyone decided that I must be growing marihuana |-)

walking boots-- which are good?
 

Vic Smith wrote:
On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 18:11:52 -0700, Jim Janney
wrote:

Vic Smith writes:



Speed isn't the only concern with weight.
After some miles of walking in comfortable but heavy boots, a knee
became painful and slightly swollen. I didn't connect it with the
boots at first, but when I doffed the boots the knee problem very
quickly disappeared.
It's possible my gait in the above ankle boots was a factor, but I'm
guessing it was mostly the swinging weight of the boots.

The knee is basically a hinge. It can move through nearly 180
degrees, but only in a single plane. The ankle has a more limited
range of motion but is also more tolerant of movement in different
planes, especially in combination with the feet -- there's a whole
collection of joints down there. What sometimes happens when you
restrict the mobility of the ankles and feet is that any sort of
lateral or twisting movements that these would normally handle are
transferred to the knees, which don't appreciate them. For an
excruciatingly detailed discussion of this, see


http://www.tmuscle.com/portal_includ...-training.html

Then again, it could just be the swinging weight.

It's very complicated. I attributed the pain to the weight because it
was most painful at the top of the swing. As if my gait and muscles
propelling the boot weight upward were more than my knee joint liked
in reversing that momentum. Perhaps hyper-extending the joint.
I don't reject the other suggestions here about the boots changing my
gait, though my gait seemed entirely natural and fluid to me.
It does make sense that the boot binding of the ankles and their
weight did adjust my gait.
Some years later I had pain in both knees, and had x-rays, then a cat
scan, then a session of physical therapy. The x-ray guy suggested
possible arthritis, the cat scan analyst found nothing wrong.
Mind you, the pain wasn't debilitating until I walked a bit, but
painful enough at other times that I wanted to address it and remove
it
I did the therapy exercises at home for a week or so with no result.
Then my wife came home from the rummage store with an ottoman, and
said, "Get your damn legs off that table, and use this."
Some months earlier I set up my computer paraphernalia on a large,
sturdy table, and began working from a reclining easy chair with the
keyboard on my lap, and my feet extended to the table, heels or heel,
depending if my legs were crossed, carrying the weight of my legs.
This was the most comfortable work position I've ever found,

Yeah. I've been exclusively computing like that for decades now.

giving total back support, and I never suffered any knee pain sitting like this.

Yeah, I smashed my patella and that leg only bends about half way back now.

No problem when walking tho.

But my knees were suspended in mid-air, and were hyper-extending.
I did as my wife demanded, and all knee pain was gone in a few days.
No doctor has asked about this seating position, and I never thought
to mention it.

Just one of the countless ways a wife is handy.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 18:11:52 -0700, Jim Janney wrote:

Vic Smith writes:

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 12:45:10 +0000, Geoff Berrow
wrote:

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:49:00 +0000, Peter Clinch
wrote:

Take them orienteering instead and they'll be on rougher terrain with
more need of good soles, and hardly anyone will think they're best off
in boots with Vibram soles and ankle support. Certainly almost all of
the experts won't be in them.

I've been walking 3-4 miles a day on pavements to keep in trim and in
the recent snow, I wore my boots instead of my usual North Face shoes.
As I only have short legs, I found it harder to walk as fast with the
boots because of the extra weight. This isn't usually a problem when
doing day walks across country or up hills as my pace will be more
relaxed. I can see, however, that someone concerned with speed would
prefer lighter footwear.

Just done a short (2 mile) walk to get a bus from the next village. In
boots it takes about 28 - 29 minutes, but today I wore shoes (Merrill) for
the first time for months and it took 27 minutes. OK, a (very) small
sample, but the cadence was up by about 4% and I felt like running up one
hill. A few walks to get used to shoes and speed could be better.

Speed isn't the only concern with weight.
After some miles of walking in comfortable but heavy boots, a knee
became painful and slightly swollen. I didn't connect it with the
boots at first, but when I doffed the boots the knee problem very
quickly disappeared.
It's possible my gait in the above ankle boots was a factor, but I'm
guessing it was mostly the swinging weight of the boots.

The knee is basically a hinge. It can move through nearly 180
degrees, but only in a single plane. The ankle has a more limited
range of motion but is also more tolerant of movement in different
planes, especially in combination with the feet -- there's a whole
collection of joints down there. What sometimes happens when you
restrict the mobility of the ankles and feet is that any sort of
lateral or twisting movements that these would normally handle are
transferred to the knees, which don't appreciate them.

Very much so. In the '80s, when 'clipless' pedals were gaining use, I spoke
to several people who'd had knee trouble due to the limited movement of the
foot allowed by the clips.
One rider, half way through a 1300km ride, changed from Look to Time pedals
(or t'other way - long time ago) and that stopped the pain in his knees
because his feet could twist a bit.

For an
excruciatingly detailed discussion of this, see

http://www.tmuscle.com/portal_includ...-training.html

Then again, it could just be the swinging weight.

V. interesting article, thanks - I shall read it thoroughly when I've the
odd fortnight spare (and when sober).
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

bobharvey wrote:

I need to wear Wellies to go into my garden at the moment. I wish I
had waders.

Ours is more microspikes territory at the moment, not snow but permafrost.

I can only plant things that have snorkels.

I just CBA to get the power drill out to dig the holes...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

walking boots-- which are good?
 

PeterC wrote: Just done a short (2 mile) walk to get a bus from the next village. In
boots it takes about 28 - 29 minutes, but today I wore shoes (Merrill) for
the first time for months and it took 27 minutes.

I have been following this thread wondering if anyone was ever going
to mention the Merrel brand. I have had a pair of Merrel boots
(hybrids) for about a year now and absolutely love them - and I might
mention that my leather Scarpa GTX have been collecting dust since I
got my Merrels. They are so comfortable, like wearing a pair of cozy
socks. I am more of a hill and glen walker than a mountaineer so I
can't attest to the latter. I didn't think that they, Merrels, would
be suitable for walking in snow and cold weather but I was wrong. They
are tough, have a great Vibram sole, Goretex lining, light as a
feather, and I have not found a leak in them so far. They are warm in
cold weather and cool in hot weather. If they only last a year, big
deal, I will go buy another pair. I got this pair for around £80 but I
see that they are now up to £100 - give or take.
I was up in Glen Esk on tuesday and shot a short video (2 mins)
wearing them in moderate snow conditions in the lower end of the hills
on the Fungle and Fir Mounths trail.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?videos=...&v=pI0PxKnYckM

haggisbag

walking boots-- which are good?
 

hbol wrote:

snip

I have been following this thread wondering if anyone was ever going
to mention the Merrel brand. I have had a pair of Merrel boots
(hybrids) for about a year now and absolutely love them - and I might
mention that my leather Scarpa GTX have been collecting dust since I
got my Merrels. They are so comfortable, like wearing a pair of cozy
socks. I am more of a hill and glen walker than a mountaineer so I
can't attest to the latter. I didn't think that they, Merrels, would
be suitable for walking in snow and cold weather but I was wrong. They
are tough, have a great Vibram sole, Goretex lining, light as a
feather, and I have not found a leak in them so far. They are warm in
cold weather and cool in hot weather. If they only last a year, big
deal, I will go buy another pair. I got this pair for around £80 but I
see that they are now up to £100 - give or take.


Merrell (not Merrel) has very good products. I've got some of their
nordic ski boot as well as some of their shoes.

As you found, with a Goretex lining and a Vibram sole, they'll be
waterproof and provide good traction. You probably wouldn't want to wear
these mountaineering, but for most hikes on good trails they're great,
and a lot lighter than full leather boots.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"Gordon" wrote in message
...

"SMS" wrote in message
...

1. GORE-TEX® lining (or other breathable waterproof membrane lining) for
breathable waterproofness (nearly all mid to high end boots have this).
NEVER buy hiking boots that lack a breathable waterproof membrane lining.


Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need them?
As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is restricted by
the ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

I'll try to convert you Gordon - have a look at:-

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/goretex.html

I love the stuff :-)

Bill

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"Bill Grey" wrote in message
...

"Gordon" wrote in message
...

"SMS" wrote in message
...

1. GORE-TEX® lining (or other breathable waterproof membrane lining) for
breathable waterproofness (nearly all mid to high end boots have this).
NEVER buy hiking boots that lack a breathable waterproof membrane
lining.


Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need
them? As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is
restricted by the ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with
the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

I'll try to convert you Gordon - have a look at:-

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/goretex.html

I love the stuff :-)


Well that's OK if that's what you want.
I don't use a goretex jacket either.
As I said in a previous ;post - most ingression of water in boots either
comes over the top, or wicks down from unprotected socks - in either case a
goretex liner ain't gonna stop that!

walking boots-- which are good?
 

Bill Grey wrote:
"Gordon" wrote in message
...
"SMS" wrote in message
...
1. GORE-TEX® lining (or other breathable waterproof membrane lining) for
breathable waterproofness (nearly all mid to high end boots have this).
NEVER buy hiking boots that lack a breathable waterproof membrane lining.

Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need them?
As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is restricted by
the ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

I'll try to convert you Gordon - have a look at:-

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/goretex.html

I love the stuff :-)

I doubt if you'll have any success. "Anti-GoreTex" is like a religion.
Facts have no effect.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, SMS wrote:

Bill Grey wrote:
"Gordon" wrote in message
...
"SMS" wrote in message
...
1. GORE-TEX® lining (or other breathable waterproof membrane lining) for
breathable waterproofness (nearly all mid to high end boots have this).
NEVER buy hiking boots that lack a breathable waterproof membrane lining.

Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need them?
As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is restricted by
the ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with the goretex?
It's a gimmick designed to con punters.

I'll try to convert you Gordon - have a look at:-

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/goretex.html

I love the stuff :-)

I doubt if you'll have any success. "Anti-GoreTex" is like a religion. Facts
have no effect.

And your "Pro-Gore-Tex" isn't a religion?

It's not really clear if you understand the material, or are simply
spouting what you read in the books. Your cutting and pasting right
down to the Vibram lug soles is a good giveaway.

People aren't anti-Gore-Tex. They are simply questioning the value of
it in boots, indeed questioning your blind acceptance of Gore-Tex in
boots.

I've worn Gore-Tex or "Gore-Tex like" jackets for a quarter century,
indeed feel Gore-Tex wins out over the other workalikes. I even have a
winter parka that has one of the workalikes in it, it is less important
there since snow doesn't tend to be as wet as rain. There will never be a
time when I don't have a Gore-Tex or workalike rain jacket.

But I know the limitations. If I sweat in something, Gore-Tex isn't going
to make me sweat less, it's just going to help get rid of that sweat. But,
it's adding another layer, so better to think of it as neutral, a Gore-Tex
lining won't make a jacket worse. But it can't improve what already
exists, which is why there are Gore-Tex jackets walking around with
underarm zippers. If I wear a fleece jacket underneath, that will make
me sweat and even collect some of the sweat, the Gore-Tex will merely mean
I wont' sweat like I'm wearing a plastic bag.

Gore-Tex won't protect your boots. It may help to keep your feet dry, but
that depends on how well your sweat can dissipate through whatever outlets
it can. Your feet won't get wet from outside water, but only if the seams
are all well done and the Gore-Tex well protected (ie another layer to
make you sweat) and as pointed out, so long as the water doesn't come in
over the top.

There are precautions one can take to keep feet dry, and that includes
proper waterproofing of the outside and of course hoping the stitching is
good and holds up. For most rain, that will be fine. If you're actually
walking through water, something else may be appropriate.

Note that the US army jungle boots from the Vietnam Era had Vibram lug
soles, but the uppers were of a material that neither kept the water in
nor out. It was a realization that the feet would get wet, so better to
design them so the water can drain out, rather than have people walking
in sloshy boots all day.

Michael

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"SMS" wrote in message
...
I doubt if you'll have any success. "Anti-GoreTex" is like a religion.
Facts have no effect.

Not at all. How about the fact that Gore-Tex only works PROPERLY in a very
small band of climatic conditions, both inside and outside the garment? I
know that in certain conditions I get wetter under a Gore-Tex garment than I
do under other types of material. Why? Because I've experienced it. As these
conditions tend to be preponderant, I don't use Gore-Tex. Period. Coupled
with that is the fact that my preferred material is HALF the price of
Gore-Tex and works as well if not better.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 23:46:02 -0500, Michael Black wrote:

Gore-Tex won't protect your boots. It may help to keep your feet dry, but
that depends on how well your sweat can dissipate through whatever outlets
it can. Your feet won't get wet from outside water, but only if the seams
are all well done and the Gore-Tex well protected (ie another layer to
make you sweat) and as pointed out, so long as the water doesn't come in
over the top.

Came back after a walk yesterday and my friend was surprised my feet
were not steaming as his were when we took our boots off.
(co-incidentally, we have exactly the same Gore tex lined boots).

I explained that my feet didn't sweat much and were, in fact,
perfectly dry.

This might go some way to explaining why some people love Goretex
lined boots and others hate them. Nothing to do with what is better,
it's what suits the individual best.
--
Geoff Berrow (Put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs www.4theweb.co.uk/rfdmaker

walking boots-- which are good?
 

On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 08:21:06 -0000, Gordon wrote:

Coupled
with that is the fact that my preferred material is HALF the price of
Gore-Tex and works as well if not better.

Which material is that, please?
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.

walking boots-- which are good?
 

"PeterC" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 08:21:06 -0000, Gordon wrote:

Coupled
with that is the fact that my preferred material is HALF the price of
Gore-Tex and works as well if not better.

Which material is that, please?

It's a Pertex 6 outer shell with a "hydrophilic PU fully taped laminate"
liner. That's all it says.
It's actually a Rab Downpour Mountain Guide jacket which I've had now for 15
years....it cost half the price of an equivalently-featured Gore-Tex jacket
back in the early 90's...it's got two horizontal hip pockets with gusset and
poppered flaps, two zipped chest pockets, a hidden zipped map pocket, a hood
with volume adjustment large enough to cover a helmet and a velcro and
poppered front fastening over a double zip and reinforced patches on elbows
and shoulders..