Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #46   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2010, 01:26 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 38
Default walking boots-- which are good?

PeterC wrote:

They'd have to be expensive wellies, so that they could be adjusted and
laced up the leg. I wear wellies v. rarely as the tops slap against my
varicous veins and also can cause soreness on the leg.

Are the Whernside Wellies still around?


Not familiar with WWs, but if it's a traditional wellie's height that's
a problem something like Nokian Trimmis (quite a bit lower at the height
of a high walking boot) might get you by that (I don't know exactly
where your veins cause you problems). Sadly not a great shape for my feet.

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/

  #47   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2010, 06:17 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 38
Default walking boots-- which are good?

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:26:47 +0000, Peter Clinch wrote:

PeterC wrote:

They'd have to be expensive wellies, so that they could be adjusted and
laced up the leg. I wear wellies v. rarely as the tops slap against my
varicous veins and also can cause soreness on the leg.

Are the Whernside Wellies still around?


Not familiar with WWs, but if it's a traditional wellie's height that's
a problem something like Nokian Trimmis (quite a bit lower at the height
of a high walking boot) might get you by that (I don't know exactly
where your veins cause you problems). Sadly not a great shape for my feet.

Pete.


The veins are affected almost anywhere on my R leg, so any wellie would
need to be a snug fit.
T'other thing about wellies: not too resistant to glass, metal, barbed wire
etc., whereas boots might suffer some damage but are unlikely to be cut.
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.
  #48   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2010, 07:12 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 161
Default walking boots-- which are good?

Peter Clinch wrote
Rod Speed wrote


Yes, but it does make sense to get a boot that has good reviews
on its design detail and THEN make sure it fits well too.


Up to a point.


Nope, thats always true.

That point being that the particular application
has to be the same basic one as yours,


Thats what part of being a good review is about, that its relevant to your circumstances.

and if the reviewer's idea of a good day out is the Cuillin Ridge
and yours is a dander round Richmond Park (or vice versa)
then you may well be looking for different things.


See above.

Unless you're doing something fairly technical the design
detail is really down to how it affects wearing comfort,


Nope, particularly with how well it wears and whether its waterproof etc.

and that's what you'll find by trying it on.


Not even possible with either.

I've come across experienced boot fitters who've
been exasperated by magazine reviews.


Sure.

Folk ignore the preamble about fit and jump straight to the "best in
test" irrespective of whether it fits or it's right for their application.


Sure, there will always be those who cant work out what is a useful review too.

And if that's pointed out they're "fobbing off the customer with something they're trying to push".


Yes, there are plenty of conspiracy theorists.

Yes, but its is also important that the design is well done too and its well made etc as well.


But we're at the point where making a pair of
shoes or boots isn't exactly unknown territory.


It is however one area where some take shortcuts to reduce the price
etc with so many of the consumers rating the price as important.

A decent pair of walking shoes 20 years ago would
still be a decent pair of walking shoes today, because
feet and walking haven't actually changed much.


Yes, but a review can be useful to decide what is and is not decent quality wise.

And things have changed radically in those 20 years with so much being made in china now.

Its desirable to know which operations have managed to get their chinese manufacture done effectively now.


  #49   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2010, 07:13 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 161
Default walking boots-- which are good?

Peter Clinch wrote:
PeterC wrote:

Well, walking across fields yesterday, after the frost was going,
would have been very messy in shoes! In several places the mud was
half way up the boots and in others there were about 2 - 3" of icy water.


Not too easy to avoid these when on footpaths near farms.


I'd be wearing what the farmers seem to wear: wellies.


I wouldnt, they are much too long for walking far.

There is a reason the military dont use them anymore.


  #50   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2010, 08:01 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 41
Default walking boots-- which are good?

PeterC wrote:

T'other thing about wellies: not too resistant to glass, metal, barbed wire
etc., whereas boots might suffer some damage but are unlikely to be cut.


Apropos nothing. Son has wellies for his horse work (stabling, he has
boot things for riding)he wears standard Screwfix jobs[1] (£15
region)and they have steel toecaps and a steel shank in the sole so
nothing can penetrate his foot. Agreeing with what Peter Clinch says in
the "what suits your feet stakes", he says they are comfier than any
other boot he has tried including £80 dedicated stable boots[2].

[1] http://tinyurl.com/yjb8geg
[2] http://tinyurl.com/yk5dwht



  #51   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 09:29 AM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 38
Default walking boots-- which are good?

Rod Speed wrote:
[wellies]
I wouldnt, they are much too long for walking far.

There is a reason the military dont use them anymore.


If a dander across the local farmlands had a significant degree of
commonality with a 30 mile forced march with a 30 kg pack then that'd be
a good point...

Gamekeepers etc. are happy to work in them, covering that sort of land
all day, every day. If they're good enough for them, they're probably
good enough for us.

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/
  #52   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 10:33 AM 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?

john bently wrote:
Now i have retired I would like to start walking. Would anyone know of a
good place to see some *critical* reviews of the different walking boots
available please? Apparently the last consumers association review was done
way back in april 2006.

Or would anyone know of some boots (preferably not too expensive) that are
generally believed by many people to be a good buy? Thanks for any advice.


"Not too expensive" is not too descriptive.

Look for the following features:

1. GORE-TEX® lining.

2. Vibram® outsole

3. Stitchdown construction (not just glued)

4. Full-grain, all-leather upper (not split grain, not "nubuck").

Such boots are hard to find and quite expensive, i.e. the Danner
Mountain Light™ II. On the plus side, they will last a very long time. I
had a pair for 24 years. I think that they're made in the U.S.A. too.

If you give up on stitch-down construction then the choices expand and
prices fall. I.e. Cabela's offers their IA-811047 boots for $170 which
are not stitch down. I bought similar Vasque Summit GTX boots at REI on
sale for about $150 last year (regular price is $200). Not as good as
the Danner boots, but I could not find anywhere to buy another pair of
the Danner's other than ordering them directly from Danner.

If you give up on full grain leather construction prices fall even more,
if you give up on the GoreTex lining and the Vibram soles you can soon
be down to $50 or less. You get what you pay for. But in my experience,
the cheaper boots are not worth it. They are not waterproof, the
imitation Vibram does not provide sufficient traction, the soles
delaminate after a couple of years, and non-full-grain leather quickly
becomes motted and dirty and is impossible to clean.

I would not cheap out on boots if you're going to be doing serious
walking or hiking. You just need mid-high boots unless you're doing
serious backpacking. The boots I mentioned are all mid-high.
  #53   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 10:49 AM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 10
Default walking boots-- which are good?

SMS wrote:


Look for the following features:

1. GORE-TEX® lining.

2. Vibram® outsole

3. Stitchdown construction (not just glued)

4. Full-grain, all-leather upper (not split grain, not "nubuck").


Though many, including myself, dislike Gore-Tex in a boot.

It requires a different construction method, which leads to the boot not
lasting as long, can create a sweatier environment, starts leaking
fairly quickly and then does a good job of keeping the water *in*.

Unfortunately, Gore-Tex-less boots are getting harder and harder to find...
  #54   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 11:06 AM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 38
Default walking boots-- which are good?

Christopher Loffredo wrote:
SMS wrote:


Look for the following features:

1. GORE-TEX® lining.

2. Vibram® outsole

3. Stitchdown construction (not just glued)

4. Full-grain, all-leather upper (not split grain, not "nubuck").


Though many, including myself, dislike Gore-Tex in a boot.

It requires a different construction method, which leads to the boot not
lasting as long, can create a sweatier environment, starts leaking
fairly quickly and then does a good job of keeping the water *in*.

Unfortunately, Gore-Tex-less boots are getting harder and harder to find...


I don't like them for exactly those reasons, but if folk /do/ prefer
them then note that Goretex isn't the only game in town. eVent is
another high quality breathable/waterproof, generally reckoned to be
considerably more breathable than Goretex though also one that suffers
more from contamination, and there are various others that will do a
similar job.

Another option is a waterproof sock, for example Rocky Goretex or
Sealskinz. These have the advantage over boot/shoe linings that you
only use them when you need them, so a hike on a hot day doesn't require
your feet to sweat freely in their own personal high-tech plastic bags.
OTOH a boot liner is better if the basic problem is cold as when a
waterproof sock outer is saturated it will still conduct heat readily
from your foot, even though it keeps it dry.

Aside from cold, another reason to keep feet dry is mainly down to damp
skin is softened and more prone to blisters, but in light footwear that
allows your foot to move naturally this is much less of an issue than in
a stiff boot, as the upper moves /with/ your foot rather than rubbing
against it. Note how orienteers gallumph around with soaking feet and
don't feel any particular need for waterproofing most of the time.

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/
  #55   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 03:40 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?

Christopher Loffredo wrote:

Though many, including myself, dislike Gore-Tex in a boot.


That's the first time I've _ever_ heard of _anyone_ disliking GoreTex in
a boot.

It requires a different construction method, which leads to the boot not
lasting as long, can create a sweatier environment, starts leaking
fairly quickly and then does a good job of keeping the water *in*.

Unfortunately, Gore-Tex-less boots are getting harder and harder to find...


For good reason. The GoreTex membrane allows the boot to breathe while
remaining waterproof. The membrane is safely sandwiched inside,
protecting it, so it doesn't get clogged with dirt or oil.

The GoreTex lasts the life of the boot. My last pair of boots with a
GoreTex liner lasted for 25 years without leaking or failing to breathe.

You'll only find a lack of a GoreTex membrane on very low end boots,
which have other limitations as well, such as sub-standard sole, or
cheaper, non-full grain leather.


  #56   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 04:03 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 1
Default walking boots-- which are good?

On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:40:52 -0800, SMS wrote:
Christopher Loffredo wrote:

Though many, including myself, dislike Gore-Tex in a boot.


That's the first time I've _ever_ heard of _anyone_ disliking GoreTex in
a boot.


I prefer a plain leather boot without goretex lining.

You'll only find a lack of a GoreTex membrane on very low end boots,
which have other limitations as well, such as sub-standard sole, or
cheaper, non-full grain leather.


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


--
Andy Leighton =
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
  #57   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 04:11 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: May 2009
Posts: 11
Default walking boots-- which are good?

On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 10:03:56 -0600, Andy Leighton
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:40:52 -0800, SMS wrote:
Christopher Loffredo wrote:

Though many, including myself, dislike Gore-Tex in a boot.


That's the first time I've _ever_ heard of _anyone_ disliking GoreTex in
a boot.


I prefer a plain leather boot without goretex lining.

You'll only find a lack of a GoreTex membrane on very low end boots,
which have other limitations as well, such as sub-standard sole, or
cheaper, non-full grain leather.


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


Sometimes a poster doesn't look at the big picture before posting.
Simple provincialism really, and I won't hold it against him.

--Vic
  #58   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 05:03 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 10
Default walking boots-- which are good?

SMS wrote:

The GoreTex lasts the life of the boot. My last pair of boots with a
GoreTex liner lasted for 25 years without leaking or failing to breathe.


And you actually used them sometimes? ;-)

You'll only find a lack of a GoreTex membrane on very low end boots,
which have other limitations as well, such as sub-standard sole, or
cheaper, non-full grain leather.


My non-Gore-Tex boots are certainly neither cheap nor low-end. In fact,
full-leather non-Gore-Text boots usually cost as much or more than the
ones with.
  #59   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 05:59 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 4
Default walking boots-- which are good?

On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, SMS wrote:

Christopher Loffredo wrote:

Though many, including myself, dislike Gore-Tex in a boot.


That's the first time I've _ever_ heard of _anyone_ disliking GoreTex in a
boot.

It requires a different construction method, which leads to the boot not
lasting as long, can create a sweatier environment, starts leaking fairly
quickly and then does a good job of keeping the water *in*.

Unfortunately, Gore-Tex-less boots are getting harder and harder to find...


For good reason. The GoreTex membrane allows the boot to breathe while
remaining waterproof. The membrane is safely sandwiched inside, protecting
it, so it doesn't get clogged with dirt or oil.

The GoreTex lasts the life of the boot. My last pair of boots with a GoreTex
liner lasted for 25 years without leaking or failing to breathe.

Gore-Tex isn't magic. It's a very thin layer that almost looks like
plastic. If it isn't protected properly, it will no longer work. I had a
Gore-Tex jacket that wore out about 8 years after I bought it, the
non-Gore-Tex wore out which then left the Goretex layer vulnerable. Since
it has no strength in itself, there went the waterproof

So either the boot has to be made really well to protect that Gore-Tex, or
you won't get any long life out of it. A pair of boots that lasts 25 years
is either seeing very little use, or were very expensive in the first
place. They stood up because of the rest of the boot, not the Gore-Tex.

I have doubts about its value in boots. On a jacket or pants, it makes
sense, since you are merely warding off rain, and the rest of the jacket
is well designed to be resistant to rain in the first place.

Boots, they get immersed in snow or water. How well does the rest of the
boot hold up? Gore-Tex isn't just about that thin layer, if it's not
put in properly (what about that stiching over there?) it won't mean a
thing.

If the boot soaks up water, you really aren't at an advantage
over no-Gore-Tex. I have my doubts about it keeping the water out when
immersed in water, but then other factors come into play. If you're
walking through snow or water, chances are good you'll hit spots where
the rain or water is higher than the boot, and your feet get wet that way
anyway.

The conditions where I'd worry about getting my feet wet, I'd want
something different in the way of a shoe or boot. Something with rubber
around the lower level, which then gets connected to leather upper
(though, I've not had a lot of success with those, the first time I bought
a pair of winter boots like that, they held for about seven years before
the rubber broke, but more recent purchases have had the rubber breaking
before a year is up). Otherwise, you live with the occasional wet foot,
I don't find my feet get wet due to rain, they get wet due to puddles.

When I walked to New York City in 1982, someone had "rubbers" or
"galoshes", thin rubber overshoes that went over shoes, he actually wore
them over light hiking shoes. I have no idea how comfortable it was, but
seemed a reasonable method for those times when it was quite wet.

I wouldn't pay extra money for Gore-Tex in shoes, I don't see the point.

Michael
  #60   Report Post  
Old 23-02-2010, 06:04 PM posted to uk.rec.walking,uk.rec.gardening,uk.rec.birdwatching,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.rec.hiking
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 192
Default walking boots-- which are good?

SMS wrote:

Christopher Loffredo wrote:

Unfortunately, Gore-Tex-less boots are getting harder and harder to find...


For good reason. The GoreTex membrane allows the boot to breathe while
remaining waterproof. The membrane is safely sandwiched inside,
protecting it, so it doesn't get clogged with dirt or oil.

The GoreTex lasts the life of the boot. My last pair of boots with a
GoreTex liner lasted for 25 years without leaking or failing to breathe.


You were lucky or careful. And I doubt that those boots were in
frequent use if you managed to get them to last so long.

Toenails and grit can quite easily make holes in boot linings.

You'll only find a lack of a GoreTex membrane on very low end boots,
which have other limitations as well, such as sub-standard sole, or
cheaper, non-full grain leather.


As others have said this is a falacy.
--
Phil Cook, last hill: Am Bodach in the Mamores on a sunny day :-)
pictures at http://www.therewaslight.co.uk soonish...


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fat lady wellington boots lillia Gardening 7 20-02-2006 02:08 PM
Women's gardening boots ? [email protected] Gardening 0 04-10-2005 01:11 AM
i was walking units to good Stephanie, who's excusing about the frog's road [email protected] United Kingdom 0 23-07-2005 11:36 AM
Need A Good mechanical/biological pond Filter Which ones are good? DD DDD Ponds 10 03-04-2005 07:15 AM
Weigela - tough as old boots! MG United Kingdom 0 14-04-2003 08:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2020 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017