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.

Perhaps you're not listening very hard?
Chris Townsend, President of the MCofS, author of numerous acclaimed
books on backpacking and gear editor of The Great Outdoors magazine
doesn't seem particularly keen for one, and I concur. (see, for example,
http://www.tgomagazine.co.uk/gear/fo...-100-1.1005457
with "Dislikes: W/B lining).

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.

Goretex doesn't get clogged with dirt or oil because of a PU smear over
the membrane. What a boot lining doesn't stop is small bits of grit
working themselves through over time and rubbing a hole through the
(very thin) membrane. Also, the membrane will be prone to wear over the
flex points around the toe with repeated mechanical stretching.

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.

I wouldn't take that as a representative sample!

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.

Ho ho, so the Scarpa SL and Manta models are "low end"? Despite their
being favourites in wet and muddy UK year after year and their excellent
construction, top-end Vibram soles, first class leather and high price tags?

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/

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.

Expert opinion here frequently put non-Goretex boots at the top of their
recommended lists and that's for use in the UK, where it /will/ be wet.

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/

SMS wrote:

When you say "walking" do you mean on trails where ankle support is
critical so you need actual boots, or on pavement and paths where you
can get by with lower walking shoes?

Unless you're toting a beastly weight you should get all the ankle
support you need from the bones, muscles and tendons that have evolved
to do the job. Ankle support is only critical when you're going outside
what ankles have evolved to do (which is just about any running and
walking with relatively light loads), so if you're trying to edge skis,
or stand on a crampon point, or stuff like that /then/ ankle support is
critical.

This has been proven by loads of people over thousands of years walking
through very rough terrain without extra ankle support. Man would have
dies out in prehistory if his ankles had been so weak that he needed
boots or special paths to get anywhere.

-One-piece, full grain leather uppers

The main point of a one-piece upper is reducing stitching which reduces
leakage, but if you've got...

-Goretex membrane for breathability and water-proofing

then it's considerably less relevant. And has been noted elsewhere you
really don't need Goretex, and if you do want a lining Goretex isn't the
only game in town (consider eVent, for example, which is demonstrably
more breathable).

-Vibram soles for traction (nothing beats Vibram soles for traction)

So why do fell-runners and orienteers who need the best traction use
something else? Vibram soles are good but they're compromises for
multiple terrains. If you're spending a lot of time in sticky mud then
a studded sole like Innov-8's or Walsh's more aggressive units will give
you better traction. But a Vibram unit is usually a good indication of
quality that will do most jobs well.

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/

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?

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

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.

2. Vibram® outsole for best traction (cheaper boots may have a lower
grade outsole).

3. Stitchdown construction (not just glued) for durability (very rare
except on extreme high end).

4. Full-grain, all-leather upper (not split grain, not "nubuck") for
support and durability.

Once you find all the boots with the necessary design elements you begin
to narrow down your choices based on other factors like fit, aesthetics,
price, etc..

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?

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

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.

2. Vibram® outsole for best traction (cheaper boots may have a lower
grade outsole).

3. Stitchdown construction (not just glued) for durability (very rare
except on extreme high end).

4. Full-grain, all-leather upper (not split grain, not "nubuck") for
support and durability.

Once you find all the boots with the necessary design elements you begin
to narrow down your choices based on other factors like fit, aesthetics,
price, etc..


But before genuflecting before each of these "necessary" points,
remember that there are other opinions (also based on a fair bit of
experience) on the matter...

While those points may be valid for some users and for some uses, they
are being presented in a *very* dogmatic manner.

On Feb 19, 11:58*am, "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.

I sincerely hope, Mr Bently, that you will come back and tells us what
you ended up buying, and why. This thread seems like a lot of
discussion/debate to not see a result.
I think I have read the whole thread, but if you have already posted
that info and I missed it, sorry.

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.

In the name of fashion some people also treat reversed leather with
the proofing treatments designed to preserve the look of suede and
nubuck. Me, I just slap on some wax and to hell with the look of them.

And speaking of fashion and branding:

1. GORE-TEX®
2. Vibram®

In the UK JCB make earth moving equipment, but they aren't the only
game in town anymore.
--
Phil Cook, last hill: Am Bodach in the Mamores on a sunny day :-)
pictures at http://www.therewaslight.co.uk soonish...

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

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.

SMS is doing what he does best, which is assuming he knws better than
anyone else. It is a simple and verifiable fact that Scarpa SLs and
Mantas (among many, many others) have long been favourites in the
(rather wet) UK, with both expert opinion and public acclaim through use
and sales, and they don't have any such lining.

2. Vibram® outsole for best traction (cheaper boots may have a lower
grade outsole).

Vibram are generally good, but not the only game in town.

3. Stitchdown construction (not just glued) for durability (very rare
except on extreme high end).

This effectively says it is *necessary* to get "extreme high end" boots.
But look what people /actually use/ and you'll find plenty of folk
doing a great deal without "extreme high end" boots.

4. Full-grain, all-leather upper (not split grain, not "nubuck") for
support and durability.

Those will be the most durable, but how durable will you need? For a
lot of applications fabric boots will be more comfortable because
there's far less effort needed to bend them as you walk, plus more
breathable, and if you can buy three pairs for the same money and
wouldn't ever have worn out the leathers anyway, why bother paying all
that money for something which is just harder to walk in? Serious
leather boots have their place, certainly, but for a lot of applications
they're simply overkill.

Once you find all the boots with the necessary design elements you begin
to narrow down your choices based on other factors like fit, aesthetics,
price, etc..

Though "necessary design elements" in typical walking footwear don't
actually include Goretex, Vibram, Stitchdown construction or full grain
leather. How do I know? From doing lots of walking in footwear with
variously only some or absolutely none of those features.

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/

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 12:57:52 +0000, 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.

In the name of fashion some people also treat reversed leather with
the proofing treatments designed to preserve the look of suede and
nubuck. Me, I just slap on some wax and to hell with the look of them.

My first boots were suede and very comfortable. I bought them
thinking that I could just brush the mud off when dry. Despite using
the various sprays though, they did get sodden and eventually cracked
and split along a crease, long before they were worn out. Now
relegated to garden duty.

Well-dubbined leather is now my finish of choice.
--
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

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:43:34 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:

No its not with his silly claim that they will never become comfortable.

I worded it rather poorly.

You did indeed.

What I should have said was that boots or shoes that are
uncomfortable because of poor fit will never become comfortable.

Still wrong. Those ones of mine were uncomforable because of
a poor fit did become the most comfortable I have ever owned.

Boots and shoes made of real leather can wear in to be comfortable.

They can also be stretched a bit.
I saw a shoe-stretcher that could widen shoes up to width D - for me,
that's narrow. It's easy to get D, so a stretcher needs to go well beyond
that.
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:28:57 +0000, Peter Clinch wrote:

-Goretex membrane for breathability and water-proofing

then it's considerably less relevant. And has been noted elsewhere you
really don't need Goretex, and if you do want a lining Goretex isn't the
only game in town (consider eVent, for example, which is demonstrably
more breathable).

Any opinions yet on Hi-Tec's IonMask proofing? Looks good in print, but
does it work?
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.

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.

Have you spoken with every expert? Nearly everybody who successfully
hikes the entire length of the Pacific Crest Trail does so in trail
runners. Is 2650 miles in one season enough to make one an expert?

Scott Williamson, who has hiked at least 40,000 miles, wears running shoes.

Not only would these people not consider GoreTex important, they would
specifically advise against it. The reason is that under some
conditions, your feet will stay drier without it.

The OP didn't even mention hiking. He said walking. Boots of any sort
are overkill for walking.

Scott Bryce wrote:

snip

The OP didn't even mention hiking. He said walking. Boots of any sort
are overkill for walking.

That depends on which language you speak. Here in the UK (and the OP
would appear to reside here) hiking is not a word in general use to
describe recreational walking. Hill walking is frequently referred to as
walking without the prefix and 'rambling' used to describe walking in
the countryside away from paved surfaces.

Two nations divided by a common language as GBS is alleged to have said.

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 04:50:26 -0800 (PST), hbol
wrote:

I sincerely hope, Mr Bently, that you will come back and tells us what
you ended up buying, and why. This thread seems like a lot of
discussion/debate to not see a result.



Prolly just turn out to be a troll...
--
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

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.