backpacking in runners

[wrongway_08]

Been reading a few threads talking about leave the boots at home and bring runners.

- how many have worn runners while back packing?
- Going up rocky sections, ever worry about your ankle rolln?
- My hiking shoes weigh 2 lb 12.50 oz (pair) - with gel insoles
..My trail runners weigh 1 lb 10.40 oz (pair) - with gel insoles

Is it worth saving an average of 1 lb 2 oz off my feet, in turn I give up some support? Or is the support worry not even an issue - even on the rocky sections.

- Does the old sayn still apply, a pound off the shoes is like 5 pounds off the pack?

[JAK]

I would like to see someone make light weight soft leather ankle boots.

[iesman69]

wrongway,

I'm gonna try the runners for the first time next week on a 40 mile NC section hike. I've been searching/reading the same type of threads/posts.

I have my doubts as I've always worn boots, but earlier this summer on my GA hike I saw more hikers wearing trailrunners than I did "traditional" hiking footwear. The adidas runners I wear definitely weigh less than my Vasque sundowners!

[Appalachian Tater]

I wore the same lightweight trail shoe except one had a high ankle and one had a low ankle and believe that you are less likely to fall or twist your ankle or otherwise injure yourself with a regular low-rise trail runner because of better range of motion and ability to adjust when you put your foot down. They are also lighter. I have no experience with heavy leather hiking boots.

[wilconow]

Been reading a few threads talking about leave the boots at home and bring runners.

- how many have worn runners while back packing?
- Going up rocky sections, ever worry about your ankle rolln?
- My hiking shoes weigh 2 lb 12.50 oz (pair) - with gel insoles
..My trail runners weigh 1 lb 10.40 oz (pair) - with gel insoles

Is it worth saving an average of 1 lb 2 oz off my feet, in turn I give up some support? Or is the support worry not even an issue - even on the rocky sections.

- Does the old sayn still apply, a pound off the shoes is like 5 pounds off the pack?

I've been backpacking in trail runners for a few years now and love it. During this time, I've been persuading my friends to get rid of their boots. For some, they love me for suggesting, others have gone back to boots.

The only way you can answer this question is to go backpacking with trail runners.

[Footslogger]

I would like to see someone make light weight soft leather ankle boots.

===================================

Check out the Lowas ...about the lightest/softest boot around.

'Slogger

[Ender]

Everyone has different feet, but it's always worth trying something new. I hiked in runners for about 1000 miles, but ended up having some ankle problems, so I don't think they're for me. Still, the light weight of the runners was very nice.

I say give it a try. If it doesn't work, you can always switch back.

[Footslogger]

I cut over to trail shoes in Damascus during my thru in 2003 (Montrail Java). Hiked in them until Glencliff, when I switched back to my boots for the Whites. In retrospect I could have just as well stayed in my low cuts.

A lot of "older" (relative term) hikers mention ankle support as their main reason for staying in boots. For the longest time I bought into that argument, given my age, and thought that boots afored me better protection. While it is true that a tightly laced boot can add some stability I personally have had many ankle "rolls" while wearing boots.

For me ...it's low cuts.

'Slogger

[bigcranky]

I've been hiking in trail runners since April 2000, Easter weekend, on a 3-day hike at Standing Indian. I left the big monster boots in the car and hiked in my Montrail Vitesse trail runners. It was a revelation. I was carrying about 45 pounds in a big Gregory Shasta.

Since then, my pack weight has dropped, but I keep hiking in the trail runners. I've tried various Montrails, the Salomon XA Comp (great shoe), and now the New Balance 810.

I don't worry about my ankle rolling -- it rolls less than when I was wearing boots, and with no more damage. I do find that I'm more nimble and agile wearing runners, so I'm less likely to roll or twist or step wrong. In addition, the lower weight reduces fatigue in my quads, so I'm less likely to do something stupid toward the end of the day.

I can't say whether your trail runners would be a good replacement for your fairly lightweight hiking shoes. You can try them out, and see for yourself. Some hikers go back to heavier shoes like the Lowas because they feel that their feet are getting pounded.

[scope]

Is it worth saving an average of 1 lb 2 oz off my feet, in turn I give up some support? Or is the support worry not even an issue - even on the rocky sections.

- Does the old sayn still apply, a pound off the shoes is like 5 pounds off the pack?

IMO - no. Most runners use abrasion resistant rubber which is lighter, but it doesn't grab on rocks like you'll want it to. As far as support goes, you can get by with them, but the uppers aren't as substantial and you'll notice that a lot on steep downhill inclines - not so much uphill. The padding is fine for roots and rocks, but I find the sole padding to be too soft and that it compresses too much for comfort while I'm hiking with a pack. I wear Montrail Hardrocks now which offer a lot of support and traction with the wearability of a running shoe.

[wrongway_08]

The trail runners (have agressive tread) I wear are one of the North Face styles, made with Gortex so they are water proof - no a real big advantage with such a low cut.
They grip great great on slippery rock, often I do day hikes up by Catactin and they grip rocks/ roots well.
Also I use the gel soles w/reinforced arc support in all my runners/boots/mountain biking shoes, they absorb a great deal of shock and keep my feet warmer in the winter.
I am going to buy a new set of trail runners and try them out on my next 3 day backpack trip.
Thanks for all the info! If you have any trail runners that have worked well for you please post as well.

[Jimmers]

- how many have worn runners while back packing?
- Going up rocky sections, ever worry about your ankle rolln?
- My hiking shoes weigh 2 lb 12.50 oz (pair) - with gel insoles
..My trail runners weigh 1 lb 10.40 oz (pair) - with gel insoles
Is it worth saving an average of 1 lb 2 oz off my feet, in turn I give up some support? Or is the support worry not even an issue - even on the rocky sections.
- Does the old sayn still apply, a pound off the shoes is like 5 pounds off the pack?

The only time I still use my boots for hiking is in winter. Runners are just better for me all around. They dry quickly and don't require any break in time. If you're carefull about what brand you buy you can usually get the same arch support you get in a boot. This was key for me, since I have very high arches.

On rocky terrain I feel much more confident, since I can actually bend my ankle to land exactly where I want. Haven't even come close to rolling an ankle yet. (knock on wood)

Best of all, I've got a lot more energy left at the end of the day. I couldn't believe how much better I felt the first time I used runners. Like I'd hardly been hiking at all, and this was a weekend trip in the Whites going up Bondcliff on the Pemi loop. I'd say the 5lb saying definately still applies.:D

[Mother's Finest]

I cut over to trail shoes in Damascus during my thru in 2003 (Montrail Java). Hiked in them until Glencliff, when I switched back to my boots for the Whites. In retrospect I could have just as well stayed in my low cuts.

A lot of "older" (relative term) hikers mention ankle support as their main reason for staying in boots. For the longest time I bought into that argument, given my age, and thought that boots afored me better protection. While it is true that a tightly laced boot can add some stability I personally have had many ankle "rolls" while wearing boots.

For me ...it's low cuts.

'Slogger

I would second what Mr. Slogger said regarding the issue of ankle rolling and low vs. high cut shoes.

Your support will come from the heel counter of the shoe or boot. That is about all you can hope to rely on from a shoe or boot. If you want to support your foot properly, you will remove the cushioned insert and replace it with an orthotic device that works for you. For some, an over the counter product will work, others will require a custom orthotic.

peace
mf

[wrongway_08]

Jimmers,
What shoe did you get? I have high arches also and wide feet.

[Jimmers]

Jimmers,
What shoe did you get? I have high arches also and wide feet.

I have two different pair right now. One is the Merrell Reactor Ventilator. Great shoe for stability, with a sole that's almost the same as a regular boot. Nice and wide too. My only complaint is that you need to lace them up exactly right or your feet will get pinched on the sides.

The other one is my favorite, the Dunham Waffle Stompers, low cut. (which they apparently no longer make.:mad:) These look more like baseball cleats with their aggressive treads, but they have great grip on rock. Dunham (http://www.dunhambootmakers.com/) is a division of New Balance, so their shoes come in widths up to 4E. These fit great, but they're not very good for cold weather. Way too much mesh.

[Kerosene]

I'd consider using trail runners (not road running sneakers) from Georgia to perhaps Harpers Ferry, but there's no way I would rely on them for the rocks north of there. They're great on smooth trail, but even smoother trail has rocky stretches where I found myself banging my feet and toes pretty hard, even in The North Face runners I used. The lighter weight (15 oz. per vs. 24 per for my Vasque Clarions) was nice, and I didn't have any more problems than usual with ankle rolling. Grip seemed pretty similar between the boots.

I think a lot depends on your walking style, weight of your pack, and perhaps speed.

[Miner]

I like trail runners, not as much for the weight (though that is a bonus) but for the extra ventilation and the quick drying time. My feet stay drier during sunny weather which helps keep my feet from blistering (I get far less blisters since I switched). When it rains, your feet get wet quicker, but if it rains long enough, even gortex boots will get your feet wet. But the trail runners will dry out much faster (especially while walking in them).

As for traction, it depends on the type of sole the shoe has. Some trail runners have excellent traction. I've had no problem on slick rocky trails in the mountains. I do hike in a 1/2 size larger then I normally wear to allow room for foot expansion/swelling and my pack weight is normally low to mid 20's.

However, not all trail shoes are alike. Some trail runners do not last as well or the sole is too soft and you'll feel the trail too much (for example, Go-Lite trail runners reportedly suffer these problems).

[hopefulhiker]

I hiked the first 400 miles with Vasque Sundownners and switched over to Montrail Hardrocks in Damascus going North.. I used the Super feet insoles, not the green ones, the causual blue ones. The gel insoles did not provide enough support for me.. My ankles were strong after 400 miles .. Also as I did more miles I would roll my ankles about everday.. But it did not even bother me at all after a while.. I found that I could go faster a lot easier without the heavy boots.. They say that a lb on your feet is like five lbs on your back..

[Blue Jay]

- how many have worn runners while back packing?
- Going up rocky sections, ever worry about your ankle rolln?
- My hiking shoes weigh 2 lb 12.50 oz (pair) - with gel insoles
..My trail runners weigh 1 lb 10.40 oz (pair) - with gel insoles

Is it worth saving an average of 1 lb 2 oz off my feet, in turn I give up some support?

Leather is an extreme minority on the AT. Think about it, with each step you move an extra pound. A mile is very roughly 2000 steps. Therefore with each mile you lift and move a extra ton of weight. The support is an illusion. I have very weak ankles and they can turn just as easily in a concrete/leather piece of crap than a trail runner. In fact, since the clod hoppers give you a false sense of security, in addition to making you MUCH more tired moving a ton per mile, you will twist your ankle MORE.

[stickman]

I have always been skeptical but this summer I hiked from Amicolola to Fontana wearing Vasque Blur Trail runners with green inserts. I'll spare you the long story and just say this: I will never hike again in boots. Trail runners kick!

Stickman

[gardenville]

Maybe I missed it but what do you expect your pack weight to be?

This is the first question and if your pack weight is light (under 25 pounds or so) ?? then Trail Runners should work fine for you.

Then I would ask what kind of shape are your legs, ankles and feet in.

Don't make the mistake of thinking gear will substitute for poor physical shape.

[wrongway_08]

I will be under 25 lbs with food and water, 27 lbs winter weight, when my new tent gets here.

As far as my shape is concerned:
- mountain bike 3-4 hours usually 3 days a week, then I try to get in a once a month endurance ride of 6-8 hours.
- kayak during (winter/spring/summer/fall) or swim (summer) upstream a few times a month
- free climb when I get a chance
- road bike - not much, kinda boring unless you have a group to go with.
- of course I hike
- weight lift a little bit, its really boring to me, so this time usually ends up with me doing set of pushups, sit up, leg raises, side steps, weighted jumping jacks......but the the real weight lifting only last like 20 minutes, it is soooooo boring!
- push mow my yard, a little over 1/2 acre. 2 or 3 times a month. Uses a LOT less gas then a riding mower and I dont have to walk around a stupid big ol riding mower all the time :) .
- trail run too, not as much as I would like, but try to get out 2 or 3 times a month.
Of course the numbers get moved around some, some things dont get done due to time. The only reason I have time to do all this is because I work from 5:30am untill 2pm, so I have a lot of day left when I am off :D !

Oh yea, only reason I am lucky enough to be able to do all this is because I work from 5:30am till 2:00pm, so lots of day light left when I get off.

No need to worry about that, I know the lungs and legs will hold up ;) .

Just wasnt sure that trail runners would hold up over repeated abust that the rocks would provide.

[gsingjane]

I hiked last summer in trail runners (Montrails) and would like to say, do not do this unless you are not carrying lots of stuff. I carried my own pack, which wasn't light, and then my younger daughter's when she decided she didn't want to, and I feel that I permanently injured my right foot. At least this is when it really started hurting (the bones leading to the second and third toes). Before that I hadn't had any pain with it, but since then (about 16 months) I have had recurring pain with it. Now I am sure training to run two marathons on it, and doing lots of backpacking and other stuff besides isn't helping any, but it is one of those nagging injuries I really would rather not have gotten. I note that you are almost twenty years younger than I am, so probably have lots more resiliency, but all in all I'm very sorry I decided to try this particular backpacking experiment.

Jane in CT

[SteveJ]

Jimmers,
What shoe did you get? I have high arches also and wide feet.

Hi, wrongway - I also have high arches, and require a wide toe box (morton's neuroma between the toes on my left foot). I've found that New Balance or Merrell's work well for me....

[Chache]

Chameleon II Stretch. Just got back from the store with what has got to be my 7th or 8th pair. Best shoe ever. http://www.merrell.com/Shop/Product.aspx?AltNavID=MAF-G-HIK&SID=14629

[aaroniguana]

Great, now you tell me, after I just bought my third pair of Moab Ventilators... ;)

[Quoddy]

I use trail runners year round, but add gaiters in the winter. Just completed the Long Trail in a 22oz (per pair) of Inov-8's. I would not go back to boots for any trail hiking. BTW... not a hint of a blister in the 280 miles.

[damush]

i'm in a position of newbie-ness regarding footwear, got a new pair of NB 809's to try for my foray into "lighter weight" packing due to recent back surgeries...but i'm still not convinced that shoes are the appropriate footwear for backpacking. i blew out my 'salomon something or others' doing MD. last month, and i was only carrying 25 lbs...granted, they were 5+ yrs old and had spent more time on construction sites than anywhere else, but mid-weight boots have served me excellently in the past- my last favorites were montrail something somethings, the ones that survivor ass is wearing on the show- took a fall off of the second floor roof at a job site a few yrs ago, and while i did break my ankle i wonder how much worse it would have been if i was wearing low-cut shoes? granted, nothing short of a pair of mountaineering or skiing boots is going to keep your ankle stiff enough to prevent rolling, but i think the point is to provide enough support to keep injury in the "minor" category rather than nastiness like compound fractures and such. like i said, i'm still new at this light weight stuff, so i'll likely end up changing my opinion after a few hundred miles.

[aaroniguana]

i blew out my 'salomon something or others' doing MD. last month, and i was only carrying 25 lbs...granted, they were 5+ yrs old and had spent more time on construction sites than anywhere else...


That's why. Trail runners are good for a few hundred miles. You got 5 years out of them. If you liked the 809s got for the 810s. I went with Merrells because the 810s were sopld out and backordered here.

[damush]

That's why. Trail runners are good for a few hundred miles. You got 5 years out of them. If you liked the 809s got for the 810s. I went with Merrells because the 810s were sopld out and backordered here.
what's the point of buying footwear for backpacking if it only lasts for a couple of hundred miles? is it so cool to be a consumer that you can overlook quality and just pay attention to "ultra light weight - 3 grams less than a fart" throw- away gear? the kicks i blew out were thrift store finds, practically brand new, and yeah i abused the hell out of them framing and roofing houses- admittedly not what they were designed for, but the idea of going through multiple pairs of shoes to through hike one time seems kinda wrong to me...

[wrongway_08]

Sometimes the more money you spend does not mean the item will last long, just the oppisite. You pay for high grip/tacky soles on the shoes but the wear fast fast due to that.
You can get shoes/boots that will easily last a thru-hike, the soles may be a little harder so they last longer. You get a great pair of shoes that still fit right, last a long time but they might not bend/flex or grip as well as the shoes that wear out quicker.
Kinda like buying tires for a car, a set that cost $300.00 will last 70,000 miles - ride like crap due to a hard compound but last forever. Then you get a set that cost $700.00, better ride, great grip but only last 45,000 miles.
Then there is a set they just came out with, $12,000 for 4 tires! These tires grip at 220 plus miles an hour! (cant remember the car maker that uses these) but these tires only last - at the most, when driving normal, get this - 10,000 miles!
Not sayn all shoes are like this but more money/comfort/grip does not always mean a longer life.

[aaroniguana]

Trail runners are lightweight, let your feet breathe so there's little moisture build up, dry very fast when you have to get them wet, require virtually ZERO break in time and they are one-half of the cost of a good pair of hiking boot.

Shoes wear out. Shoes that take the abuse of 10+ miles of trails every day wear out fast.

You bought your 809s used at a thrift store, wore them to frame and roof houses for 5+ years, then are disappointed in their performance on the trail.

OK then, Walmart makes some nice wafflestompers that will get you to PA and only cost you $39.95. two pair will cover the entire AT for the cost of one pair of trailrunners. Happy shinsplints!

[wrongway_08]

Spend the extra money, your feet and back will thank you. Plus for safety reasons (grip, flexibilty, they breath well), spending the extra is well worth it.
Figure that for most people a Thru-Hike will be a once in a life time deal, I want to be as safe and comfy with all my gear. Shoes can make or break your hike. I would rather buy 2 or 3 sets of fast wearing soled trail runners/boots, knowing that they will stick to the wet/dry rocks/roots, then buy a pair of shoes, that may last the whole trip, cost 1/2 as much but leave me wondering if my foot hold will stick on a wet climb.

Damush, its not so much about saving grams - most companys that make trail runners just happen to use good materials that weigh less.
You wouldnt throw a set of those $12,000 tires on a Geo Metro, shoe companys are not going to make a great set of soles and then toss a plastic top on them either. Also just like in any sport I have ever been in, the higher quality items (shoes, kayak paddles, drive shafts for my offraod Jeep, down hill disk brakes on mountain bikes, high performance parts for race cars...) they require more care, attention and while they work much better then stock parts, you pay for that performance in life span. Greater quality - for the most part - means your going to pay more and pay more often for the benifits


For the people who look at only weight, those people may not be getting the best for their money, or more important - feet!

Just my 2 cents worth, everyones feet are different and all you need to worry about is that what ever gear you pick is going to work for you.

[Newb]

I did a hike yesterday with my new Vasque Mantras. I carried about 15 pounds on my back. All I can say is "wow". I don't know how they'll be in the winter or with a full pack, but so far I'm happy.