View Full Version : The BOOT Question
Hey all,
Wanted to just get a sampling of who is using what on their feet these days.
I guess you can keep it to the warm weather months. Interested in developing a profile of sorts to be able to give some sound advice in regards to the "BOOT" issue.
I have been using the Vasque Zephyr's this year and I am about ready to bail on them after 150miles.
This post is not specifically for me I have some hikers who want the best info (the best info IMO is from the community)
The thought here also is, if I direct them to a link, they'll stay here too.
Brian :banana
No boots! Brooks Cascadia 7.
Thanks Maren, this is what I am looking for; the issue of the BOOT vs Trail-runner or low cuff to emerge.
jburgasser
03-19-2012, 12:49
I still use a pair of Merrills boot from 2002. I'll probably switch to shoes when (if!) these wear out.
JB
Merrill Refuge Core Mids. My sneaker days are over because of age. Specfically the toenails.
WillyStyle
03-19-2012, 13:59
I just got a pair of Vasque trail runners. They look like they might last a month. I hope to be surprised. When they fall apart I'll replace them with an even more poorly constructed pair of Nike cross trainers.
Then I'll be out of shoes, but I will have hopefully found a pair someone else was wearing that were awesome and I'll order those through the magical wed of information and transportation networks we have created.
My feet hurt most of the time, so I expect them to continue to hurt.
The most important criterion is that the boots/shoes fit well. The whole boots vs. trail runners thing has been beaten to death.
there's three groups of people:
1. Older folks that use boots for a variety of reasons (habit and or health, I'm not sure )
2. Folks that hike frequently and use some sort of runner/trail runner
3. folks that don't hike much and advocate boots.
royalusa
03-19-2012, 19:49
there's three groups of people:
1. Older folks that use boots for a variety of reasons (habit and or health, I'm not sure )
2. Folks that hike frequently and use some sort of runner/trail runner
3. folks that don't hike much and advocate boots.
Add '4' to your list:
4. Older folks that have switched from boots to trail runners after they saw the benefit of lighter footwear (as well as lighter packs)....but it's still a HYOH. What works for one, does not always work for all. Us? Trail runners all the time now for us. I'm sure you've heard the 'a pound on the foot is like 5 pounds on your back'. IMHO, I think there really is some truth to that.
ChinMusic
03-19-2012, 20:18
Add '4' to your list:
4. Older folks that have switched from boots to trail runners after they saw the benefit of lighter footwear (as well as lighter packs)....but it's still a HYOH.
For any trail I have on my list it is trail runners and I am 53. I got boots and mids collecting dust in the gear room. Those Keens mids in my avatar pic have a lot of miles left in em. I just don't see wearing them again.
kevperro
03-19-2012, 20:24
I've hiked in both and still use boots. My boots are lighter than they used to be but I still wish I could buy another pair of Vasque Sundowners made like my old pair. Weight isn't everything. The bottom line is this.... I hike typically between 12-15 miles/day. Whatever makes that most pleasant in the conidtions I'm hiking in are what goes on my feet. The other upside to the Sundowners was lifespan. I could put 2K miles on a pair whereas with the light weight boots/shoes you blow through them like they are disposable. In the long run the heavier boot was a better value.
ChinMusic
03-19-2012, 20:32
I've hiked in both and still use boots. My boots are lighter than they used to be but I still wish I could buy another pair of Vasque Sundowners made like my old pair.
I got some original Italian Sundowners collecting dust too.
NorthCountryWoods
03-26-2012, 17:04
#5 old people who've become frugal over the years prefer boots.
$200 Boots will last for multiple seasons of heavy hiking and $100 trail runners won't (because they're not meant to). I use trail runners for day hikes and mid summer 1-3 nighters, but I do kill a pair a season. I wear boots in fall, winter, spring and for extended hikes....the same ones I've had for 6 years.
Like the post above stated.....it's a matter of lifespan.
ChinMusic
03-26-2012, 17:37
.....it's a matter of lifespan.
For me, the various "lifespans" of different footwear means almost nothing. Comfort is #1.
rocketsocks
03-26-2012, 18:12
Boots rule,trial runners drool:rolleyes:
Old Boots
03-26-2012, 19:32
I just got off the trail after 200 miles using Oboz Windrivers. No blisters or even hotspots the entire 4weeks.
NorthCountryWoods
03-27-2012, 14:22
For me, the various "lifespans" of different footwear means almost nothing. Comfort is #1.
Don't remember stating it wasn't......
.....but lets infer comfort was close to equal. For myself and many of my frugal trail squirrels.....quality of materials and longevity play a big role in the choice.
It's your money, spend it how you wish.
I use boots for trailwork and once in a great while during 'mud season'. That's about it for anything remotely hiking related.
(Skiing is another ball o' wax. :) )
ChinMusic
03-27-2012, 14:46
Don't remember stating it wasn't......
And I remember stating "for me". In fact, I opened with it.
#5 old people who've become frugal over the years prefer boots.
$200 Boots will last for multiple seasons of heavy hiking and $100 trail runners won't (because they're not meant to). I use trail runners for day hikes and mid summer 1-3 nighters, but I do kill a pair a season. I wear boots in fall, winter, spring and for extended hikes....the same ones I've had for 6 years.
Like the post above stated.....it's a matter of lifespan.
The solution to this dilemma is don't buy $100 trail runners. Sierra Trading Post right now has probably 20 pairs of trail runners under $50 bucks. Sign up, get a 35% off and $2.50 shipping coupon and take your pick of $30-$35 trail running shoes then you can buy 5-7 pairs of trail runners per one pair of boots.
I just bought these Columbia shoes for I think $27. http://www.sierratradingpost.com/columbia-sportswear-kaibab-plus-trail-running-shoes-for-men~p~4425n/?filterString=mens-hiking-shoes~d~361%2F&colorFamily=01
Before that I found some at Endless.com (free shipping to and back if you don't like, same as Zappos.com) The North Face that I really like I think I paid less than $40 for them.
The bonus to me is these are normal looking shoes so you can wear them out and about, on vacation then seamlessly transition to a day hike...all blister free.
My question to the boot users...be honest...are you constantly managing blisters? Almost everyone I know that uses boots are always dealing with blisters (and hot sweaty feet). Since I switched to trail runners, I haven't even had a hot spot much less a blister. I didn't know that it could be that way until I switched. No need for camp shoes, hardly any need to take your shoes off at lunch breaks to cool and dry your socks (still do but dont have to). Its just so much more...like normal. Your footwear just becomes something on your feet not something that needs to be managed.
NorthCountryWoods
03-27-2012, 17:46
The solution to this dilemma is don't buy $100 trail runners. Sierra Trading Post right now has probably 20 pairs of trail runners under $50 bucks. Sign up, get a 35% off and $2.50 shipping coupon and take your pick of $30-$35 trail running shoes then you can buy 5-7 pairs of trail runners per one pair of boots.
I just bought these Columbia shoes for I think $27. http://www.sierratradingpost.com/columbia-sportswear-kaibab-plus-trail-running-shoes-for-men~p~4425n/?filterString=mens-hiking-shoes~d~361%2F&colorFamily=01 (http://www.sierratradingpost.com/columbia-sportswear-kaibab-plus-trail-running-shoes-for-men%7Ep%7E4425n/?filterString=mens-hiking-shoes%7Ed%7E361%2F&colorFamily=01)
Before that I found some at Endless.com (free shipping to and back if you don't like, same as Zappos.com) The North Face that I really like I think I paid less than $40 for them.
The bonus to me is these are normal looking shoes so you can wear them out and about, on vacation then seamlessly transition to a day hike...all blister free.
My question to the boot users...be honest...are you constantly managing blisters? Almost everyone I know that uses boots are always dealing with blisters (and hot sweaty feet). Since I switched to trail runners, I haven't even had a hot spot much less a blister. I didn't know that it could be that way until I switched. No need for camp shoes, hardly any need to take your shoes off at lunch breaks to cool and dry your socks (still do but dont have to). Its just so much more...like normal. Your footwear just becomes something on your feet not something that needs to be managed.
I don't pay $100 for runners, but that is right around the average price for them. Got my last pair on zappos. Free next day shipping and free returns.
Never gotten blisters in any footwear other than dress shoes (knock on wood), but have had hot feet in boots and longed for trail runners after a long dry day on the trail. I usually don't take my shoes off until camp regardless the footwear. Carrying camp shoes is sometimes a PITA, but I do that when wearing trail runners too...or go barefoot.
My wife (ultra-marathon runner) is quick to blister and found that socks are a more important factor than the shoe.
But you do get my point about longevity, right? I've got a super heavy pair of Montrail ATs that are going on 16 years old. Probably well over 3000k miles of Alaskan/Canadian bush and mountains on them. Soles are pretty worn, but they are comfortable as heck. Will I wear them mid summer on the LT? No, but then again I don't wear trail runners on a mid winter snowshoe over-nighter.
Boots and trail runners are different species with different strengths and weaknesses. Knowing what they are and using each at the correct times will make hiking much more enjoyable.
"Boots and trail runners are different species with different strengths and weaknesses. Knowing what they are and using each at the correct times will make hiking much more enjoyable.
I agree. I have Zamberlan 760's which I use for the Rocksylvania trails which are closet to me. They are great in the winter, fall and spring. I walk through mud and trails that are like streams and stay dry. For summer on less rocky trails I am wearing Saloman XA3D Ultra 2's. These are the non gortex ones and breathe very nicely on a hot day.
Edwardo Rodriguez
03-27-2012, 18:25
Am wearing these North face http://www.rei.com/product/811478/the-north-face-hedgehog-iii-gtx-xcr-hiking-shoes-mens last year on the JMT I wore some Salomon http://www.rei.com/product/818511/salomon-xa-comp-6-gtx-trail-running-shoes-mens with great success cross all the creeks and snow fields on the JMT with no blisters my only complain about trail runners shoes is the is I can expect at best is 300 mile for one pair. Going to give the North Face a try on the JMT this year and hope I can get over 500 miles in one pair.
I don't pay $100 for runners, but that is right around the average price for them. Got my last pair on zappos. Free next day shipping and free returns.
Never gotten blisters in any footwear other than dress shoes (knock on wood), but have had hot feet in boots and longed for trail runners after a long dry day on the trail. I usually don't take my shoes off until camp regardless the footwear. Carrying camp shoes is sometimes a PITA, but I do that when wearing trail runners too...or go barefoot.
My wife (ultra-marathon runner) is quick to blister and found that socks are a more important factor than the shoe.
But you do get my point about longevity, right? I've got a super heavy pair of Montrail ATs that are going on 16 years old. Probably well over 3000k miles of Alaskan/Canadian bush and mountains on them. Soles are pretty worn, but they are comfortable as heck. Will I wear them mid summer on the LT? No, but then again I don't wear trail runners on a mid winter snowshoe over-nighter.
Boots and trail runners are different species with different strengths and weaknesses. Knowing what they are and using each at the correct times will make hiking much more enjoyable.
I get where you are coming from. I always assume most of the comments on this site are aimed towards the AT and hiking in fairly decent (no/low snow type weather). I think for the vast majority of hikers in these types of conditions on established trails, they would benefit from shoes vs leather boots.
I defer to your experience though because if you have 3000K miles in Alaska and Canada I could certainly learn a thing or two from you (and am jealous :)
Slo-go'en
03-28-2012, 11:47
My question to the boot users...be honest...are you constantly managing blisters? Almost everyone I know that uses boots are always dealing with blisters (and hot sweaty feet).
I'm one of those old guys who always wear boots. Maybe because I live in New Hampshire and our trails and conditions favor boots. Ideally ones with a steel shank in the sole so you can toe step up steep, rocky trails.
Blisters? I hardly ever get blisters. I've meet pleanty of hikers with trail runners with nasty blisters. Boots (ideally gortex) might make the feet slightly damp from sweat, but thats not nearly as bad as having soaking wet socks all the time from trail runners. But they dry quick you say - but not if it rains for 3-4 days in a row.
Have I tried trail runners? Yes I have and never again.
ChinMusic
03-28-2012, 12:27
I'm one of those old guys who always wear boots.
Have I tried trail runners? Yes I have and never again.
I am in the older age group too and have come to the exact opposite conclusion.
In nearly all of these boot/shoes threads I state the same thing. You are just not going to get information on what works for YOUR feet in one of these threads. You are going to have to find out what works for YOU through trial and error (maybe "trail and error" is better). If you are lucky you won't go through too much $$$ in the process.
NorthCountryWoods
03-28-2012, 17:20
I get where you are coming from. I always assume most of the comments on this site are aimed towards the AT and hiking in fairly decent (no/low snow type weather). I think for the vast majority of hikers in these types of conditions on established trails, they would benefit from shoes vs leather boots.
You are correct on a well worn and maintained trail. Up above MA the AT tends to be a lot wetter/muddier/rougher/colder (along with the LT) and that's where the boot can have an advantage.....and even that depends on the weather and time of year.
Like many other gear choices, we all have opinions and preferences.....but there is no "correct" answer to this debate.
Big Dawg
03-29-2012, 01:36
I've used both, and prefer boots. Never had a blister in the boots or trail runners, probably because I've ensured the right fit and sock combo. My boots have lasted many years. I wore a hole in the interior lining of a new pair of trail runners on a 50 miler,,, and REI took em right back. Other trail runners didn't fair much better. Plus, w/ my stature (6'5" 275#'s), I feel much more stable in boots while wearing a pack and traversing mountains. Like a skyscraper needs a good footing,, this Big Dawg needs good sturdy boots!!
I have very old and very heavy Vasque mountaineering boots that I am now certain will outlast me. I bought a spare pair way back when and they have not seen daylight yet.
I'm planning a thru-hike though so the weight concerns me. I am looking to Merrell's Moab Mid Ventilators (1 lbs 15 oz for the pair)
I am now concerned at how long they will last, particularly poor construction as I have read a limited number of separation horror stories.
As for blisters or any foot problems - I've never had any either but I always ensure a good fit and good socks as well. (Those 5+ lb boots felt like house-slippers for comfort right out of the box.)
I'm planning a thru-hike though so the weight concerns me. I am looking to Merrell's Moab Mid Ventilators (1 lbs 15 oz for the pair)
I am now concerned at how long they will last, particularly poor construction as I have read a limited number of separation horror stories.
All I can say is that I hiked the last 800 miles NOBO in a pair of those.
All I can say is that I hiked the last 800 miles NOBO in a pair of those.
Well hopefully you can say you loved them? And would recommend them highly?
Well hopefully you can say you loved them? And would recommend them highly?
Yeah absolutely, my pair, my girlfriends pair and those of everyone I met who had a pair on the AT loved them. Jen and I switched to them because of all the people we met who recommended them.
Yeah absolutely, my pair, my girlfriends pair and those of everyone I met who had a pair on the AT loved them. Jen and I switched to them because of all the people we met who recommended them.
Great, one more question and I'll let this rest (here anyway): Did you use insoles? I've looked at the green Superfeet, but don't know if I can handle that rigidness. Maybe if I put gel over that?
Great, one more question and I'll let this rest (here anyway): Did you use insoles? I've looked at the green Superfeet, but don't know if I can handle that rigidness. Maybe if I put gel over that?
I'd recommend insoles, I ended up with some plantar fasciitis in my right foot because I didn't use them.
I'd also recommend Sole instead of Superfeet. http://www.yoursole.com/products/footbeds/
My girlfriend managed to crease the plastic on the bottom of the green Superfeet in one day of wearing them. Granted she did trip and come down hard on that foot but still. Sole's are more flexible and you can heat them and get them to conform to your foot shape skipping much if not all of the miserable break in process of superfeet.
We've both ended up going with Sole based on the recommendation of another thru hiker and so far they have been great.
Ok, I would hope to find an outfitter that carries Sole somewhere near me to test them.
I will thru at 6' / 205 (and fit!) - which Sole soles do you recommend?
Thanks for the information, I appreciate the input.
SassyWindsor
04-02-2012, 23:44
I reccomend a good fitting, high quality leather boot, no gtx. I use Scarpa, Italian made or my older Fabiano Rios.
https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRIRTjHZWhpcwy7lQ_WpBl50bmQ0VV5C NMwWtp9MoBXQ6aNYHoXmw
I will thru at 6' / 205 (and fit!) - which Sole soles do you recommend?
Sorry, I guess that page isn't real user friendly, here's a chart that will make more sense: http://www.yoursole.com/products/footbeds/compare-all-footbeds/
As far as I can tell by looking/bending them the support layer is the same for all of them. There are a couple feature extras that the two on the far left have but it mostly comes down to how thick the cushion layer is.
Ok, I would hope to find an outfitter that carries Sole somewhere near me to test them.
REI carries a range of thicknesses in the sporty versions: http://www.rei.com/search?query=sole So hopefully there's a REI near you. My girlfriend has the blue version, Velvet (the hiker who recommended them to us) had the red ones and I got the thin pair so they will also fit in my work shoes. As for which pair you should get, I have no idea. Try them on and see what fits, cushion is nice but make sure there's room in your shoes for your feet to swell.
Oh speaking of which at the various gear stores they tend to fit shoes on the snug side but as a thru hiker that may not be the right answer for you. If you haven't already I'd really recommend checking into how thru hikers like their shoes to fit.
“Will I wear them mid summer on the LT? No, but then again I don't wear trail runners on a mid winter snowshoe over-nighter.”
I do. Not saying there’s a right or wrong answer either, but just to be clear, trail runners can do a whole lot with a bit of mental adjustment and experience.
“I always assume most of the comments on this site are aimed towards the AT and hiking in fairly decent (no/low snow type weather). I think for the vast majority of hikers in these types of conditions on established trails, they would benefit from shoes vs leather boots.”
I agree with the second sentence above, but again, for me and at least some folks, use of shoes isn’t restricted just to “favorable conditions”.
“I'd recommend insoles, I ended up with some plantar fasciitis in my right foot because I didn't use them.”
If you’re really going to do a lot of miles, consider investing in a visit to a foot doctor and getting custom orthodics. The visit and making of the molds can be expensive. As a thru-hiker, I appreciate that I can as a follow-up bring back the plaster molds and get a new set of orthodics for not nearly as much money --- especially so if it boils down typically to just resurfacing the hard plastic core of the orthodic.
If you’re fortunate and find out that off-the-shelf orthodics like superfeet work for you, wonderful. Note, however, that since few of us are foot experts, it’s a little hard to know whether they work for you short of buying a pair and then doing a number of miles in them. And note also that for me at least, I can be fine for up to, say, 50 miles or so before certain issues crop up.
“If you haven't already I'd really recommend checking into how thru hikers like their shoes to fit.”
I think this varies too, but of course the general rules of thumb are to go one to two sizes bigger than normal, and look for a wide toebox. The sizing up issue isn't something to do, at least not so much anyway, unless you anticipate doing so many miles in a relatively short period that your feet physically change as a result. I think that a relatively wide toebox is good for most people regardless.
One advantage of shoes over boots is that not only is it cheaper to try out different shoes to ultimately find a current model that really works for you, but if you wear them outside your house in the testing enough that you can’t return them, a “close but no cigar” pair shoes are at least useable later as just … shoes. Boots are something that I think you really really want to get right the first time. This is something that I find that I can't do very well.
I do have a REI relatively close. And yes, the Sole website entirely sucks as they don’t link their information well.
After looking at both Sole and Superfeet, I found an immediate concern.
Sole brags that if you DON’T wish to heat mold the insole, no problem, just wear and they will adjust themselves within a week of scaled use. See the problem here? With my overall weight on the trail, that harsh abuse will then flatten those out and make them useless in less than a month.
I am NOT seeking insoles for just a cushion effect but rather support issues (especially around the heal). I will purchase my shoes at least 1 size large, so there will be too much movement in the heal for my preferences. Therefore I will want decent insoles.
The Superfeet green works on an unmoldable hard form under the heal to mid-foot. But they do little to cushion.
Yes, I will keep working on this, and try them out as much as possible in actual hiking before I get to the A.T.
Thanks for the information!
I get that you're looking for support, I got the kind that are really just supportive and Jen got the ones that have the most cushioning on top of the support layer. That's what I was trying to explain.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that you won't squish them flat, actually I'd be surprised if you didn't eventually. What I'm saying is that at least in our limited experience the flattening process happens faster in the green superfeet.
15660
Oh, before someone slams me here: IF I go with support insoles, I know from many others those will NEED to be replaced on the trail. How many times??
I am really stuck here though on a number of issues, such as:
1. You say the GREEN Superfeet which are NOT heat moldable (even body heat designed) are NOT longer lasting than the Sole Ultra which is designed to change with the heat of your feet / walking.
2. I have questioned what support I want / need but looks TO ME as though heal support AT MINIMUM is a good concept for the duration.
3. I am still contemplating how to get high-compression jell pads (base) incorporated as well. I day hike, walk, and work with them in many various shoe types and I know that is part of the reason I've never had the slightest food, knee, or back issues from being on my feet.
4. On the Moab shoes, other than the Vibram sole, there is nothing spectacular going on underneath the foot at all. There is also no shank for additional support. I got to think shoe-minimalists would like this sort of set up. If you take out the factory installed simple insole, you'd essentially be walking on dense rubber.
5. And here's a tricky one: I can now TODAY purchase Moab Mid Ventilator Wides in my size at an REI which were shoes manufactured probably close to 2 years ago - OR, purchase them directly from Merrell as they have finally restocked my size (after months of not having them) which means that version is at least a year newer. I am very concerned with quality of construction as I won't know how well they will hold up until 100's of mile on the trail.
6. IF any insoles I pursue ends up flattened by say 200 miles, I will want to understand and plan accordingly NOW - yes, whatever that means.
7. Whoosh.
peakbagger
04-04-2012, 16:35
I live in the whites and hike in the whites year round. For late spring summer and early fall I use New balance trail runners. When it real muddy or getting colder I do have a pair of New Blance boots (NB1000's) They work but they dont ventilate well. I also need leather boots for official ATC chainsaw work and the NB1000's sort of meet the guidelines as they are mostly all leather. I also use them for corridor boundary maintenance as their tend to be a lot of leaf covered chuck holes. I had Custom Limmers made years ago and hiked extensively with them for three years but once I switched to trail runners my foot issues went away and my daily mileage went up. The other thing with trail runners is they need practically no break in, I have done a week long backpack before with a pair right out of the box.
The local trail crews tend to use Limmers are they are built like a tank (an weigh just about as much).
Lorcatronik
04-05-2012, 12:44
You really don't need to go to a podiatrist to get custom orthotic insoles, or pay a lot of money. There are a number of companies, such as eSoles and Dynamic Foot Systems, among others, that have scanners at stores, generally at cycling, running, triathlon or chiropractic offices. Some will send a kit to you that takes a form of your foot. All of which they use to create a custom orthotic for you to based on your foot and for your specific need and shoe type. For more information you can do a search in some of the cycling forums. One note on the Merrell Moab Ventilators. I've had them for several years, and was wearing them the other day for a 8 mile hike. I noticed during the hike that they were hurting my small toes on the toenails. They, like so may shoes, slope in from the toes too much. I really wish they had a straighter and wider toe box more similar to Keens. I may check out the newer model. I'm still debating whether to get a new pair of these, or a pair of trail runners. I'd like to find some trail runners that offer a decent amount of protection and sturdiness around the forefoot area for going down hill.
SassyWindsor
04-05-2012, 14:50
Had a friend, who hikes/treks quite a bit, tell me that he's switching back to his leather boots. He says the cost per mile on trail runners, plus the inconvenience of having to go purchase more, is just not worth it. He did say if they ever make a pair that can cheaply be resoled he'd reconsider using them. I too agree. I only use my trail shoes for short trips or day hikes, would never use them on a long extended trip.
I don't think anybody should slam you on this topic, footwear is the single hardest piece of gear to get right. You absolutely should be looking at every review/opinion that you can and asking all the questions you can think of. I can't tell you if this is the right setup for your feet or that either of the two insoles will work for you.
I can tell you that Jen got her insoles in NY and is still wearing them. The 1 year of normal use projection that both Sole and Superfeet give is obviously worthless for you but I can tell you that according to the Sole site "If you are unsatisfied with the footbeds for any reason, return them within 90 days for replacement or refund, no questions asked." Which as a thru hiker should make you cackle evilly.
I can't tell you that Superfeet wouldn't be better in a different shoe or that you won't have better luck than we did. I can tell you that as you've already noticed the moab's don't have the most rigid sole ever invented, when you step on a rock things bend. The rigid layer on Jen's Superfeet didn't bend with the shoe instead it crumpled. The Sole's also have a rigid layer but it will flex a bit and at least for Jen that really worked.
I can also tell you that if these things are melting from the heat of my feet it's not enough to see. I kind of wonder if that's a euphemism for, these insoles will break your feet in after a few days.
Apparently even 200 degrees doesn't mold the insoles that much:
"The reason SOLE Custom Footbeds are so effective at increasing comfort and performance, while reducing pain and the chance of injury is because of their orthopedic shape. The insoles are designed to mold to your unique feet without losing this supportive shape. During the molding process the insole contours to the subtle nuances of your foot and footwear, but because it retains the orthopedic shape, it may appear that the insole has not molded very much. If you are unsatisfied with the level of molding you can put them back in the oven for a slightly longer period (no more than 3 minutes) and re-mold them. This will enhance the molding properties of the footbed, but may also affect the level of support the footbeds will offer. You can also try molding the insole without any socks on. This will increase the visible impression made in the forefoot area."
I'm hoping I get some understanding at REI which as stated carries both of them. I will try them and see once I get the shoes.
Thanks!