[pct-l] Running Shoes vs. boots

[Brian Lewis]

Previous posters had great comments on this; I have a couple of other
stray thoughts ...

"How well do runners work with quick/panic stops on common trail conditions?"

Like Diane, I don't see this as much of an issue, and if I did, I
wouldn't feel any more comfortable in hiking boots I don't think.

Note also that "boots" versus "shoes" isn't a purely black & white
issue, but that there are shades of gray.  People include quite a
spread of different shades of gray with the term "boots" --- some
hybrids are hard to catagorize as purely one vs. the other.


"If they wear out fast and you have to leave the trail a few times on
a 5-month trip to find and buy more, won't the total expense of
runners begin to equal or at least approach that of a decent hiking
boot?"

Per above, I suspect this depends on the particular boot.  Note that
the last couple of pairs of boots that I've owned were of a type that
when I took them in to be resoled I was told that they couldn't do it
--- I ended up just replacing them.

Also, a person who expects their shoes to only last, say, 500 - 600
miles a pair will hopefully factor that into their planning.  I
pre-planned where I would replace my shoes based on mileage, and my
wife mailed them to appropriate trail towns.  So I didn't have to
leave the trail to get replacement shoes, no expense or hassle factor
there (for me, anyway).
Note also that while some shoe wearers go for 500 - 600 miles a pair,
I ran into multiple people on the trail who got considerably more.
This will vary based on model/brand and other factors, and I don't
recommend that a person depend on this, but it can and is done.


"If the shoes feel great when you have a lightweight pack on, what
happens to your feet when your weight goes up with your Sierra extra
gear?"

Depends on a lot of factors, certainly to include what your base
weight is before you add whatever extra gear you're inclined to carry.
  I'm not an ultralight hiker, so my base pack weight went up to about
23 pounds in the Sierras last year, offset somewhat by having to carry
less water than previously, but also impacted by potentially longer
stretches between food resupply.   I didn't see anything in particular
"happen" to my feet as a result.

I had been a bit nervous about all the snow and wet and stream
crossings in the Sierras (with shoes), but in retrospect the shoes
were a great choice, I'd go with the same shoes were I to do it again.

I'd add that of quite a number of thru-hikers I saw and hiked with
last year, the majority (a high majority) were wearing shoes, not
boots.  I'm sure there were some boot wearers, but looking back I
can't think of anyone in specific that wore them.    I think that
suggests that shoes can work out pretty well.


Brian Lewis / Gadget '08
http://postholer.com/brianle