[pct-l] Foot Expansion

[Patrick]

On the issue of foot expansion:

The PCT-L has a funny seasonal rhythm that I've always watched from afar,
as I haven't contributed here regularly since I realized the cyclical
nature of it and the redundancy of topic. However, I have been thinking on
a few, oft-repeated issues of the PCT-L over the course of my 5-year
thru-hiking "career" -- including Foot Expansion. Please excuse any
detected tone of superiority because that is not my intent, I'm just trying
to lay it out all in one e-mail instead of piecemeal to later be
misunderstood.

The concept of foot expansion as portrayed by the PCT-L, postholer, yogi,
and other PCT authorities is two-part. One, you have actual foot expansion,
as in the foot physically becoming larger. Two, you have a new desire for
room in the toebox and elsewhere of a hiking shoe. These things are viewed
as one unit, I think, when in reality they are definitely separate,
especially when relating this idea to new or pre- hikers.

Physical foot expansion does happen, but it is not as pronounced as one
might assume. I've noticed a perhaps doubling in foot width due to fluid
retention or "muscle pump" while hiking, usually on a daily basis. In the
morning my feet are free of swelling, slender and normal looking with
tendons, ligaments and bony protrusions clearly defined. Starting sometime
in the early afternoon they start to take on a puffy appearance. By the
time I camp, they are noticeably swollen (although not painful, unhealthy,
reddened, or anything of that sort). And, over time and especially on my
first thru-hike, I noticed an increase in overall volume due to changing of
the muscle build of my foot. This is largely a width and height increase
and not very much length.

In addition to normal foot expansion, I notice that some people (not myself
in this case) will notice a very slight permanent increase in length but
this is uncommon. Not having experienced this myself I'm not sure why it
happens. I've heard some suggest flattening of the arch but I doubt that in
healthy hikers. My guess is that it is due to issues of cartilage in the
foot, perhaps an increase in bloodflow or use results in thicker cartilage
or joints.

Now those two size increases are much less than the overall wisdom makes
them seem. I've never, first-hand, seen people who's feet physically became
much longer and larger. I'm pretty safe in saying there is no new bone
growth so I don't see how they could actually get that much bigger. This is
only one part of a two-part process, but when lumped together I can see the
~12.5 size difference in pre and post hike shoe sizes.

Part two is the desire for more room in the shoe. I've noticed that when
trying to help a new hiker select shoes they are not comfortable with
large, loose-fitting toe boxes and extra-wide sizes. I think this is
something that the average person prefers - snug fitting but not
uncomfortable shoes. This works fine if you only walk a mile or two a day
in the course of your life but when you're going over 20 miles and
experiencing slight foot swell as well as extended periods of rubbing you
realize that you don't actually want any significant contact between your
toes and the inside of the shoe, or especially your toes contacting the
other toes.

However, something that some people experience and blame on large shoes --
heel blisters -- is not a process necessarily of a shoe that has too roomy
of a toe-box but instead a shoe that is not well-laced around the mid-foot.
I find the best shoe for me is one that I can slip easily into without
untying but still remains snug (but not death-grip tight) around the middle
of my foot. In a ring around the middle of the foot, just forward of where
the tendons meet the top of the foot, just behind where the toes join the
front of the foot. Directly above the arch. If my shoe is snug here but
loose in the front my heel will stay back and I will not experience heel
blisters or toe blisters, leading to a comfortable hike.

So what this novel-length e-mail comes to is:

Get shoes that are mostly wider than your normal daily shoe and only longer
in as much as they become wider with length to find the correct fit, over
all, that is snug around the mid foot, very loose in the toes and capable
of being worn so that the heel does not excessively slip. If this means
going from a D (normal) width to a 4E width (extra-wide) with no increase
in length, that may be fine. It may also mean going from a size 12 2E to a
size 13 2E, as long as it yields a good amount more of toe box room without
letting your heel slip around or having the middle of the shoe, under the
laces, not fit snugly around the center of your foot.

This is all, of course, from my experience. I have always heard second and
third hand tales of people who like vice-like shoes or people who get
terrible blisters from having loose toeboxes but from first-hand sources I
can say that this is a fair assessment on my part, although only my opinion.

I look forward to seeing this discussion next year!

Joker