Lightweight Hiking Shoes – Approach?

[Christoph Blank]

Hi there,

I've got for (rather UL) trekking and hiking (including overnight stays and longer trips) generally my Inov8 Roclite 315 and 370 – which are perfect for this purpose.

However, their downside is a) not waterproof and b) not very stiff (I'm living in the alps and if going into more difficult/harsh/rocky terrain they are simply too soft).

So, for some hikes (daytours, rainy days, rocky ground) as well as for cycling in the rain or holiday trips, I'm now looking for more robust, waterproof but still lightweight hiking shoes (no boots or mids).

Generally a lot of people are using approach shoes for this purpose.
What I found so far:

– Garmont Dragontail LT GTX
– Garmont Eclipse GTX
– Garmont Zenith GTX
– Scarpa Mystic GTX
– La Sportiva Boulder X

If anyone has an oppinion of my intended use, those shoes or possible (same weight or lighter) alternatives I would love to hear your suggestion!

Thanks a lot,
Christoph

[Rick M]

del

[rOg w]

deleted

[Christoph Blank]

Hi there,

Thanks a lot for your suggestion!
I actually forgot the XPlorer in this list, I also considered it.

The list is basically what I want to go and try out, I won't order it online – or at least not before trying.
I heard the same about the Garmont shoes being very narrow, and I have a La Sportiva Trango Evo S (or so) which fits really nicely. So I'm curious which one will fit.
I think I did not look at the Boulder X and XPlorer so much because they seem to be non-water restistant.

Looking forward to your blog post!

[Christoph Blank]

ok so my list changed to this:

Garmont Dragontail LT
La Sportiva Boulder
La Sportiva XPlorer (a bit softer I guess)
Scarpa Vitamin (couldn't try it)

La Sportiva fits best, the Garmont is a bit narrow, but also fits quite well.
Now I'm not sure which one to buy..

How is the Boulder for longer walks, hiking etc?

[rOg w]

deleted

[James holden]

get the one that fits best …

thats really all there is to it with shoes … no other piece of gear matters more in terms of fit

;)

[Christoph Blank]

well, there are harder and softer soles, and it makes a big difference I think..

rOg w, I just read a review that said the Boulder X (low) is not that suitable for longer walks :)

I think the XPlorer might be too soft and is more suitable for climbing..

But it's really hard to decide between the Dragontail LT and Boulder X

[David Ure]

"thats really all there is to it with shoes … no other piece of gear matters more in terms of fit"

I thought that was for packs?

[David Chenault]

Christoph, I'm a fan of the Boulder X Mid. The leather uppers and rand makes them tough. They have enough structure and stiffness to wear flexible crampons comfortably all day. They scramble well.

In my book they hike well enough. For me the rigid sole is a bit harsh for long trail miles, I find flexible trail shoes to be better. When I'm in decent shape I can do 25 mile days in trail runners and have perfectly happy feet. With the Boulders I start feeling it after 20 or so. Loosening the lower laces to give your toes more room is mandatory for hiking. Fortunately the lacing system does this easily.

My only complaint is the lower profile tread in the mid foot. Good for more friction, bad for traction in mud and steep vegetation.

[Christoph Blank]

Thanks!

I wonder how it compares to the Low version ..

I need the shoe as a strong, robust shoe for day hikes, not really for trekking.
For trekking and longer walks I also use trail runners..

[michael levi]

New balance mt110 winter. My 10s weigh 9.1 ounces. Awesome shoes and the borrower part can be left unzipped for more airflow while hiking if hot. I would say they are more waterproof than most shoes because the top is sealed in the event of a full shoe submersion and rain.

[rOg w]

deleted

[Christoph Blank]

that sounds good! :)
as the la sportiva feel more comfortable and I've already got the trango evo s (if I remember the name correctly)

[James holden]

"thats really all there is to it with shoes … no other piece of gear matters more in terms of fit"

I thought that was for packs?

cant stop bringing other threads in again eh mr ure? =P

shoes matter the most as youre walking in em all the time …

perhaps youd care to say otherwise

if you want a flame war i suggest taking it to PM

;)

[James holden]

Thanks!

I wonder how it compares to the Low version ..

I need the shoe as a strong, robust shoe for day hikes, not really for trekking.
For trekking and longer walks I also use trail runners..

keep in mind that leather uppers take a while to dry …

the greatest "problems" with approach shoes is
– some dont have the best tread for wet weather
– leather uppers on many which take forever to dry compared to mesh
– some have a high lift compared to some trail runners

as long as you can deal with the above they work well and generally last a long time …

approach shoes are basically made as "day hiking" shoes for easy climbs …

eventually though it all goes kaput

again FIT is what matters … get the one that fits you best

;)

[J C]

>However, their downside is a) not waterproof and b) not very stiff (I'm living in the alps and if going into more difficult/harsh/rocky terrain they are simply too soft).

So you want a stiff approach shoe, huh? Check out the upcoming Scarpa Zodiac. "like a low B1 boot says Scarpa."

[Anton Solovyev]

A word on LaSportiva Boulder X. I used to love these shoes. Had 3 pairs. However, a year ago on a hike to Gannett Peak I over-tightened the shoe laces and the very high foam insert on the back of the heel hurt my achillies tendons. It started hurting a bit on the way in on flat terrain and ended up so bad that it took me 3 months to heal completely. I had to stop wearing Boulder X other than when canyoneering (and cut away the back of the foam insert).

Boulder X has great traction, very sturdy (survives a season of canyoneering). On the other hand, it takes forever to dry and is quite heavy. Honestly, I think Boulder X is a bit overbuild with this inner foam liner.

I am planning to start using Scarpa Crux for mountaineering. These shoes are lighter, have no foam liner and feel great on my feet.

[Christoph Blank]

I didn't see the Crux before, apparently it is only available in the .uk not in the rest of europe.. weird.

Scarpa Crux and Scarpa Vitamin look interesting.. but I didn't find any shop around here to try them.

[Christoph Blank]

I came across a review comparing the crux to the boulder x if anyone is interested:

http://www.valleyvertical.com/2013/06/approach-shoe-comparison-and-review.html

I remember to have come across an article once stating that the "average" person is sweating way more (feet) than humidity can be transported through the membrane of such socks – which makes sense if you compare it to the wind/rain shell discussions here in the forum.

[Christoph Blank]

I think I will order the Boulder X and give it a try.

I also plan to buy a pair of GoreTex shoes in mid size for rain and eventually winter use. I suppose I could therefore just use a mid version of the shoes I posted..

[Ito Jakuchu]

I have been using two pairs of light mids in GTX and one pair of trail runners in OutDry.
Using them in the rainy and typhoon season here has provided some good experiences/feedback for me.

In short – almost always when there is sustained rain my socks will start to feel wet after two hours. Then they will be soaked and sogging in 2,5 hours. I've had this happen quite consistently while hiking in continuous rain. The rain I'm talking about varies from normal sustained to intense sustained rain, sometimes was a bit less, sometimes a bit more. But none of my shoes stayed dry for more than 2~2,5 hours.

I liked the OutDry trail runner because they felt less clammy over the GTX mids, but that might have been a function of the mesh of the trailrunners uppers. I think there might still be cases where GTX mids could be good. In mild snow trails where you are not constantly subjected to lots of snow or water the GTX Mids were warmer and stayed dry enough (but I have limited snow experience).

Other people's milage may vary of course, just sharing my experience.

[Christoph Blank]

since it's getting rainier and rainier here in the alps, I decided to look for a mid sized waterproof shoe (lightweight of course) as well.

I'm very satisfied with the Boulder X, unfortunately it's really nothing for wet weather since it does not dry.

How about the Boulder X Mid GTX? How suitable is it for longer hiking/trekking? Since it still is rated as an approach shoe and I don't really go into difficult terrain if it is raining, what would be lightweight alternatives for longer walks? Maybe the La Sportiva XPLORER MID GTX?

[Mike W]

I think you are limiting yourself by looking for Gortex shoes. Since your not likely going to be hiking wet 100% of the time, why not just buy beathable shoes (gortex shoes are hot) and wear gortex socks when it's wet.

I do this and it works very well for me. Gortex socks make a lot of sense in heavy rain because they are high enough to keep your feet dry when walking through flooded trails and shallow creek crossing that often occur during rainy periods.

Waterproof socks are nice in camp when your shoes are soaked.

On nice days you can ditch the gortex socks and have breathable shoes. Gortex socks only weigh a couple of ounces

[Christoph Blank]

I've tried sealskinz socks once during heavy rain in summer.
My conclusion was that I was sweating so much in these socks (they don't breathe) that I was as wet inside as outside.

Furthermore in my experience a completely soaked shoe and sole you tend to lose grip..
Therefore I found it not really the best option, although it would be a lot lighter..

[Author]

Posts