Trail shoes for wider feet

[Yoyo]

I don't know about the rest of you, but the hardest decision I have faced in selecting gear has been my footwear. After months (more like years) of trying shoes and boots, I have yet to find a pair which meets the following criteria:

1) lightweight
2) fits my wide feet well
3) provides adequate cushioning from rocks, traction, and support

(Waterproof vs. non-waterproof is a secondary concern)

Keens are super-comfortable for my wide feet–they have a very generous toebox. However, they also don't seem constructed very well nor very supportive. I currently wear Keen Bends for casual urban use and have tried them on a few day hikes but am not totally confident taking them backpacking. I've been wearing these for about a year around town now and the cushioning seems to already be giving way:

http://www.rei.com/product/741492

Merrells fit nearly as well as Keens, although not quite as comfortable. I considered the Merrell Moab Ventilators at some point, but they didn't seem very supportive.

I recently ran across these Garmont Nagevi and ordered a pair:

http://www.rei.com/product/747953

They seem to fit wider than most shoes, not quite as comfortable as Keens, but feel more supportive and have cushier Vibram soles. Has anyone had experience with these?

Also considering Garmont Kiowa Vegan lightweight boots, although I have concerns about the breathability of synthetic leather:

http://www.rei.com/product/765495

Feel free to add to my list if you know of other good options for wider (but not terribly wide) feet.

[Frank Ramos]

you'll probably scoff at this suggestion, but my suggestion is the Air Force jungle/desert combat boot, model 600 or 600F for women, available at http://www.bellevilleshoe.com. Unlike ordinary boots and shoes, which typically come in at most two size (medium and wide), the belleville boots come in 6 sizes total (narrow, medium, wide and extra-wide for men, medium and wide for women) plus all the half-sizes for length. So you'll probably find something that fits.

Because these are designed for Iraq, they will be quite comfortable when walking around in extreme heat (if used with lightweight wool socks, such as the Vermont Darn Tough micro crew cushion socks). More comfortable than running shoes in the heat, in my experience, because they has no lining. The cordura top is just that: ultra-breathable cordura with nothing on the other side. Keeps the sand and rocks out, while allowing water vapor to evaporate. Running shoes have all sorts of padding which interferes with water vapor transport. The vent holes on the side allow water to be pumping out out, thus making them jungle boots, and also pump air in and out and this also contributes to the coolness. The leather is treated to avoid absorbing much water, but it still very breathable. This treatment will gradually wear off, especially where the leather flexes, but my boots continue to absorb little water after 1000 miles of heavy use. The vent holes have a screen to keep dirt and sand from getting in. The 8" uppers keep sand out the top and allow you to "blouse" your long pants, meaning tuck them into the boots, which adds warmth in cold weather and keeps ticks out and also snow out when postholing. The sole is a sturdy Vibram sole. Should last 3000 miles, though there may be some cracks where the boot flexes. This is not Bellevilles fault, since any rubber sole will crack when repeatedly flexed.

I STRONGLY RECOMMENDING DISCARDING THE INSOLES, SINCE THESE HAVE CURVED EDGES WHICH WILL IRRITATE THE SIDES OF THE HEELS. Also, the insoles are not needed for cushioning or moisture absorbtion, since wool socks provide that. I think Belleville included them mainly because some people can't conceive of boots without insoles.

You can order direct from Belleville and they will accept returns with no hassle if you don't wear the boots outdoors (shipping charges not refunded), in my experience. Their sizing is kind of crazy. I normally wear size 11 medium or wide. I ended up wearing size 10 wide for the Belleville boots, and apparently that is typical. You have to size down one size in length and use your regular width. Best idea is to order a whole raft of boots, 1 size down and maybe .5 sizes down and then wide and extra-wide in both of these sizes and then send back the ones you don't like.

The boots weigh 1600 grams (3.5lbs) for men's size 10 wide without the removable insoles. Compare with about 1050 grams (2.3lbs) for my last pair of trail runners which didn't begin to give as much protection as these Belleville boots, nor to last as long, and which were hotter and otherwise less comfortable and which stank like crazy after a few days in the slop (the Bellevilles are amazingingly stink-resistant, if treated occasionally with Desenex Miconazole powder). Or to 1600 grams for a typical pair of 11 medium backpacking boots at REI, which didn't fit me properly. In other words, modern jungle/desert combat boots are NOT that heavy, considering what you are getting. In the past, I was forced to resort to sandals to get something that both fitted properly and didn't cause problems in very wet environments. These Belleville boots are the first real boot I have found that actually works in the conditions I encounter and also fits perfectly right out of the box.

As with any boots, treat all stitching with fray-check or seam-sealer before hiking in rugged mountains.

Avoid the Belleville Marine jungle/desert boots, since these have a steel plate in the sole (protection from punjee spikes, nails, broken glass, etc), which adds weight, reduces flexibility and probably ends up slicing up the softer parts of the boots after 500 to 1000 miles of use. (Then again, the Marine boot with steel toe is a great choice for construction workers, precisely because of the steel plate in theh sole.) Avoid the Belleville Army boots, since these lack the vent holes. Avoid any of the boots with steel toes. I can't recommend any of the Belleville Gore-Tex boots. Instead, use the jungle/desert boots with a goretex or neoprene sock for cold and wet conditions. Avoid the other manufacturers of military combat boots. I examined them all, and they are all grossly inferior to belleville.

[Roger Caffin]

Hi David

Welcome the walker's world of wide feet. We KNOW!

Width – go for a company which specifically offers a wide fitting. Many don't actually state what width they offer, which always makes me suspicious. Salomon offer an SL1 last whcih is moderate, and an SL2 last which is supposed to be wider. New Balance offer a 4E width fitting in many models, and I find these ultra-pleasant and comfortable.

> provides adequate cushioning from rocks, traction, and support
This is a moving target. Very experienced walkers can and do use shoes with far lighter soles – this probably means they have got tougher feet. Here in Australia we have two shoes – Volleys and KT-26s, which have very soft soles. Many will find the soles to be too soft, but the grip they offer is fantastic – and better than the harder Vibram-style soles.

What actually happens is that after a while in UL shoes you start to walk differently – cat-like rather than parade-ground crash. It happens that walking softly, as you do when walking in bare feet, is better for your ankles, knees and back. However, do NOT expect the boot companies to offer any support for this concept – they will vehemently oppose it in fact. Perhaps they have a vested interest?

Cheers
Roger

[Phil Brown]

Frank, I wore the Belleville 600s (Army) model for the last 2 years in almost every condition. Wore them in the desert (worked well there), and also on wet patrols and in the winter. One of the main problems is they take forever to dry out. I mean days. They also retain water, to the point where I installed grommets in the bottom as drain holes. The laces tore in the first week and had to be replaced with 550 cord. They are terrible in the winter, and below 30 degrees I just couldn't keep my feet warm in them. The only positive thing I can say is they were comfortable and last forever. I would probably never use them backpacking for the reason that they won't ever dry if they get wet. I don't know if they still make them, but the mid-height merrell moab ventilators are great wide foot shoes and are very supportive. They may be a little on the heavy side though.

[t.darrah]

I will start by saying I have normal width feet and do not require special sizing.

Montrail has a wide option in their 2008 Hardrocks that fit D-EE width feet. (the older 2007 version also had wider sizes which can be found at closeout prices but in limited sizes and colors)

The Hardrocks, although not the lightest option, are good all around trail shoes that may well be worth looking into if this D-EE width is within the range your looking for.

[Bob Bankhead]

Yes, Merrell still makes the mid-height Moab Ventilator, BUT NOT IN WIDE.

Only the Ventilator low shoe is available in both wide and regular.

I have the wide shoe and find the cushioning to be inadequate for use on even moderately rocky trails with a 25 pound pack. They are definitely NOT going into the Sierras with me next month. With a 10 pound load they are very comfortable.

[Frank Ramos]

Phil: The Belleville Army model is 390 and NOT the model 600 and that may be part of the problem. The Model 600 (Air Force) incorporates everything Belleville and the military has learned in field testing of the Army and Marine boots, and hence is the best of their boots thus far.

I wore the Belleville 600's this spring in fairly wet conditions in the mountains of central Spain and they did NOT take long to dry out. Now obviously, if it is raining or you are constantly walking through slop and dew, they will stay wet until the rain stops and the slop and dew dry out. What else do you expect? My Bellevilles did NOT absorb much water. The leather is treated at the factory with silicone which prevents water absorption (at least until the silicone wears off, which takes between about 200 miles when the boot flexes at the front to at least 1000 miles at the heel, where there is no flexion) while still allowing breathing. Even after 1000 miles of use, my boots still have enough silicone that I don't worry about getting them soaked by wading through streams. Maybe your boots didn't have enough silicone treatment. As for the cordura uppers, these will dry faster than any running shoe on the market. As I noted previously, the upper is straight breathable cordura, with no lining on the inside. Every running shoe I've ever seen has some sort of lining which slows drying drastically. Also, I'm quite surprised your laces failed. Mine look about as durable as laces can be. Combined with the lack of silicone treatment suggest you got a bad batch of boots. Or maybe the Army boots are defective compared to the Air Force boots.

(Note: I realize now what the problem is. The Army boots are NOT a jungle/desert boot, but rather a pure desert boot. The Marine and Air Force boots are jungle/desert boots, and thus are designed for wading through streams without the leather absorbing water and with vent holes to allow pumping out water that gets inside the boots. These vent holes are an improved version of the grommets Phil mentions installing, because they have a wire mesh to prevent sand and dirt from getting inside. For those of you who didn't read my previous post carefully, AVOID THE MARINE BOOT FOR BACKPACKING!)

As for cold weather, well, any breathable shoe is going to be uncomfortable when it gets wet and then freezes at night. At least the Bellevilles are roomy enough that I WAS able to get my feet inside when they were frozen in the morning. And again, they simply didn't absorb much water and so quickly unfroze as I walked in them. It helps to have wool socks. If it were really cold, I would have worn neoprene socks. Neoprene socks will work for any breathable boots or shoe.

The problem with most boots, in my experience, is that they try to "support" the foot and thus cause all sorts of problems. The human foot doesn't need support. Assuming the foot has well-developed muscles (which you get from walking barefoot on rocks), all it needs is plenty of room at the front of the shoe for the toes to spread out and behave the way nature intended, and the Belleville boots give that room. So the ideal footwear consists of a wide sole that doesn't abrade too quickly, some means of attaching that sole to the foot without causing other problems, and some means of preventing the foot (especially the heels) from drying out and cracking. Sandals handle the first two problems, and there are various ways of dealing with the dryness when wearing sandals. I've walked about 5000 miles in sandals, in every sort of terrain though not much in snow, and the Belleville boots are the first footwear I've found that is quite close to sandals while being durable enough that I'm not constantly worrying about replacements.

You might be able to find low top trail runners with a wide front, but my feet aren't just wide, but very muscular at the metatarsal arch from all the barefoot and sandal walking I have done. So every trail runner and conventional boot I have tried, and I've tried at least 10, has caused me horrible pain until I eventually weaken the stitching enough to get extra room. By contrast, the Bellevilles fit me perfectly from the day 1. I think part of the reason for this is that the Bellevilles can afford to be very wide at the front because of how high the upper is. They hold me feet at the bottom of the lower leg, just above the ankles, whereas most shoes try to grab the foot at the metatarsal arch. Obviously, because the Bellevilles are so loose on me, they offer little ankle support, but given that I used to walk in sandals, I really don't need ankle support at this point.

Roger: I know you are prejudiced against the term "combat boots", but these Belleville boot do NOT force the foot to stomp around as if goose-stepping on a parade ground. (Some of the other combat boots I examined are another story.) I walk the same way in my Belleville boots, regardless of terrain, as I used to walk in Teva Hurricanes, which is about the flimsiest sandal imaginable, which in turn isn't too different from how I walked barefoot. If you know how to walk AND IF YOUR FOOTWEAR IS SUFFICIENTLY LOOSE AND FLEXIBLE TO ALLOW THE FOOT TO OPERATE THE WAY NATURE INTENDED, then you can walk "cat-style" or "fox-style" or any other style regardless of the style of footwear.

For those of you who are curious as to whether the Bellevilles 600's last more than 1000 miles, I'll be taking another long hike this fall, once the heat dies down, and I'll give a report after that hike is over. But given the condition of my boots at this point, I am pretty confident they'll reach at least the 2000 mile mark and still have plenty of rubber left on the soles.

[Graeme Finley]

I second the Montrail Hardrock option. I used them on my '07 PCT thru hike and even when my feet were quite swolen from heat etc the wide sizes worked very well for me.

[Roger Caffin]

Hi Frank

> I know you are prejudiced against the term "combat boots"
Dunno whether you are exactly right. Let's just say I have worn big heavy boots in the past, and don't like them :-)

However, if you can walk cat-style in the Bellevilles then they can't be too heavy. Interesting.

> The problem with most boots, in my experience, is that they try to "support" the foot and thus cause all sorts of problems. The human foot doesn't need support. Assuming the foot has well-developed muscles (which you get from walking barefoot on rocks), all it needs is plenty of room at the front of the shoe for the toes to spread out and behave the way nature intended,
Oh, you will get my long loud vociferous chorus in support here! Absolutely!

> my feet aren't just wide, but very muscular at the metatarsal arch from all the barefoot and sandal walking I have done.
I agree again. This is a problem which many shoe-makers don't seem to recognise. Granted, some designs allow you to lace more loosely and can handle a high arch that way.

Looking at so many shoe designs leaves me thinking that a substantial fraction of the population must have long narrow flat feet with absolutely no muscles in them at all. Maybe this represents an evolutionary path for the non-walking homo vehicula?

> As for cold weather, well, any breathable shoe is going to be uncomfortable when it gets wet and then freezes at night. At least the Bellevilles are roomy enough that I WAS able to get my feet inside when they were frozen in the morning.
Interesting. I have had frozen low-cuts which were hard to get on when frozen solid. Since I had stepped into a hidden creek the night before, one of them had started very wet. And rock hard. Sigh.

[b s]

You might take a look at Dunham (New Balance's boot brand). Not sure if they are still making them but they had a "Waffle Stomper" collection that included low-hikers and lightweight boots in 2E and 4E widths. They had solid Vibram soles and the boots had a waterproof option. I used two pairs of Waffle Stomper Nimbles on my AT thru and am still wearing the second pair. They were the only shoes I found that fit my semi-wide feet plus a pair of decent socks.

I recently bought a pair of Salomon XA Pros in wide. The fit is very comfortable with thin socks but I've only worn them around town thus far; haven't had them on the trail yet.

[Aaron Sorensen]

vasque makes a good wide shoe as well.

[Brett Grizzle]

I don't have wide feet, but one of the guys I hiked with on the AT did. He used to buy a brand new pair of running shoes then cut a section out of the side over his "pinky" toe (you could do this to whatever part of the shoe causes you irritation) this seemed to work for him. I know nobody wants to hack up a nice pair of shoes, but if you cant find a shoe that works, you could try it as a last resort.

[Eric Blumensaadt]

I use Danner boots because my feet spread out one full width after two days on the trail and I need the extra width. Danner offers several widths in all their sizes. Plus Danner boots are VERY high in quality and are U.S. made.

Many boot companies do not offer anything beyond one "medium" width or, at best, thicker & thinner insoles to give differennt fit but not true width increases.

Eric

[James Loy]

I have the same wide foot problem and have wasted more $ trying to find a suitable brand. I used to wear Montrail products, but my later Hardrocks seem much narrower than they used to be, so I now avoid Montrail. I agree that Keen products are a great alternative and haven't found them any less durable than Montrail. For my feet, I have found Garmont and Lowa products to be the best all around brands. I just wish more local retailers would carry them!

[Christopher Holden]

Aaron mentioned the Vasque shoes. I can personally vouch for the Vasque Velocity shoes. They're a great fit, but one thing to note: mine squeak sometimes. I have read several posts about this on the web by others too. I removed the stock insoles and it stopped. After a couple of weeks, the new ones started it. I've tried this several times and found if I just swap insoles between them and my RedWing boots, they quit. When the other pair of insoles starts squeaking again, I swap them back. I know it sounds silly, but I find it's a small inconvenience for a pair of comfortable shoes.

[JR Redding]

I have wide feet. Wide flat feet. Have worn Vasque Breeze (non Gore Tex) for the last several years but have always had to have Superfeet insoles.

After seeing Andrew Skurka in person and talking about his Sun Dragon's, I bought some. Very light (size 13 is 15 ounces per shoe) – Handles rocks and talus unlike any other shoe I have ever worn – very breathable – very comfortable.

I purchased mine on a deal. Three pairs for price of one. if you look hard enough you can find them cheaper than retail price of $120.00

I do recommend a light ankle gaiter and the use of Smartwool light ankle socks.

Happy Trails…

GrinchMT
http://www.bozemanstoveworks.com

[Eric Blankenship]

I have an extremely wide foot. After spending tons of time trying every wide shoe I could find, I have always come back to New Balance trail runners. A few weeks ago, I picked up a pair of MT1110GT's. I have perhaps found my nirvana in trail runners. These are the best fitting trail runner I have ever worn. See if you can find them locally and see how they fit. I bet you'll be pleased.

[Alvie Morton]

I got some wide hardrocks and fell in love with them. The trails I do are rough as a cob and I have no problems.

[Yoyo]

Thanks all for the replies and sorry for the belated reply. Interesting suggestion about the Bellevilles but I'm not sure I'm ready to go that route just yet. As for wider widths, I'm not sure my feet are so wide that I need an wide width shoe. In my experience, volume increases with wide width shoes. Thus I have stuck with regular width shoes that tend to have a generous toebox. My feet aren't abnormally wide–I just don't want pinched toes.

I'm in agreement with Roger and others about the foot being allowed to move naturally. I prefer the insole to minimal "arch support."

After ordering (and returning) many shoes, I've finally settled on Keen and Garmont as the brands that fit me best. I gave the Merrell Moab Ventilators some thought, but they don't seem to support my ankle all that well. Note that I haven't yet gone for trail RUNNERS–I'm shifting over from heavy boots and wanted to ease into trail SHOES that offered some support and cushioning from rocks.

Right now, I'm trying to decide between the Garmont Nagevi (low cut) and the Garmont Kiowa Vegan (mid). Has anyone had experience with either of these? The Kiowas are amazingly light for boots–1 lb, 15.75 oz for size 9.5. They are quite comfortable–yet I have concerns about the synthetic leather. Will it be as breathable as real leather? Will it be as durable?

I also tried on a pair of Garmont Sitka XCRs which got great reviews in Backpacker magazine this year. A size 9.5 weighs around 2 pounds, 8.5 ounces–not bad for an all-leather boot. They are goretex though and a bit hot for summer. For fall/winter/spring, they might be a good bet.

If the above options don't work out, I might just wear my Keen Bend shoes–which are super comfortable and have been my favorite casual shoe for around town. Much of the cushioning seems to be gone, though–maybe this is inevitable with EVA midsoles?

[O S]

–

[Andrea C]

Reviving this old thread, as shoe models seem to disappear from the market on a yearly basis.

I was after non-leather lighteweight walking boots. All I could find was Merrell, and I find them not wide enough.
For running/approach, the New Balance Minimus 10V3 (surprise surprise, seem a discontinued model) are all man-man materials and with a nicely wide toebox :-) very light too, although they are trail running so protection is very limited.  I use those as backup shoes, they take very little space and weight, and have proofed them with Scotchgard so they don’t get soaked when walking in the grass.

The hunt for proper walking boots, not made of leather and with wide toebox continues!

[Mike M]

for boots, check out the Keen Aphlex (they have a low cut version as well)- I used these last elk season (after returning a pair of Salomon Quest) with pretty good results- they definitely run a little wide

 

[Hiking Malto]

The Altra Lone Peaks and Superiors have the widest footbox that I have worn.  Lone Peaks have more cushion than the Superiors but I have worn both on some very long days.  They have become my go to shoes after my feet became cave man like from the miles.

[Dave Ayers]

For those who prefer trail runners:  I’m very happy with Saucony Excursion trail runners which come in EE.  I’ve worn TR8, TR9, and now the TR10 since switching from Salomon’s a few years ago.  I know several people who are very happy with them also.  The bonus is that they are relatively inexpensive too.

[Richie S]

There’s a lot here with wide footboxes, but if you are in the real wide mode – 4E and so on, then look at Merrell. The Moab FSTs are great, but there are lots of other choices.

[Author]

Posts