Shoes/trail runners on wet rocks

Thomas,

Thank you for the excellent water shoe comparison! I am looking forward to your further posts on this topic.

Okay, one more thing.

The small toebox on the Inov8's were enough of a frustration to me (and the fact that I spent 100 bucks to get them), that I decided to look for a solution that didn't involve dumping the shoes.

They fit very well except for the toe area, and the tight toebox produced mild blistering on the inner parts of a couple of outer toes after a 24-mile hike with numerous ups and downs.

To provide a bit of extra cushioning between the toes, I wore an old pair of toe socks I had for a short, 10-mile hike this afternoon. The toe covering seemed to provide just enough cushion to keep the toes comfortable with no hot spots.

Proviso: Although I waded into some water, my toes didn't get nearly as wet as they did on the 24-miler. Also, the hike involved nearly no descents, which tend to compress the toes. I'll have to try them on a longer hike, but the toe socks seemed to do the trick.

Stargazer

Sorry to resurrect this relatively dead thread, but my final conclusion is that the Vibram toe shoes are the best of the five shoe brands that I tried on wet rocks.

As a matter of fact, I'm a convert. I won't be BPing in anything else unless the temperature gets below zero. The version below is made of Neoprene, which is the stuff that wet suits are made of. They keeps da feets pretty durned warm with just toe-sock liners on underneath.

Add a pair of "Arctic" or "Tundra" toe socks, and I should be good to go deep into the winter.

Note the vegetation you see is not growing out of the ground. It's stuck between my toes. :vD

Stargazer

Stargazer,
You might want to take a look at a product line very popular among fishermen, who walk on stream bottoms.
They are called "korkers," and the line includes several different styles of boots, as well as traction devices you can attach to your boots. More information is available from Korkers.com and tackledirect.com. Also, sierratradingpost.com is currently selling two models, item nos. 1858J and 1858H. Hope this is of some interest.
Sam Farrington, Chocorua NH

> They are called "korkers," and the line includes several different styles of boots, as well as traction devices you can attach to your boots.

They look promising at only a bit more than a pound per shoe.

BTW, the toe shoes seem to be catching on among runners:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112995970

Stargazer

After an abortive attempt to traverse the still-heavy snows of the AT in Maryland, I spent the rest of last week wading along the incredibly wet 54 miles of the Shawnee State Forest in Ohio.

As a result, I got to try out two solutions to slick, wet, slimy, icy rocks.

On the AT (for an embarrassingly short 11 mile or so), we waded through sometimes deep and sometimes icy (mostly because of previous footprints but also because of melting and refreezing) rocks of Maryland. I was wearing a set of Neo overshoes. My opinion:

1. They're pretty heavy, especially because I had to wear a set of shoes underneath.

2. They're waterproof, a definite plus for steam crossings in winter.

3. They're big enough to float of top of the refrozen snow most of the time.

4. When they fall through occasionally, you might sink one leg crotch deep into the snow. Best to watch every spot you put your foot. They aren't snowshoes although they often act like them.

5. They are truly ineffective on wet rocks. Going down those steep, rocky hills was a tedious adventure.

Because most of the snow was gone from Shawnee, I switch to plan B — heavy woolen Wigwam socks under large Reynolds oven bags. I resurrected my Five Ten Runamucks because of their lightness (13.5 oz for the pair in a size 10!). Their low weight comes from the stiff mesh that makes up most of the upper show. They are reinforced with leather and some kind of stiff material underneath in critical spots, especially at the back of the shoe. The effect is that they are true water shoes. Step ankle deep in a creek and the water runs right out. Conclusions:

1. The Runamuck hold remarkably well on wet, slimy rocks.

2. The combo of woolen socks and oven bags kept my feet dry and remarkably warm.

3. The socks did get a bit damp because of the vapor barrier, but the Wigwams wick wonderfully well.

Main conclusion: Despite the fact that they are made mostly of mesh, the Five Tens are ideal for winter hiking as long as you add a vapor barrier and as long as there isn't too much snow.

Anybody want to buy a pair of Neos.:-)

P.S. Thanks go to Doug Ide frequent contributor to this community. He is a true mensch for giving me a ride to the AT and hiking along with me. The idea of using the oven bags also belongs to him. He is the King of Gear, as far as I'm concerned.

Runamucks are excellent for wet rock but my pair of size 11.5 weigh 28 oz.

Meant to say, "13.5 oz each," which is still pretty good. The advantage is that they dry and drain well, which means that you're not carrying all that extra water weight.

Stargazer