Minimalist Footwear for Fall/Spring Backpacking

Superman or Clark Kent??? … Just TFD … LOL … Although…… The ‘Flying’ part of this acronym is a reminiscence of earlier, long forgotten years. I think I should find another nick ‘cause I can’t live up to this one anymore. What a pity – getting older. Having said so… NOT getting older is worse, isn’t it?? :)

– Sorry for the OFF TOPIC –

I think I’ll go ahead with the Salomon Tech Amphibian and maybe get some VFF as well. This way I can do some testing and find out for myself. Still interested in finding out what one -you- can do with a 10 lb pack.

Both were mentioned in the article.

Can someone elaborate a bit.

Waterproof socks: I have tried socks by sealskinz (the US licensee, Looks like the UK site as an entire line of more technical socks for various uses) and Serius. Bummers! The are not formfitting. They might work if you sized your shoe up a full size but they would still be baggy and wrinkly.

Crampons? I am at a total loss. In the last few weeks, I have tried several of the lighter trail runners. For example, Inov-8 Bare Grip is one I like — probably more for running than walking. You put crampos on this shoe? Which ones? Where do you go with this arrangement — what type of terrain. How do you feel? And how does the shoe hold up after a few days?

BPL has a lot of good articles. But sometime things aren't clarified very well. "I like this shoe because I can put crampons on it." Yeah, and where do you go with this set up and does the shoe survive? Do you feel secure?

Now, taking a pound off your feet so you can add five pounds to your back doesn't really intrigue me! There seem to be a number of posts here about lightening footwear to increase pack weight. I think there is something to be said for this old wisdom but why not just enjoy the weight savings?

Thats got me interested too. Flexible/light very much has effects when walking, but I'm far less sure if cushioning does.

Uphill (steep) I certainly don't use my heels at all even in cushioned running shoes, downhill you just want secure really and do you ever heel strike very much when walking?

Cushioning not missed on peat of course, but certainly nice when you run into extensive bits of made vehicle tracks, tarmac etc. Although I'd almost get as worried by how the grippy sole units on some of these would just get worn to dust by that sort of stuff….

I'd guess the peregines might be too cushioned to count?!

Just got some. Gonna wait a day for a 1/2 size larger before taking them out on the trail. They are pretty beasty overall –rigid shoes with serious tread. Wouldn't want to run in them — way too stiff. One thing they have going for them IMO is that they are relatively flat heel-toe! They have some firm cushion. They certainly are not barefoot/minimalist. I think a lot people are going to like them…for walking. I am happy with more minimalist trail running shoes for trail running. I am not convinced that the principles of barefoot running are completely applicable to backpacking.

Hello Hartley,

>> Now, taking a pound off your feet so you can add five pounds to your back doesn't really intrigue me! There seem to be a number of posts here about lightening footwear to increase pack weight. I think there is something to be said for this old wisdom but why not just enjoy the weight savings? <<

Totally agree. As I said, I know the adage but I never ever thought of using weight reduction of shoes to increase pack weight (and I don’t think anyone in the UL-community will). As a matter of fact, I think it’s just the other way around: If you don’t reduce pack weight you won’t be able to reduce the weight of the shoes and that’s the reason of my question (will I be able to use minimalist shoes if my initial pack weight is around 30 lbs?).

If I can’t do that, the solution is easy: (1) I’ll have to forget about minimalist shoes; or (2) I’ll have to get the pack weight down; or (3) get more re-supply points. (Mind you: I’m not talking about ‘increasing’ pack weight!) To address point (3) first: If I can get away for 10 days in the mountains, I want to be able to walk wherever I want to — I don’t want to having to walk from one re-supply point to another, so I’ll have to take ALL my food (for 10 days) as from day one. At 1.5 lb per day, that means 15 lbs of food. So, even after shaving off every ounce of my base weight and bringing it down to 8 pounds, I’m still left with an initial pack weight of 25 lbs (I only count 1 liter of water and I haven’t added the rest of the consumables, so it's likely to be more). And that was the reason of my initial question: Is this doable in minimalist shoes?

According to the answers from other posters this seems difficult, so that’s why I’ve decided -more or less:)- to stick with sandals for the time being. I’ll probably buy some VFF too, to try to make an effort to transition -very slowly- into wearing minimalist shoes so I can find out for myself.

Increased weight! – that is like kryptonite to TFD. I agree NO WAY.

====

walk vs run form – it depends…

Consider a continuum. Walking slowing on one end, running fast on the other.

o=walkslow===walkfast=/=runslow===runfast=o

I would agree that walking and running are quite different at the opposite ends. Slowly walking versus sprinting. However, someone like me who walks fast and runs slow, the only difference is cadence.

My gait in both has the same: form, midfoot, lean from ankles, head up, and upright posture. Just faster steps when running. And both feet off the ground between strides when running versus one foot on ground between strides when walking.

Carrying a pack while walking fast all day with minimalist shoes is unknown territory for me.

I've tried low miles (6 mpd) with no problems carrying about 30 lb. No problems.

My theory is that minimalist shoes will work better the lighter your pack is if you want to hike at a good pace all day long (20+ mile days). I believe <20 lb for +20 miles or somewhere +/- few lbs and miles.

Here's what I want to test: minimalist shoes work for lightweight backpackers who hike all day.

I will get back with you later next week with the results of my first test.

I do not subscribe to the idea of a "continuum" with speed being the differentiating factor between walking and running. No. The mechanics are not the same. The first few slides of the powerpoint presentation clearly outline the fundamental differences between walking and running: http://www.cnhs.umb.edu/documents/BiomechanicsofRunning.ppt If you have access to MEDLINE, you will find a large body of literature devoted to the subject.

Agreed. If running were fast walking, there'd be no reason to hate running as much as I do! Walking good. Running not so much. Although, having adjusted my stride makes it, if not enjoyable, at least no longer painful.

I'm also not convinced that minimalist shoes are ideal for backpacking. Your bones are a porous solid and they will remodel when exposed to continuous, increased stress levels (where stress is force per unit area). Basically, your bone density increases giving it more material to handle the increased force. The rest of your tissue/muscle does something similar but more complex (it grows in size and remodels). If you give your bones enough time to respond, they can remodel themselves to a point where they can handle the new increased stress that will be applied to them by minimalist shoes. However, the new stress level could be greater than what your bones can physically remodel to. What this limit is depends on your age, your weight, your pack weight, mileage, terrain, stride, etc.

My point is that even with a gradual transition (which is necessary for most people) and a new stride, minimalist shoes may not work for backpacking for every body. I think that a small amount of cushioning could be very beneficial for when heel striking on level, hard ground.

I've been using the Peregrines for about a month now and really like them. I love the grip and the amount of protection I get for their weight. I really wish Saucony made a more minimal version of the Peregrine, but they don't, so I'm going to give the new NB MT 20s a try soon and see how they work out. I'm hoping they will be the perfect combination of protection, comfort, and minimalism that I'm looking for.

(I'm a mechanical engineer developing a new program to simulate growth and remodeling in the body for my master's thesis, so this kind of stuff is constantly on my mind)

In the last couple weeks I have tried about 30 shoes. I order them from places that guarantee your purchase — RRS, REI, backcountry.com. Several of the Inov-8 models I had to order from Zappos which isn't one of those places with a liberal return policy although they do have free shipping both ways. Some I try on, take off and and pack up immediately, some make it to the treadmill and then the one's with potential go to the trail. I am shopping for trail running shoes and backpacking shoes — separate categories as far as I'm concerned.

I think Peregrine is going to be a popular backpacking shoe for a lot of people!

I took a couple runs on on the trail in the MT Trail Minimus, a little slipper that will stop heel striking immediately — negative feedback. The Minimus 20 is less snug than the first Trail Minimus with a wide forefoot and the same sole material as the Trail Minimus — a seemingly decorative pattern that is slightly sticky. It appears quite delicate overall. It did not make it as far as the treadmill. I would not consider Minumus 20 and Peregrine in the same category. Peregrine is somewhat Salomon-like without the high "ramp angle".

BTW, running in minimal shoes wasn't much of a transition for me. For road runners I am using NB Road Minimus (I have the NB Minimus Life too — oh so nerdy!) — highly recommend. Nothing radical just flat and light. If anything, I think such shoes are a good way to improve your running. Walking on the other hand…

Pretty cool, Hartley, I'd love to see a list of all the shoes you've tried and your opinions on them! I definitely agree that running in minimalist shoes is different than walking in them, mainly because running uses the forefoot strike and walking uses a midfoot or heel strike. I just wanted to provide a different viewpoint to people for why a transition period might be necessary.

I started off my journey into the world of minimal footwear with a pair of Merell Trail Gloves. I did not find the transition to running in them very difficult, but walking in them took a little more effort. I returned those to REI after only having them a month because the desert in my backyard was tearing up the non-vibram sections of the sole (I walk my dog a lot in a local desert park, a good place to test shoes). Since most of the damage was under my arch, I think it may have had something to do with the shoe being a little narrow in the midfoot.

I then tried the Montrail Rogue Racers, the MT 101s, and the Peregrines and only the Peregrines were wide enough for my feet. The Rogue Racers and MT 101s also felt way too cushiony for my tastes. After several day hikes and 1 overnighter, they are hands down my favorite shoes yet. My longest stretch in them was a day hike of 14 miles, 3500 ft elevation change and they performed great. Like I said earlier, I just wish Saucony made a more minimal version, and with better color choices.

That's interesting/slightly unfortunate to hear about the MT 20s – I have never seen a pair of Minimus Trails in person. I'd still like to try a pair, if for no other reason than to use them as my daily work/walking shoes, but maybe not if they are that delicate. It seems the only minimalist shoes which have good reviews for walkers are the Saucony Hatori and the NB Minimus Life, neither of which could stand up to hiking. Any others good for walking? Inov-8's are too narrow for me; the VFF might be good overall if they fit, but I'd never wear those to work…

John, they are well made. A thoughtful design. Delicate looking mesh. Clearly, manufacturers are saving weight in the mesh dep't! IMO, they are well within "minimalist". You might like them.

Since you brought it up…the Hattori is junk:

For work, check out the Minimus Life. I hear some race walkers train in it.
http://www.shopnewbalance.com/detail.asp?style=MW10MM&s1=Froogle&s2=DF&s3=MW10MM&gclid=CJW37se2yKoCFSY0QgodXGle0Q

VFFs didn't work for me — they stretch my toes too wide apart — I have to yank my toes apart to get them on. My feet don't splay much. My friend in DC informs me that VFFs worn with suits are the norm on the subway.

Thanks for the info. I’ll probably be trying both the MT 20s and the NB Life soon. I might look into the VFF too. I’ve been wearing some water shoes from Target on my dog walks lately, so I’m ready to move up to some real shoes.

Here are two semi-new and durable-looking VFF shoes that might be good for colder weather hiking:

Trek LS

Borimo

LOL – regarding my reality not fitting your theory

Throughout history there are always those who when observing something working in practice will ask, yes, but does it work in theory.

5 pound pack base weights? hahahahha

Backpacking with minimalist shoes? hahhahhaha

While you theorists keep playing with shoes, some of us will go backpack with ours.

Reflect a moment and see the humor.

NOT in theory. NOT in practice!

Fast walking:

Start of 20 km Race Walk Event, Beijing Olympics, 2008

Running

(Leading Pack, 2008 Olympics, Marathon)

You can readily find frame by frame, side by side comparisons of these very different activities on you tube and elsewhere (Google it) and analyses of the biomechanics.

Gee, I wonder if you could strap real crampons onto those things.

Not.

–B.G.–

I used to racewalk competitively and can confirm that it is very different from both running and walking. I was around 12 at the time and could walk a mile in 6 minutes. I could also run one in 4:45 then. With racewalking, you are required to have a least one foot on the ground at all times, where with a run usually both are off the ground during some point of each stride. The form for racewalking looks really funny, but the speed that can be attained is undeniable. For reference, with a normal walk 12 minute miles would be pretty fast.

Have recently been trying these. They're higher, and a bit heavier than the 190's (roughly 4 oz per pair, I think), but I'm pretty sure they're made on a less restrictive last than the 190's. I have a broad fore-foot and a narrowish heel, and they fit just fine. The lugs underfoot give a "lively" feel at footstrike, and the body/sole combination flex well together to give a glove-like feel which is both unrestrictive and sensitive.

Previous experience has been with various types of Inov-8 290's, 310's, and 315's (all quite a bit heavier)– the X-Talon 240's are my favorite, which is surprising, as I never would have thought I would like a high-sided shoe.

Whoa, sorry everyone for my long delay in getting involved in this conversation! This article published while I was on vacation and somehow I missed it in my RSS! Wish I could have been involved a lot sooner!

Hartley F,

I am using the Rocky Gore-Tex socks. One of these days I would like to try the ones from Gore to see if they are any different/better.

I basically struck Soft Star off the list because of the all-leather upper. I am not a huge fan of a leather upper for multi-day trips.

Whoops, you guys are correct, that is the Skylite, not the Crosslite.

@Paul,

I would love to try a pair of Lunas some day, but they weren't appropriate in my mind for this article (i.e. Fall/Spring).

@Hartley

Going for minimalist runs and doing multi-day trips in minimalist footwear are quite different stories. One is a short duration activity with a long recovery period in between. The other is a long duration activity with a short recovery period in between. I have found that running in minimalist footwear is good training for backpacking, but that to be able to handle all the various terrain types and to be able to do it for hours on end, day-after-day, definitely takes some time to work up to.