Need help converting from hiking boots to something lighter

I know the dominant thinking around here is trail runners, but after breaking my foot (avulsion fracture) from rolling it due to a lack of ankle support, I'm loath to carry any weight without ankle support.
I'd check out the Merrel Moab Mid boots if you want to keep something with ankle support. They aren't terribly heavy and will provide some ankle support. I like mine.

I've used racing flats as light as the lightest trail running shoes, and with much heavier weights and felt fine…and I was around 225 lbs. The determining factor will depend on the strength of your feet, and that includes the bones. If your feet aren't strong enough, and you push to fast and hard, you might get bruising and broken metatarsals.

Roclite 295 and Terroc 330 have wider toe boxes than most Inov-8 shoes.

I believe the solution for flat footers is not the shoe, but the insole. Find an insole you like, and you should be fine in almost any shoe. The exception would be shoes that put the arch in a different location, which mostly means that the bottom of the shoe won't be in the right spots under your feet.

Check out Roger Caffin's recent article on this site about light hiking footwear, with an emphasis on those suited for wide feet.

go out an do a day hike in a pair of cheap (preferably flat) sneakers im sure you have lying around with yr trail weight …

do you like it? … yes go buy something new … no … maybe not

inov and other companies have footwear for flat wide feet … i use the inov terroc 330s … fit is everything, try before you buy

I agree with Eugene, it all depends on your feet and ankles. If you have strong feet and ankles, you will be fine with trail runners. If not, then you will need something with more support. That doesn't mean you need really heavy boots, though. You may be fine with mid-length boots.

The weight on your back is a small proportion of your overall weight. The big thing is that it can throw you off balance. So that is probably the other issue, which is how comfortable you are carrying the load.

Asics and New Balance do trail runners in proper wide fittings.

Go to your local shoe store (local, not chain) and have them fit you for a trailrunner.
Different brands and models are good for different people and they'll have all that information for you.

I prefer a low top hiking shoe rather than a trail runner. I like better forefoot rock protection and overall support. My hunch is that hiking shoes are better for a walking stride than running shoes. I do find that that they give better traction and are more durable. Each manufacturer has their own lasts, which is the form the shoe is made on and determines the finished shape and I assume is it more an art than a science. To date, Merrell shoes work best for me. Non-waterproof models will dry much faster.

I like the Moab Ventilator, which comes in a mid height as well: http://www.merrell.com/US/en-US/Product.mvc.aspx/12006M/0/Mens/Moab-Ventilator

I like Keen shoes too. I don't have direct experience with a current model, but the Voyager looks a like a good non-waterproof model to start with: http://www.keenfootwear.com/us/en/product/fw11/shoes/men/trailhead/voyageur/deep lichen ! simply taupe

I wear hiking shoes for city travel. They are ugly, but more forgiving when walking on hard pavement all day. They make the Italians crazy, I think– they love to stare at my shoes :)

> 1) is it feasible/advisable to convert to trail runners with such weights?
Absolutely.

> 2) should i go for trail runners or something in between?
See my reviews of New Balance shoes (several). That's what I wear across Europe. Quite enough.

> 3) i have wide feet and am flatfooted and most models (inov-8 and montrail and such)
> dont seem to fit that well – any specific suggestions
Get your feet measured on a Brannock device.
Go up half a size at least – you feet will swell when walking.
Wear thick wool-blend socks ( I like Darn Tough Vermont)
Refuse to wear any shoes which are not wide enough. Absolutely refuse.

Note: the http://www.nbwebexpress.com/ web site allows you to search by shoe width!

Cheers

I backpack in full-on boots that are light by "boot" standards, but heavy by UL standards: Salomon Quest (just under 3lb the set) and hike in "trail running" shoes that weigh just under 2lb the set. I use the heavier boot because I want more resistance to rocks and more ankle support (super, super happy with the Salomons!) and the trail runners where I want ventilation, low weight and don't need protection from rocks, burrs and such.

I was just in REI, cashing in one of my stockpile of 20% coupons and noted a new Salomon light hiker that weighs just slightly less than my New Balance runners, but is a mid-top, Gore-Tex etc… with great tread on it. They call that one the "XA Pro 3d Mid". Very cool. If you're looking for a transition shoe, or a boot that's light but still covers your ankle, that kind of thing might be just the ticket.

yeah – although i see ya'll wear lightweight runners its scary to lose the ankle support..and then there is the ruggedness of the boots that keeps your feet safe with rocks and bush…

having said that i want to try.

@eugene – i agree that insoles would help – i have custom ones. still many runners are just too narrow

I guess i need to try a few for fit, although a bit hard to say in the store. unfortunately selection here in TA isnt that great

Will look up Roger's article

Thanks for the input

I wish we had a like button. I agree with Roger on never settling for too narrow of a shoe!

As a woman with wide feet, I often wear boys shoes to get the right width, but the quality is often lacking. One of the reasons I've become an Innov 8 fan is because they have many models that are unisex, so I can get a shoe with sufficient width and great quality and function.

I switched to Montrail Hardrock's about 6.5 years ago, doing great with pack weights of up to 35 lbs., mostly around 30-31 lbs. Ankle support? Three years ago, I did a trip that had quite a bit of rocky XC/off trail scrambling four of the first five days in Sequoia NP. I had no issues, my pack developed some small holes from being dragged over a few boulders though. No help here on which brands, just my two cents.

Duane

+1 on what Terri said

but after breaking my foot (avulsion fracture) from rolling it due to a lack of ankle support, I'm loath to carry any weight without ankle support.

I'm curious who sold you that line? Unless your boots have stiff reinforcement around the ankle (the ones you listed don't), they are not even close to preventing you from rolling it. In fact, they increase the chance of it. You basically need a traditional mountaineering or plastic ski boot to get the protection you're thinking you get out of those Merrells.

If your boots were stiff enough to prevent foot fracture, like in ski boots, then your leg will break at the top of the boot

We need to define "wide fit" better.

Do you have a really big foot that's wider from front to back than average? Or do you just have a foot that's (what should be known as) anatomical?

If the former, by all means try a shoe in a EE or even EEEE.

If the latter, just find a properly shaped shoe. Most are simply too narrow at the toe due to a pointed shape. This is true with almost every athletic shoe on the market although some are slightly better than others. The latest trend is towards a more natural last, but IMO, the only one who has gotten it right thus far is Altra. The Merrell Barefoot line and New Balance Minimus Trail line are ok, but still too pointy and too tight in the midfoot. The VivoBarefoot Neo Trail is ok as well, but suffers from an upper that is too stiff to allow the toes to spread.

I remain intrigued every time someone claims that hiking shoes with ankle support give less ankle support than those without ankle support. It's the old, "low tops give more ankle support than high tops" argument that's clearly been validated all these years in places like, say, the NBA and trail-hiking.

Or not.

So, for those of us hiking and running (maybe even playing ball) in lows, mids and even highs **but out in the real actual world** how is it that a mid or high top INCREASES the likelihood one will roll an ankle, when compared to a low top? Sure, this flies in the face of common sense and experience, but hey, the world may really be flat and that propeller in your intake might really give you 65mpg. Personally, I'd love all three to be true, but have lingering doubts.

Note that reality and truth don't require one to ignore the advantages of a low-top. Many people who accept the round world realities think low tops are great! I have several sets and use them often while traversing the arc, as it were. Not a one of them protects my ankles from burrs, rocks or sloppy mistakes at the end of the day, but they're still awesome.

If your boots were stiff enough to prevent foot fracture, like in ski boots, then your leg will break at the top of the boot

An added bonus, although I suspect (will have to verify) it would require considerably more force to break a tibia or fibula than one of the smaller bones in the ankle.

Think about it a little.

I'm walking along and my ankle starts to roll.

If I'm wearing a shoe that doesn't cover my ankle, the shoe has at least some chance (varies depending on how tight it fits and how tight it's laced) of rolling off my foot. But, if I have on a boot that extends above my ankle and is laced to the top, it has no chance of coming off. If the boot rolls, my foot and ankle go with it. If the shoe rolls, well, it may just be the shoe that rolls, and not my foot and ankle.

The other side of it, at least speaking in general terms, is a boot will almost certainly be very thick at the sole. That means your foot has zero proprioception. Less so with a shoe, especially if it's of the more minimal variety.

by my podiatrist–the kind of fracture I suffered was the hyperexention of a ligament. What happens in that instance is a chunk of bone tears away rather than the ligament snapping. What my podiatrist told me is the ligament would not have hyperextended to the extent it did had I been wearing boots at the time because the ankle support provided would have restricted the range of motion. I'm not an expert, I'm just relating my own experience.

Fair enough. I don't know your podiatrist, but I suspect that's based more on theory than fact.

My wife (a PT/DPT) has hypermobile joints, including both ankles. She will be walking along the trail (or even on a road) and roll her ankles at random. It makes a horrible noise and usually causes minor short-lived pain.

When we met, she wore clunky boots and a big knee brace (coming off a second knee repair). At some point she stopped wearing the brace but kept the boots. Eventually I convinced her to move to a light hiker, and then to a trail runner. Since decreasing her footwear, the instances of her ankles rolling has gone down from several times a day to maybe once every several trips. She can't wear footwear that's as minimal as what I can get away with, but it's a far cry from what she used to wear. FWIW, she did a published project on the effects of shod vs unshod running as part of her DPT program, mostly in part due to her own experiences with minimizing footwear.

I have endured ankle problems for a long time. I have previously dislocated both ankles(separately), had numerous sprains, and fairly recently an avulsion fracture. Most of these injuries occurred in sporting events on a wooden floor.
Here are my thoughts and remedies. Both of my dislocations occurred in high cut athletic shoes; I don't think they help that much. After my dislocations, I began wearing Active Ankles, a hinged brace worn by a high percentage of volleyball players. Active Ankles allow the foot to flex with a hinge but prevent almost any rolling movement. I have never injured my ankle in about 20 years of wearing them in situations that commonly roll and injure ankles. They have never blistered my feet but I do have some concerns about wearing them for long distance. I think Active Ankles with light shoes are lighter than heavy high boots and provide a lot more support.
That being said, I do not wear them backpacking now. It is my belief that low-profile shoes help prevent rolling of the ankle. I also believe poles help prevent rolling an ankle. I have gone 2 years injury-free with low shoes and poles. I also run in low-profile shoes now and feel it has strengthened the muscles supporting my ankle. I think the more you wear them the stronger your ankles will become.
I hope my non-scientific experience is helpful to you.

I made the switch from heavy leather Italian, high top hiking boots recently to The North Face Crestone (low top, non-gore tex) and will never go back.

The North Face has a lot of options as far as trail shoes. Several of their models they have in low top, mid top, goretex or no goretex. Several of the models have vibram soles so a little more substantial than a running shoe or something with a foam sole. I havent put a ton of miles on mine yet but I love them so far. I wouldnt even consider boots ever again unless it was very cold/snow/wet conditions and even then I would probably go with a non boot option.

Here is a link to all the men's The North Face shoes at http://www.endless.com I love these guys, free shipping to you and on returns so I order several pairs, try them on then return the ones I don't want. http://www.zappos.com does the same thing.
http://tinyurl.com/78mjp43