Boots or Sneakers??

[edy810]

Mostly Mid section from Wind Gap to VA is what I want to hike. eventually more.

[Slo-go'en]

If you don't want to burse the bottom of your feet or develop stress fractures, I'd get something with a stiff sole/rock plate. It's no wonder people who wear wimpy shoes through there all complain about sore feet. A proper insole can help.

[Gambit McCrae]

Sneakers with an aftermarket rock plate insole. Expect to get about 500 miles out of a pair, maybe 300 out of a cheap pair. Your results may vary in PA.

[FlyPaper]

Mostly Mid section from Wind Gap to VA is what I want to hike. eventually more.

So far, I have hiked about 1100 miles of the AT. The first 500 miles I always wore boots. The last 600 miles, I've been wearing fairly cheap trail runners. I now wear the same shoes everyday that I hike with. I do include after market insoles, which I also wear everyday. I've gone through several pairs of Saucony Excersions. Latest version is TR11. I think I have enough experience with both shoes and boots to have a meaningful opinion on this.

In my experience, shoes have been much better. I can hike much further and hurt much less. I guess I just don't hike fast enough or plop my feet hard enough on the ground to hurt the bottoms of my feet. Perhaps if I was actually running and/or jumping, I'd need a firmer sole.

One thing I've found is that with shoes, my ankles are always sore after a hike from having to do their own work. I don't have boots bracing my ankles. However, I'd describe this as a "good hurt", meaning that the feel like they've been exercised well, but not strained, injured, nor overworked.

[Fredt4]

So far, I have hiked about 1100 miles of the AT. The first 500 miles I always wore boots. The last 600 miles, I've been wearing fairly cheap trail runners. I now wear the same shoes everyday that I hike with. I do include after market insoles, which I also wear everyday. I've gone through several pairs of Saucony Excersions. Latest version is TR11. I think I have enough experience with both shoes and boots to have a meaningful opinion on this.

In my experience, shoes have been much better. I can hike much further and hurt much less. I guess I just don't hike fast enough or plop my feet hard enough on the ground to hurt the bottoms of my feet. Perhaps if I was actually running and/or jumping, I'd need a firmer sole.

One thing I've found is that with shoes, my ankles are always sore after a hike from having to do their own work. I don't have boots bracing my ankles. However, I'd describe this as a "good hurt", meaning that the feel like they've been exercised well, but not strained, injured, nor overworked.

This is an excellent post, as it posts the results of individual testing of the options. I find the results to be similar to my experience, although I didn't hike first with boots then switch over to trail runners. My experience was a bit more of trying the trail runners on the next hike and just not using the boots again. I didn't, or at least wasn't aware, know of mass movement away from boots so I didn't keep any notes on the difference. I also found that the shoes are overall better for my feet but most importantly I found that my knees felt much better.

[rocketsocks]

Sandals....

[DuneElliot]

I've only had one bad experience with an ankle roll because I was wearing trail runners vs supportive boots BUT that was because I had rolled my ankle really badly in a hole a month prior and had rolled it pretty much daily on the hike so it was just bad timing.

[cmoulder]

Trail runners with a low stack height greatly reduce ankle roll.

At least for me. I have FAR less tendency to roll ankles with trail runners than I did with boots.

[Ethesis]

Sneakers with an aftermarket rock plate insole. Expect to get about 500 miles out of a pair, maybe 300 out of a cheap pair. Your results may vary in PA.

The only after market ones ones I could find with several google searches were Sole Armor.

Any links or reviews?

[Feral Bill]

On rocky trails, light footwear lets you easily and precisely place your feet. This more than makes up for any mythical protection offered by boots (which I used for way too many years). Also, any boot stiff enough to prevent ankle roll is going to be nearly unwearable. Think of hiking in downhill ski boots.

[TwoSpirits]

Trail runners with a low stack height greatly reduce ankle roll.

What is stack height? Is it the same as foot drop?

[DuneElliot]

On rocky trails, light footwear lets you easily and precisely place your feet. This more than makes up for any mythical protection offered by boots (which I used for way too many years). Also, any boot stiff enough to prevent ankle roll is going to be nearly unwearable. Think of hiking in downhill ski boots.

Not to mention that if your ankle can't roll a little, like the joint is meant to do, then the knee is going to bend in a way in probably shouldn't and cause way more damage than a rolled ankle.

[DownYonder]

What is stack height? Is it the same as foot drop?

As I understand it: Amount of sole between the forefoot and the ground = stack height. Foot drop usually refers to the difference between the heel raise and stack height......if the heel is 22mm and the forefoot is 18mm = 4mm foot drop. Most trail shoes have 4mm foot drop although some go up to 8mm.

[TwoSpirits]

Ahh...makes sense. Thanks!

[jimmyjam]

Neither here. Non-waterproof hiking shoe for me. Either Keen Voyager or Oboz Sawtooth. But you gotta experiment and find out what works for you. It may take a few hundred miles and a few hundred dollars.