Boots have split

Discussion in 'General Fitness' started by Geoff Berrow, Dec 7, 2005.

  1. Geoff Berrow

    Geoff Berrow Guest

    I know I should have listened to the guys who suggested waterproofing
    suede boots and not to worry what they looked like. But I didn't and as
    a consequence they have both split at the bend. So, since they have had
    it anyway, I dubbined them up and gave them a try. What a vast
    improvement in performance!

    But, looking round for new boots it seems to me that for an item which
    will be wet and covered in mud for a lot of the time - I have now come
    to the conclusion that it makes sense to buy something which is
    waterproof and mud coloured. So going for just brown leather, my local
    Millets (only shop in town...) only have Brasher, HiTec and Peter Storm
    in stock. Had Magic with me so couldn't try any on but the Peter Storm
    looked the most impressive. Leather, waterproof and a very solid looking
    Vibram sole. Anyone tried this boot?
    --
    Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
    It's only Usenet, no one dies.
    My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
    Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/
     
    Tags:


  2. Daytona

    Daytona Guest

    Geoff Berrow <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Leather, waterproof and a very solid looking
    >Vibram sole. Anyone tried this boot?


    No, but I have a high regard for Vibram Bifida soles, if that's what
    it's got.

    Daytona
     
  3. In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] says...
    > I know I should have listened to the guys who suggested waterproofing
    > suede boots and not to worry what they looked like. But I didn't and as
    > a consequence they have both split at the bend. So, since they have had
    > it anyway, I dubbined them up and gave them a try. What a vast
    > improvement in performance!
    >
    > But, looking round for new boots it seems to me that for an item which
    > will be wet and covered in mud for a lot of the time - I have now come
    > to the conclusion that it makes sense to buy something which is
    > waterproof and mud coloured. So going for just brown leather, my local
    > Millets (only shop in town...) only have Brasher, HiTec and Peter Storm
    > in stock. Had Magic with me so couldn't try any on but the Peter Storm
    > looked the most impressive. Leather, waterproof and a very solid looking
    > Vibram sole. Anyone tried this boot?
    >


    Make your choice based on how well they fit YOUR feet. Everything else
    is a secondary consideration.
     
  4. Bitstring <[email protected]>, from the
    wonderful person Geoff Berrow <[email protected]> said
    >I know I should have listened to the guys who suggested waterproofing
    >suede boots and not to worry what they looked like. But I didn't and as
    >a consequence they have both split at the bend. So, since they have had
    >it anyway, I dubbined them up and gave them a try. What a vast
    >improvement in performance!
    >
    >But, looking round for new boots it seems to me that for an item which
    >will be wet and covered in mud for a lot of the time - I have now come
    >to the conclusion that it makes sense to buy something which is
    >waterproof and mud coloured.


    Yep, indeedy. Grey/Blue/Red suede/cordura or Nubuck or whatever is just
    a cr&p idea, unless you do your walking mostly in lounge bars. A triumph
    of form over function (unless you have red/grey/blue mud round your way,
    of course).

    > So going for just brown leather, my local
    >Millets (only shop in town...) only have Brasher, HiTec and Peter Storm
    >in stock. Had Magic with me so couldn't try any on but the Peter Storm
    >looked the most impressive. Leather, waterproof and a very solid looking
    >Vibram sole. Anyone tried this boot?


    No, but I tried a pair of HiTek ones today (15 miles - 50% roads - first
    time out). The sole is not Vibram, but seemed to grip OK. Comfort wise
    they (at £32, from the outdoor shop in Bridgnorth .. reduced from
    £39.99) are superior to the Scarpa Rangers (at 4x the price), which are
    still biting the top of my big toe on one foot only. No pseudo-Goretex
    membrane either (good!). The mud washed right off, but that's because
    they're still new and shiny.

    I have destroyed two pairs of Brasher (Nubuck .. FMB1 and FMB2) in
    record time - even with Nikwax they seem to rely on the membrane to stay
    waterproof, once the membrane goes (which takes about 3 barley seeds)
    they become mobile puddles (especially the Cordura panels on the FMB2s).
    Haven't tried their actual leather (Hillmaster etc.) boots. Comfort on
    the FMB1s was good, but the FMB2s (same size - free replacement from
    Brasher) were a tad too narrow. The FMB1s did what yours did, split at
    the toe crease after 8 months / 687.8 km.

    I'm coming to the conclusion that cheap & cheerful (HiTek, Peter Storm,
    Hawkshead, etc.) walking boots are probably a better investment, at
    least for me, than expensive ones, as long as the sole is reasonably
    grippy. I don't worry about the foot-bed, since I usually stick a
    sorbothane insole in anyway. Certainly for £32 I figured I couldn't go
    far wrong.

    --
    GSV Three Minds in a Can
    Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.
     
  5. Alex Clarke

    Alex Clarke Guest

    GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:
    > Bitstring <[email protected]>, from the
    > wonderful person Geoff Berrow <[email protected]> said
    >
    >> I know I should have listened to the guys who suggested waterproofing
    >> suede boots and not to worry what they looked like. But I didn't and as
    >> a consequence they have both split at the bend. So, since they have had
    >> it anyway, I dubbined them up and gave them a try. What a vast
    >> improvement in performance!
    >>
    >> But, looking round for new boots it seems to me that for an item which
    >> will be wet and covered in mud for a lot of the time - I have now come
    >> to the conclusion that it makes sense to buy something which is
    >> waterproof and mud coloured.

    >
    >
    > Yep, indeedy. Grey/Blue/Red suede/cordura or Nubuck or whatever is just
    > a cr&p idea, unless you do your walking mostly in lounge bars. A triumph
    > of form over function (unless you have red/grey/blue mud round your way,
    > of course).
    >
    >> So going for just brown leather, my local
    >> Millets (only shop in town...) only have Brasher, HiTec and Peter Storm
    >> in stock. Had Magic with me so couldn't try any on but the Peter Storm
    >> looked the most impressive. Leather, waterproof and a very solid looking
    >> Vibram sole. Anyone tried this boot?

    >
    >
    > No, but I tried a pair of HiTek ones today (15 miles - 50% roads - first
    > time out). The sole is not Vibram, but seemed to grip OK. Comfort wise
    > they (at £32, from the outdoor shop in Bridgnorth .. reduced from
    > £39.99) are superior to the Scarpa Rangers (at 4x the price), which are
    > still biting the top of my big toe on one foot only. No pseudo-Goretex
    > membrane either (good!). The mud washed right off, but that's because
    > they're still new and shiny.
    >
    > I have destroyed two pairs of Brasher (Nubuck .. FMB1 and FMB2) in
    > record time - even with Nikwax they seem to rely on the membrane to stay
    > waterproof, once the membrane goes (which takes about 3 barley seeds)
    > they become mobile puddles (especially the Cordura panels on the FMB2s).
    > Haven't tried their actual leather (Hillmaster etc.) boots. Comfort on
    > the FMB1s was good, but the FMB2s (same size - free replacement from
    > Brasher) were a tad too narrow. The FMB1s did what yours did, split at
    > the toe crease after 8 months / 687.8 km.
    >
    > I'm coming to the conclusion that cheap & cheerful (HiTek, Peter Storm,
    > Hawkshead, etc.) walking boots are probably a better investment, at
    > least for me, than expensive ones, as long as the sole is reasonably
    > grippy. I don't worry about the foot-bed, since I usually stick a
    > sorbothane insole in anyway. Certainly for £32 I figured I couldn't go
    > far wrong.
    >

    Having spent a lot of money on good boots that didn't perform as
    expected in the past, I heeded the advice of Hunter Davies in "The Good
    Guide to The Lakes" circa 1980. "Walking is easy. it's just putting one
    foot in front of the other". He goes on to say that you see shepherds
    walking in shoes in summer and wellies in winter. Following this general
    principle I assume that if its wet underfoot, my feet are going to get
    muddy and wet whatever I wear. If its very wet I wear wellies £5.00 from
    the local shoe shop (I have walked 15 - 20 miles in a day over rough
    moorland as a volunteer ranger, without problems in them). If its
    snow/ice and I need crampons on, I wear the plastic Trezetas I've had
    for some years now (cost £100 when new) All other conditions I wear the
    cheapest "walking" boots that I can find. I spent all last summer and
    autumn walking in a pair of £10.00 boots from Decathlon which are light,
    have a decent sole and are hard wearing. They have accompanied me on
    many lengthy treks in the Dales, Bowland and the South Pennines.
    I suppose what i'm trying to say is go with what you're comfy in. I have
    never found price to be an indication of comfort. There is an amount of
    technobabble out there which I think misleads people into parting with
    more cash than they should in the persuit of comfort, dryness and
    performance.

    Alex
     
  6. Geoff Berrow

    Geoff Berrow Guest

    Message-ID: <[email protected]> from Graeme Cogger
    contained the following:

    >Make your choice based on how well they fit YOUR feet. Everything else
    >is a secondary consideration.


    Yeah, that's pretty much a given. That's how I bought my last pair.

    --
    Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
    It's only Usenet, no one dies.
    My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
    Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/
     
  7. Andy Howell

    Andy Howell Guest

    On 8/12/05 17:55, in article [email protected]lid, "GSV Three
    Minds in a Can" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > No, but I tried a pair of HiTek ones today (15 miles - 50% roads - first
    > time out). The sole is not Vibram, but seemed to grip OK. Comfort wise
    > they (at £32, from the outdoor shop in Bridgnorth .. reduced from
    > £39.99) are superior to the Scarpa Rangers (at 4x the price), which are
    > still biting the top of my big toe on one foot only. No pseudo-Goretex
    > membrane either (good!). The mud washed right off, but that's because
    > they're still new and shiny.


    I reckon these Hi-Tec boots are the best bargains available at the moment. I
    occasionally take two teenage relatives out to Snowdonia and earlier this
    year bought them both two pairs of Hi-Tec boots from Millets. The kids love
    them and tend to wear them all day, when the rest of us have taken off our
    boots. Chris Townsend gave them his boot of the year recommendation a couple
    of years ago and I can see why.

    I'm thinking of buying a pair of the slightly firmer Hi-Tecs for the TGO
    Challenge.



    --
    Andy Howell, Birmingham, UK. To mail simply put back the dots ...

    Must Be Over There ...
    http://www.ecotrend.org.uk/trek
     
Loading...
Loading...