Choice of footwear ?

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Bob H, Sep 20, 2004.

  1. Bob H

    Bob H Guest

    Anyone else wear walking boots for cycling in ? ;-)

    I tend to wear old knackered pairs, that are nice and supple, but with a good shank.

    This is their penultimate use before garden duty.
     
    Tags:


  2. Bob H wrote:
    > Anyone else wear walking boots for cycling in ? ;-)
    >
    > I tend to wear old knackered pairs, that are nice and supple, but with a good shank.
    >
    > This is their penultimate use before garden duty.

    Only on big days out in Scotland where the bike is used to gain access
    to the hills. Cycling efficiency is traded for dry feet and not having
    to carry boots in the sack.
    Graham
     
  3. "Bob H" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Anyone else wear walking boots for cycling in ? ;-)
    >
    > I tend to wear old knackered pairs, that are nice and supple, but with a
    > good shank.
    >
    > This is their penultimate use before garden duty.


    Why would anyone do that, apart from Graham's reply?

    Rich
     
  4. MSeries

    MSeries Guest

    Bob H wrote:
    > Anyone else wear walking boots for cycling in ? ;-)
    >
    > I tend to wear old knackered pairs, that are nice and supple, but

    with a good shank.

    No I wear cycling shoes nice and stiff.
     
  5. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>, Bob H
    ('[email protected]') wrote:

    > Anyone else wear walking boots for cycling in ? ;-)


    I used to, in the days I rode mountain bikes with toe clips. I think
    it's fair to say I was doing more adventurous riding in those days, and
    most rides included at least some bike-on-shoulder stuff. They are, as
    you say, exceedingly comfortable and a real benefit when you have to
    get off the bike and carry it.

    However, I find clipless pedals a sufficient benefit that I wouldn't go
    back to toe-clips now. I have thought of getting the friend who makes
    my boots to make me a pair with shanks for cleats in.

    --
    [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
    Windows 95:
    You, you, you! You make a grown man cry...
    M. Jagger/K. Richards
     
  6. Peter Clinch

    Peter Clinch Guest

    Bob H wrote:
    > Anyone else wear walking boots for cycling in ? ;-)


    No. It's quite rare for me to even go walking in walking boots any
    more, unless I can see crampon use or step kicking in my immediate
    future. They're usually heavier than most walking needs and the great
    "you need ankle support" mantra is IMHO mostly a sacred cow that would
    be better off killed (c.f. "you need 20mm tyres to go fast!").

    The high cuff restricts ankle movement which is terrible for cycling.
    The stiff sole is good, but you get that with a cycling shoe. More
    weight, more sweat, less movement. I don't want any of that.

    Pete.
    --
    Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
    Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
    Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
    net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
     
  7. Nick Kew

    Nick Kew Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Simon Brooke <[email protected]> writes:

    > I used to, in the days I rode mountain bikes with toe clips. I think
    > it's fair to say I was doing more adventurous riding in those days, and
    > most rides included at least some bike-on-shoulder stuff. They are, as
    > you say, exceedingly comfortable and a real benefit when you have to
    > get off the bike and carry it.


    Bah. What's wrong with that nice allrounder-footwear, the trainer?
    Serves well both on the bike and on foot.

    --
    Nick Kew
     
  8. Nick Kew

    Nick Kew Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Peter Clinch <[email protected]> writes:

    > No. It's quite rare for me to even go walking in walking boots any
    > more, unless I can see crampon use or step kicking in my immediate
    > future.


    Deep mud? Much more usual than crampon conditions in .uk.

    > They're usually heavier than most walking needs and the great
    > "you need ankle support" mantra is IMHO mostly a sacred cow that would
    > be better off killed (c.f. "you need 20mm tyres to go fast!").


    Agreed, ankle support scares me: it seems to sacrifice too much
    flexibility, and with it control. I divide my boots into two
    categories: light/comfortable/flexible for UK conditions, and
    the mountaineering ones that are stiff enough to take a crampon
    but too heavy and inflexible for regular use.

    > The high cuff restricts ankle movement which is terrible for cycling.
    > The stiff sole is good, but you get that with a cycling shoe. More
    > weight, more sweat, less movement. I don't want any of that.


    But what you're describing there isn't exactly what I'd call a
    *walking* boot.

    I've worn boots for cycling in exceptional circumstances when the cycling
    was combined with walking (ride to meeting point then walk) and conditions
    were seriously wet. But not through choice. Too bulky.

    --
    Nick Kew
     
  9. Terry

    Terry Guest

    > Only on big days out in Scotland where the bike is used to gain access
    > to the hills. Cycling efficiency is traded for dry feet and not having




    i sometimes go exploring the fields and hills and find a combination
    of bike and boots to be effective and as you say a stiff sole gives
    quite efficient pedalling.I would not say hiking boots were quick but
    they are not as hard work a they look.wore them in Grisedale forest
    last week, and on the way back tied up the bike while i went for a
    walk.

    TerryJ
     
  10. MSeries

    MSeries Guest

    Nick Kew wrote:


    > Bah. What's wrong with that nice allrounder-footwear, the trainer?
    > Serves well both on the bike and on foot.


    Trainers do not really serve well on road racing machines, not stiff
    enough and not tough enough to hold the screws for Look cleats.
     
  11. Rory

    Rory Guest

    [email protected] (Bob H) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Anyone else wear walking boots for cycling in ? ;-)
    >
    > I tend to wear old knackered pairs, that are nice and supple, but with a good
    > shank.


    Sounds like the exact opposite of good cycling footwear: should be
    just about impossible to walk in (rigid sole) and have no ankle
    support to speak of (BTW, what's rhe "shank" of a boot?)
     
  12. Peter Clinch

    Peter Clinch Guest

    Nick Kew wrote:

    > Deep mud? Much more usual than crampon conditions in .uk.


    Which is why I'm more likely to be wearing a pair of Walshes or Tevas
    than a pair of boots...

    > Agreed, ankle support scares me: it seems to sacrifice too much
    > flexibility, and with it control.


    And it's pointless most of the time AFAICT, unless you have weak ankles.
    And I don't: might be all that walking I do, of course... I love
    ankle support where it helps, like front pointing and downhill skiing
    that rather go beyond the limits evolution took the basic ankle design
    to, but walking shouldn't be a problem!

    Pete.
    --
    Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
    Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
    Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
    net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
     
  13. Nick Kew wrote:

    > Bah. What's wrong with that nice allrounder-footwear, the trainer?
    > Serves well both on the bike and on foot.


    The soles are too thick to work well with toeclips or cups, and not stiff
    enough to prevent painful arches when riding briskly.

    Guy
    --
    May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
    University
     
  14. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>, Nick Kew
    ('[email protected]') wrote:

    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > Simon Brooke <[email protected]> writes:
    >
    >> I used to, in the days I rode mountain bikes with toe clips. I think
    >> it's fair to say I was doing more adventurous riding in those days,
    >> and most rides included at least some bike-on-shoulder stuff. They
    >> are, as you say, exceedingly comfortable and a real benefit when you
    >> have to get off the bike and carry it.

    >
    > Bah. What's wrong with that nice allrounder-footwear, the trainer?
    > Serves well both on the bike and on foot.


    The answer to that is 'bogs'. I may still be the only person to have
    cycled across the Silver Flow, although I should think that by now at
    least one other person must have been stupid enough. But any mountain
    biking expedition of any length involves more minor bogs, and if
    putting feet down in bogs stout waterproof footwear is a good thing.

    --
    [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
    /-\ You have discovered a security flaw in a Microsoft product. You
    |-| can report this issue to our security tesm. Would you like to
    | | * Be completely ignored (default)?
    | | * Receive a form email full of platitudes about how much we care?
    \_/ * Spend hours helping us fix this problem for free?
     
  15. Arthur Clune

    Arthur Clune Guest

    Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:

    : The answer to that is 'bogs'. I may still be the only person to have
    : cycled across the Silver Flow, although I should think that by now at

    Where's that then? I'm assuming the north-east of Scotland (flow country)?

    --
    Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
    "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect"
    - Paulina Borsook
     
  16. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    On 21/9/04 1:05 pm, in article
    [email protected], "Simon Brooke"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > and if
    > putting feet down in bogs stout waterproof footwear is a good thing.


    Not at all.. You want (as many cavers will tell you) holes in the soles to
    let the water out.

    If you are riding in bogs you will get wet feet. The question is whether you
    want to take a pair of shoes full of water or just a pair of wet shoes with
    you.

    Trainers suck for almost everything except walking on reasonably smooth
    paths and snow that is perfect for cross country skiing.

    ...d
     
  17. Peter Clinch

    Peter Clinch Guest

    Rory wrote:

    > Sounds like the exact opposite of good cycling footwear: should be
    > just about impossible to walk in (rigid sole) and have no ankle
    > support to speak of (BTW, what's rhe "shank" of a boot?)


    It's a sole stiffener.

    Pete.
    --
    Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
    Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
    Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
    net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
     
  18. Arthur Clune

    Arthur Clune Guest

    David Martin <[email protected]> wrote:

    : Trainers suck for almost everything except walking on reasonably smooth
    : paths and snow that is perfect for cross country skiing.

    I disagree. They aren't that hot in bogs, but I've done a 6 day
    backpack across Tasmania in a pair of trainers. I was much more
    comfortable than the other people I was with, all of whom
    were wearing "big boots" (tm)


    --
    Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
    "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect"
    - Paulina Borsook
     
  19. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    On 21/9/04 3:05 pm, in article [email protected], "Arthur Clune"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > David Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > : Trainers suck for almost everything except walking on reasonably smooth
    > : paths and snow that is perfect for cross country skiing.
    >
    > I disagree. They aren't that hot in bogs, but I've done a 6 day
    > backpack across Tasmania in a pair of trainers. I was much more
    > comfortable than the other people I was with, all of whom
    > were wearing "big boots" (tm)


    It depends on your definition of 'reasonably smooth'.. I'd go for the
    'smooth enough to ride a bicycle along in both directions' and that is most
    certainly not suitable for playing billiards.

    ...d

    >
     
  20. Arthur Clune

    Arthur Clune Guest

    David Martin <[email protected]> wrote:

    : It depends on your definition of 'reasonably smooth'.. I'd go for the
    : 'smooth enough to ride a bicycle along in both directions' and that is most
    : certainly not suitable for playing billiards.

    My trip involved lots of stuff unridable on a mtb. While carrying tent etc


    --
    Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
    "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect"
    - Paulina Borsook
     
Loading...
Loading...