Several days of hikes in some regions in Romania, will void your boots waranty, at least a friend of mine, destroyed 2 pairs of Salomon Cosmic 4D GTX in two months, fortunate for the company's return policy.
I have a pair of older Kayland Contact, they come as tough as a Hillux Double Cab Pick-up, except for the normal wear they like to last for ages.
@Backpacker magasine: When you post new clips ?, including a detailed review of the Salomon Wings Sky GTX, and Editors Choice 2010 ?
that test is the worst test i`ve ever seen. things on the boots were tested in a way that no real hiker would put them through. my han wags have been up and down mountains and on rugged coastlines for 5 years and i never seen those steel bits that the laces go around, never bend like that. maybe if you get crushed by a landslide you`ll see that happen to your boots
Yep. No ecological validity whatsoever. Complete waste of time...and even were it simulate actual use in any way at all, it was ineffective at producing signficantly different results.
Are you young? Do you have any foot problems? How are they on rocks? I'm 60 and am hesitant to try running shoes on anything but two or three mile easy nature trails. I'm interested in your feedback.
I'm pushing 40, but the guru on this is Ray Jardine. He's in his 60s and he's done the PCT in running shoes several times. With an ultralight pack of course. The trick is to go as light as possible. I can get away with a week trip with less than 30 pounds on my back. He does it much lighter. He says that for every pound you add on the feet, it equates to 5 pounds on the back. So if you use shoes that weigh less than 2 pounds instead of 5 pound boots, you actually save 15 pounds on your back.
I did about half of the AT in asics and agree that running shoes are definitely a good option with a very light pack. The main problem I ran into was the grip on the soles--I really wish I had a Vibram sole every time I took a fall on slick rocks. Oh well. . .light is right! (and why would a pound on your foot equal 5 on your back?)
If your hiking and fall into a cement mixer this test is helpful.
actonbath 1 year ago
Several days of hikes in some regions in Romania, will void your boots waranty, at least a friend of mine, destroyed 2 pairs of Salomon Cosmic 4D GTX in two months, fortunate for the company's return policy.
I have a pair of older Kayland Contact, they come as tough as a Hillux Double Cab Pick-up, except for the normal wear they like to last for ages.
@Backpacker magasine: When you post new clips ?, including a detailed review of the Salomon Wings Sky GTX, and Editors Choice 2010 ?
connectorxp 1 year ago
Not practically tested. Weight on the sole! |What weight--total waste of time .
ktblooz 2 years ago
Well, at least now I know what pair of boots to wear next time I go hiking in a cement mixer.
fortitudine617 2 years ago
that test is the worst test i`ve ever seen. things on the boots were tested in a way that no real hiker would put them through. my han wags have been up and down mountains and on rugged coastlines for 5 years and i never seen those steel bits that the laces go around, never bend like that. maybe if you get crushed by a landslide you`ll see that happen to your boots
brokenspectral 2 years ago 12
@brokenspectral
Yep. No ecological validity whatsoever. Complete waste of time...and even were it simulate actual use in any way at all, it was ineffective at producing signficantly different results.
datacipher 1 year ago
good song
kickyourownface 2 years ago
15 minutes?
Try testing them for 15 hours.
BigBosley 2 years ago 9
@BigBosley I second that, these boots should have been half destroyed after they came out.
newengland72 10 months ago
I agree, Asolo!
beltbuckle703 2 years ago
Asolo
oneonebravo11B 2 years ago
such a good article in the last issue
rubiconsm 2 years ago
I use a regular pair of Nike running shoes. They are great and don't add that much weight to my feet. God Bless you Ray Jardine.
joshjhutton 2 years ago
Are you young? Do you have any foot problems? How are they on rocks? I'm 60 and am hesitant to try running shoes on anything but two or three mile easy nature trails. I'm interested in your feedback.
mudhens4ever 2 years ago
I'm pushing 40, but the guru on this is Ray Jardine. He's in his 60s and he's done the PCT in running shoes several times. With an ultralight pack of course. The trick is to go as light as possible. I can get away with a week trip with less than 30 pounds on my back. He does it much lighter. He says that for every pound you add on the feet, it equates to 5 pounds on the back. So if you use shoes that weigh less than 2 pounds instead of 5 pound boots, you actually save 15 pounds on your back.
joshjhutton 2 years ago
I did about half of the AT in asics and agree that running shoes are definitely a good option with a very light pack. The main problem I ran into was the grip on the soles--I really wish I had a Vibram sole every time I took a fall on slick rocks. Oh well. . .light is right! (and why would a pound on your foot equal 5 on your back?)
fortitudine617 2 years ago
I have a pair of Kaylands, they are very well-made boots!
mdk009 2 years ago
Put them in for longer! or take them to hawai'i. That'll eat up your boots
AjaPuppy1 2 years ago