UKH

Hello there, just after a bit of advice!

I've just bought a pair of these boots:

http://www.mountainwarehouse.com/footwear/hiking-boots/mens/field-waterproo...

I'm planning to use them for hills up to Monro level, and for flatter walks through forests and the countryside. They don't feel overly heavy and clunky, so I'm happy wearing them for the latter as well (when I don't want to get my trainers dirty)! I've suddenly had a bit of post-buy confusion, and I'm wondering whether I should return them and get these instead:

http://www.thenorthface.co.uk/tnf-uk-en/men-s-hedgehog-fastpack-lite-gorete...

My reason for doing so would be that the NF (North Face) ones are even more lightweight. But I'm just not 100% sure whether the NF ones are also suitable for that level of hillwalking? Thinking mainly of grip and ankle support? I'm not entirely clued up on gear and what the different styles of shoes/boots are designed/capable of, but figured I'd get some experienced voices on here

Side note - I know from lurking these forums that a lot of people do hills in shoes, not boots. However, since I'm fairly new to it all, I think I'll play it safe and stick to the conventional method of boots. At least until my ankles are a bit stronger and I'm more confident in my balance and all that. Since these boots, especially the NF ones, are really lightweight and nowhere near the weight of old fashioned boots, I don't think there's too much real-world advantage of me going for a shoe over one of these two boot options anyway. Unless someone has good reasons to convince me otherwise of course, I am here for advice after all!

Many thanks

Dom

In reply to dmorty:

Well, Mountain Warehouse kit is really low quality and usually overpriced. I would return these boots straight away.

The North Face quality is not always the greatest either, but these shoes aren't something you would want anyway. Firstly, their sole seems to be quite low profile which can be quite troublesome in Scottish hills (lots of mud, wet grass, etc). Secondly, as you said, they are quite light, hence not that durable or supportive.

If I were you, I would go to Tiso/Cotswold and get my boots fitted. Their staff knows a lot more and won't sell you something that is rubbish. You can also get 10-15% at these shops quite easily with a right card, too.

I would suggest a leather boot as they are usually quite durable, easy to maintain (well, that's arguable, but they are just simpler) and provide good support. I love wearing shoes in the hills now as I used to use Scarpa SL year round (1720g a pair). They were good, but very painful for spending long days on easier ground.

In reply to dmorty:

I like boots; it's just because it's what I'm used to and while having lighter weight footwear would perhaps make things a bit easier over the course of a long walk for me, I think I'll stick with them as when it comes to doing winter walking I'll be in boots. Ankle length is more down to personal preference. I like a higher ankle for the support it gives me and my boots have a nice soft lining to cushion that part of my leg as well as having memory foam in which is a dream for my feet but then if I go out walking I go for 5 hours or easily more so comfort is a big plus.

I'm not sold on boots that are a mixture of mesh, suede, fabric etc on the outer. I find leather is a bit easier to clean as there's no mesh and little places for mud and dirt to get ingrained and with less stitching there's not so many places for that to wear and come apart but a good pair of boots should be well made to last anyway. I know my brother who is more experienced than me at walking and getting out in Munroes and mountains doesn't like such boots but I think he has had some particularly bad experiences which have skewed his opinion. You may like the mesh for additional breathability and there are many like that with Goretex that do keep moisture out very well.

A more aggressive sole with deeper lugs I'm led to understand helps for giving a bit more grip. A full rand may be better rather than a partial and certainly I've found that on boulder fields all sides of my boots took a bit of a bashing but the full rand on mine took the bashes so I wasn't damaging the upper. To be fair when I made my boot choice I went for a boot that I know will be sturdy, be able to take in a range of terrain and a bit of a bashing as I know that when I get out walking with my brother he won't be making the walks very easy and is throwing in a fair bit of scrambling in too.

In reply to PPP:

Ah, funny - I've heard others say very good things about Mountain Warehouse, their higher-end stuff anyway! Spoke at length to an older guy in the shop who knew his stuff, and he very clearly told me not to buy any of the lower end Mountain Warehouse stuff because it's garbage, but that the higher end stuff in their range is def worthwhile. Obviously I have no reason to doubt what you're saying, and I'm grateful for the warning... but can anybody else out there chip in on the quality of higher-end Mountain Warehouse gear? Yay or nay? Curious to hear more opinions now, cause I was fairly confident before this reply =/ Should maybe also mention I got them in a shop sale for £70 instead of £140, so got some value points there if they are ok.

Oh, and in terms of the style of boot that I've bought, would you say it's what I'm after (hillwalks up to Monro-ish sort of level)? is it just the quality of Mountain Warehouse you were concerned about with the first pair, or the style also? Thanks for the pointer on the NF ones not being suitable. I see your point about the soles and will avoid accordingly!

Cool - my one hesitiation around leather is that I'm under the impression it's quite heavy and sweaty! Am I wrong in thinking that, is it not really that bad compared to the sort of thing I've got?

And cheers for the pointer about Tiso/Cotswold and a discount card, I'll look that up

In reply to PamPam:


Cheers for the input! Yeah, my thinking was going for a slightly harder-to-clean boot for the advantage of breathability/lightness. Believe these are still waterproof. Is it the mixed fabricy ones your brother's had a bad experience with? If so, does he reckon it's something that wouldn't have happened in a leather boot..?

In reply to dmorty:

If they fit and are comfortable, I'm sure they will be fine. Where they really £140?

In reply to The New NickB:

Original price £140, and that seems to be standard going price - but I got them for £70 at an outlet sale!

Cheers, so you'd say that in terms of style (thickness, tread, whatever), they look suitable for hillwalking all day and potentially scrambling a bit then?

In reply to dmorty:

Well I know when he started out he didn't have much money so budget may have come into it as well as the fact that myself and my brother have very different approaches to kit buying, certainly he is better at it now and when I kitted myself out for much of the year I had savings and had decided to dedicate some of those to purchasing kit. My own experiences with boots and what has happened to my feet in various other things told me that my feet and their comfort are of great importance to me so boots were one of the things I spent time over and were a big ticket item. I've seen such boots that aren't fully leather get good reviews though.

Sure, there are different factors; I've seen leather boots made up of many pieces with lots of stitching required whereas others have much fewer so things like where the stitching is will have an effect but also the aftercare of the boots. Leather needs different aftercare to man-made materials as you'll know as it can dry out, shrink, crack and split if it is not kept in good condition. Sure, it can be a pain to take care of leather, nubuck or suede, but I hate getting grime trapped in the mesh parts of shoes as it's a pain to clean. I suppose a toothbrush or something would get the job done and so long as you keep on top of it they'd be fine.

In reply to dmorty:

Hi there,

I think the choice between boot and shoe tends to be a very personal one. For example I wear boots only in the high mountains and winter, whereas I sell boots to people everyday who for one reason or another wouldn't consider shoes so stick with what you feel comfortable with. That said if you only have one pair of outdoor footwear I would make it boots.

As to the boots you have linked they will do the job but they won't be very good. Some things for you to consider:
1. They are very soft mean your foot and leg will have to compensate on rougher ground meaning more tiredness by the end of the day.
2. That softness will also mean you will feel stones poking through your soles.
3. The masses of low-quality open-cell foam which helps the boot fit everyone will soak up masses of water and take forever to dry.
4. The open mesh will fill with grit and lose its waterproofing relatively quickly if used on rough ground.

All that said if your on a budget those boots will get you out there and will do the job for a while. They will be comfortable and have a good tread for grip.

Would recommend something along the lines of the Anatom boot I have linked to below but like PPP said go and get fitted properly and beg/borrow a discount card off someone if you don't have one already.

http://www.cotswoldoutdoor.com/anatom-mens-q2-boot-32110333?id_colour=143

And a big definite no no to the north face shoes!

In reply to The New NickB:


What Nick says. If you paid £70 for them that seems like a good price. Chances are you'll wear them out in a few years and then you'll have a better idea what you like wearing.

I would say that generally 'waterproof' boots can be a bit sweaty in the summer and often aren't as waterproof as you'd hope. Also boots are overkill for most UK hillwalking (apart from winter if you're wearing crampons). I wear fell running shoes most of the year.

In reply to dmorty:


I can only judge based on the pictures in your link, the sole unit isn't the classic Vibram sole, but many aren't these days, it looks like it has an adequate tread. Seems to be a fair bit of shoe snobbery going on, they certainly look better than the boots I started mountain walking in 30 years ago. Comfort is the main thing, doesn't matter how expensive boots are if the last is the wrong shape for your foot.

In reply to ciaran1999:

Lots of info there, cheers! Just out of interest, how do you know they have a soft sole, are you familiar with these?

My thinking at the mo is return em, get something similar but with a stiffer sole, and just put up with the little bit extra weight when on the lighter walks taken your point about leather into consideration too. Can you put my mind at ease that leather isn't unpleasantly hot/sweaty in warmer weather, compared to meshy ones then..? That and the weight have beem my (possibly false) reasons for avoiding leather so far :/

In reply to mattrm:

Haha cheers, throwing a wee spanner im the works by raising the shoe/boot debate in my mind again.. but nah, decided since I have neither it makes sense to start with boots. As you say, don't want anything overkill, but if I'm shelling out the money then def don't want inadequate either!

In reply to ciaran1999:
Hmm - sorry for yet another post, but what exactly is the Cotswold discount card? Is it just the "explore more" thing? Didn't ask earlier as assumed it would be easy to figure out online, but turns out google didn't really get me anywhere...

In reply to dmorty:

Well don't buy Scarpa SLs. Mine gave me horrible blisters from heel lift. But I wouldn't buy either of those - the MH ones aren't waterproof, and TNF ones have no sole.
I've walked 1000 miles in Salomon 3Ds, but other folk say they leak and make your feet sweat.
You need to try quite a few on, and go somewhere decent with a good fitter. Don't go at the weekend.
Berghaus do some decent enough boots at a reasonable price.
Waterproofing will make your feet sweat, but dry days are rare ime. And if it's scotchio, just wear your trainers unless there's loads of bog or scree.

In reply to dmorty:

From my experience:
15% off with BMC, MCofS, Glasgow Climbing Centre (others should also work) cards.
10% off for students.

Similar to Tiso, but they provide 10% discount which is applied to sale items as well. Occasionally (during their events or promotions) you can get 20% off.

In reply to dmorty:

Just my 2p worth

Having worked in retail for quite a long time and having spent most my life walking in everything from trainers to B3 mountaineering boots bottom line is comfort is the most important thing. Best boots in the world that dont fit will still cause you pain.

However they are own brand boots, made cheaply.

http://www.sportsdirect.com/karrimor-aspen-mid-weathertite-mens-walking-boo...

same sole unit, and the weathertite extreme membrane is 10k/10k waterproof/breathable probably more than isodry but both are own brand linings. both will do the job fine. the sole unit is soft and on rocky ground (munros) you will feel every stone through the sole of your foot. I almost guarantee you can pick those boots up for £70 every day of the year, probably less for big chunks of it.

I generally like trainers for walking but if it's wet a boot with gaiters (waterproof trouser if actually raining) are the best way to stay dry if out for a long walk.

A few options for similar or just a touch more you are getting such a better quality boot and goretex is substantially better than the own brand linings. An unlined leather boot will breath better than a mesh boot with a cheap lining.

just food for thought

http://www.gooutdoors.co.uk/merrell-grasshopper-mid-sport-gtx-mens-walking-...

http://www.gooutdoors.co.uk/mammut-t-element-mid-gtx-mens-hiking-boots-p349...

http://www.sportsdirect.com/merrell-moab-mid-gtx-mens-walking-boots-182052?...

In reply to dmorty:
Leather is indeed warmer than open mesh, but is much more protective. Good leather (avoid cheap leather boots, apart from those Anatom you'll really struggle to find quality leather below about £150) will last much longer and protect your foot and the waterproof membrane to a much greater degree.

Essentially your goal is to find a balance between what is affordable, what is practical and and what fits, pretty much in that order. A good boot fitter will explain the differences and offer you choices based on what you need for the ground you're walking. If you do decide the benefits of leather don't out weight the decreased breathabilty then by all means get a leather/fabric mix.

If you do go down this road just make sure your keeping them clean and they should last well as long as you get something with a rubber rand at least around the toe, and split leather in high abrasion areas (instep, around the toe etc.) and something made with higher quality padding and tightly woven nylon in the fabric areas.

Someone mentioned Salomon Quests, these are excellent and widely available so normally cheap online (cotswolds will price match, i'm sure other outdoor shops will too). Scarpa Nangpa La and Asolo Fugitives are all good examples of well designed boots so you can have a look and see what I mean.

But definitely go in for a proper boot fit, like others say nothing is any good if it doesn't fit!

In reply to SiGregory:


They gave you blisters. This does not mean they will give everyone blisters. Especially if the problem was heel lift, which is a fit/lacing issue.

Recommendations, good or bad, for footwear should really only be given on price, build quality and durability. Fit and function are so very personal, it's impossible to say that a particular boot or shoe will suit someone. It's hard enough for a person to say that footwear they're trying on, on their own feet, will be suitable. If it were so obvious, we wouldn't buy footwear that turned out to have heel lift and give us terrible blisters, would we...?

In reply to dmorty:

I tend to think of mountain warehouse kit as being fairly bargain basement stuff, but I use some of it.

My approach to hillwalking gear was roughly:
i) kit myself out as cheaply as possible (mostly Millets and Yeomans at the time...) when I started out and needed to get a full stack of stuff for a sensible price
ii) when stuff fell apart and needed replacing, generally replace it with pricier stuff if I could afford it at that time
iii) if pricier stuff turned out to be massively better or more more durable then keep replacing it with similar stuff, otherwise go back to the cheap stuff next time it breaks.

Edit: In this case, those boots may or may not fall apart sooner than you'd expect, but they won't get you killed in the meantime. So if they last for ages then you're quids in, if you're replacing them already in a couple of months then don't buy the same again.

In reply to dmorty:
Don't let the gear snobs do your head in, I've got a pair of £50 leather boots from Mountain Warehouse, had them for years and used them with gaitors and crampons for winter walking. No question my Scarpa Mantas are a much better boot, bought them off eBay at less than half price unused; no doubt bought by someone to do one walk and convinced by the gear experts that they needed "proper" boots or they'd perish in them thar hills.

My experience is that fabric boots are very difficult to keep waterproof, could be that I'm not spending enough, either money initially or time and effort maintaining. But £50 against a couple of hundred?

For what it's worth, I've had karrimor approach shoes (another name belittled by those in the know), that have outlasted their merrell counterparts.

If they're comfortable and fit, wear them and enjoy your walks.

In reply to dmorty:

Fit is the most important thing. If they fit they will be fine. If they don't fit whatever the brand (and there really is a lot of brand snobbery about ) they will be agony.

In reply to captain paranoia:

Re heel lift. It's my gait. Stiff boots don't suit me at all.
Boots designed for any degree of crampon compliance have a flat stiff sole. That's no good for me

Totally agree on the comfort comments. The difficulty lies in assessing this in the shop.
Get a cheap pair, trash them, work out where you went wrong, get something decent next time.
Tbh for a first pair of boots, KSBs are bendy but not all that bad.

In reply to dmorty:

for the price these seem to fit the bill

http://www.bergfreunde.co.uk/salomon-xa-pro-mid-gtx-hiking-shoes/

In reply to SiGregory:


On the other hand, I've used Scarpa SLs straight from the box with no problems whatsoever.


Good advice.


But they're only decent if they're the right shape and size for your foot.

To the OP:
If you're new to walking, I'd go for something relatively cheap and cheerful to see if you actually like the activity. For simple forest trails, something light will be fine, and there are plenty of Munros you can do without anything very high-spec - if you're new to walking, you won't be doing any gnarly ascents to start with anyway. As long as the bot/shoes fit properly, they're not going to enhance or detract in any significant way. You'll probably get wet feet at some point, which will be uncomfortable in the short term but won't really hurt you.

In reply to dmorty:

This is only going on appearance in a photo, an unreliable guide at best, but assuming they fit you well then those Mtn Warehouse ones do at least look OK. The sole certainly looks better that your NF alternative for rough Munro-level ground (deeper lugs, a heel breast for grip going downhill, likely more lateral stiffness for foot support on steep/rough ground)

Here's some general advice on choosing summer footwear: http://www.ukhillwalking.com/articles/page.php?id=4567

In reply to dmorty:

I spent several years buying (and quickly trashing) various brands of fabric/leather boot from reputable brands including Meindl, Scarpa and Asolo. Fabric boots hate peat bog. I bought Alt-Berg leather boots (Mallerstang B1). They are bombproof, I've never had wet feet and I walk in all weathers. They come in four varieties of stiffness and about six width fittings. I own B2/B3 boots as well, but of all of them the Alt-Bergs are my favourites - I even did the Aonach Eagach in them the winter before last!
The fabric boots you have bought look OK-ish and may last a year or two depending on ho much you get out......but for really rough rocky ground and endless peat bog (near where I live) leather and stiff boots would serve you better in the long run.

In reply to dmorty:


The cheaper brands and the better brands often have similar RRPs in my experience but nobody ever pays the full RRP on the 'cheap' stuff, and it is always half price or so when people actually buy it, while the better brands don't get as heavily discounted. 50% off Mountain Warehouse/Hi Gear/Sports Direct is near enough standard and can still be more than the gear is worth, whereas 50% off RAB/Montane/Mountain Equipment is a real bargain.

In reply to james Campbell:


Cheers - are shoes like this stiff-soled enough though? They're described as "speed hiking" and "trail running" on the site, but people have pointed out that the ones in my original link might be too soft-soled already. Pretty sure mine will be stiffer than the ones I'm replying to though, so... what's the deal with that? Open question to whoever.

In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:

The only thing I could see that I wasn't really sure about with the sole on those was the fact that all the tread seems to go in tram lines from side to side. There are some breaks but I would be concerned on a side sloping clay-muddy path or long wet grass that they might wash out from underneath.

They seem a bit steep price wise. I managed to replace my Quests with the new model for £110 recently by shopping around online. To do this though you need to know exactly what boot suits you and in what size.

OP makes reference to support and ankle height. I believe the current thinking is that (wrt to walking footwear)the boot ankle does nothing to stop you turning an ankle. It is entirely a function of footbed, sole design(so you don't "catch a crab" when picking foot up) and gait. I'll still favour a boot though if I am out for days with lots of rough descents as I have the kind of foot and ankle volume that makes it difficult to otherwise stop my foot sliding forwards on descents. There's a bit of support when traversing steep slopes with ankles rolled into the fall line. I have also on occasion suffered the indignity of digging for a low cut in a bog or hidden muddy stream between tussocky reeds but never a boot

In reply to ciaran1999:

All helpful again, cheers! Don't feel too strongly either way about leather/hybrid, so will prob just make that decision at the time based on what fits best and is affordable.

Another quickie for you - how important, or otherwise, is a proper stiff sole for what I'm planning on doing? You pointed out earlier that the ones I've got are fairly soft, and why that may be bad. However, I know others swear by softer, running-style shoes for (I think) the same sort of terrain. Is it personal preference, kind of like shoe v boot, or would you say stiff is actually better/safer in some way?

In reply to dmorty:

Stiffer (up to a point) is arguably better for walkers less accustomed to long distances, steep slopes and rough ground as stiffer soles give untrained feet more support.

In reply to Ramblin dave:


Thanks - the point about not getting me killed in the meantime is re-assuring! Since they feel like they fit fairly well, I'm tempted towards going with your method and giving these cheap-ish ones a chance

In reply to dmorty:

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but although I've flirted with fabric, i.e. canvas/suede/goretex contraptions I have always found that the membrane fails early in the life of the boot rendering them poor value for money.

Therefore I have always stuck with leather boots, remembering the old adage that a pair of boots should cost you a week's wages and bought ones with one piece leather uppers in a decent thickness and good chunky soles. It is true that they are heavier but I'd contend that over a long hill day their weight is more than compensated for by their stiffness, the ability to edge (particularly on steep grass slopes), the protection from underfoot knobbly ground and generally leaving one's feet less fatigued at the end of the day. Maybe for high summer I'll revert to trainers but otherwise no.

Having said the above, my last three pairs of boots have come used, cheap but barely worn from ebay. All have fitted very well and, if they hadn't, I could easily have sold them all on. There's a lot of hogwash talked about boot fitting...

In reply to dmorty:

I think the sole stiffness preference comes with fitness. If you are walking consecutive days you might find a stiffer sole will make legs more tired as it is heavier to pick up but takes a bit of stress away from the foot if it fits well. Terrain and foot-bed matters too as you don't really want to be feeling what's under your feet if out for more than a day. If you are tired you are more likely to smash your feet down onto pebbles and rocks you would avoid when fresh or fitter. A stiffer sole stops your feet from feeling hammered by that.

In reply to ciaran1999:

Oh yeah - and out of interest, how did you know that the MH ones have a soft sole? I don't think it says on the webpage, so can you tell from the picture or do you have experience with these?

In reply to dmorty:

From what I've seen when browsing in Mountain Warehouse, pretty much everything is priced at ~50% off its supposed "normal" price. As others have noted, this is similar to Sports Direct's approach. (I think both chains must sail very close to the edge of what's legally allowed in terms of misleading pricing). I have occasionally bought stuff from both retailers, but based on the price they were asking, not the supposed "discount". I've also taken some stuff back that failed on first use, and got very poor wear out of other items. Overall, as slong as you buy based on what you pay and set your expectations re quality and longevity based on that, then you are unlikely to be surprised.

I'd also add my voice to those pointing out that the Scarpa SL is by no means guaranteed to give you blisters. My SLs are as comfy as carpet slippers and I find them ideal for Munro-bagging all year round. But if they don't fit your feet, don't bother.

Regarding fabric boots: I'm not keen on them for Munro-bagging. Remember, this is Scotland we're talking about. You are are almost guaranteed to come across water and/or mud underfoot on most Munro outings (anyone ever sunk into a peat hag in fabric boots?) As others have pointed out, mud + mesh => erosion of 'waterproof' membranes. Even if the weather's dry, access to many Munros requires river crossings with no bridge, for which a leather boot with a reasonable ankle height is handy. And a robust sole is almost essential for some of the rough ground you get in the Scottish hills (eg interminable boulder fields), and certainly so in winter.

The most sensible alternative to 'proper' boots, IMO, is fell running shoes which are so light that benefit from that genuinely can outweigh the disadvantages. They are not waterproof, but the point is that getting them wet doesn't matter (in fact they're arguably better for river crossings than a boot for that reason). The main disadvantage is the lack of support: something that you can train to deal with, but I wouldn't particularly recommend that anyone with little hillwalking experience should expect to bag their first Munro in fell running shoes and have happy feet at the end of it.

In reply to ultrabumbly:

Yeah, I learned what comfort and protection from your boots means in a rather painful way when I did Nijmegen marches a few years ago. My boots were the boots I'd trained with and fit my feet perfectly but when it came to the event, marching over 100 miles in four days on mostly tarmac made my feet ache badly - just the muscles and bones took a battering. Okay, I don't do that walking when I'm out in the hills but I realised what a drain foot pain can be and how miserable it made me. A harsh lesson but boy did I learn well!

In reply to Martin W:
All very helpful, cheers!

Just a general update - went to both Tiso and Cotswold today. Got conflicting advice.. One of them suggested the Scarpa Terra as a leather boot option. The other, without me mentioning it, picked out exactly the same boot as a perfect example of what *not* to wear. Their reason being that the sole is far too soft for doing Monros. I'd specifically asked about the thickness of sole at the first shop, and was told it was ok. Be interested to hear what people think about this, I imagine the Terra is fairly well-known.

If the suggestion that the Scarpa Terra is too soft-soled is correct, then I'll definitely return my MH ones (which I'm now leaning towards doing anyway), as they are definitely no more solid than the Terras.

In reply to dmorty:
I got a pair if scarpa terra 6 months ago, decided to get something a bit more 'traditional'. I think they are great. Really comfy and the sole is fine for 3 season walking, wouldn't use them in proper winter conditions tho. Very waterproof too, so far - Brasher conditioning cream does a good job on the leather. I have done a couple of rounds of the munros and I can't see what the problem would be with these boots; I would be wary of paying too much attention to people in outdoor shops...

In reply to mac fae stirling:
Cheers for the input! You've used the Terras on rough, rocky Monros then, and can't see a problem? One shop guy was confident they wouldn't do the job.

I didn't feel entirely confident in the advice of either shop tbh, hence me being straight back on here. Kind of feel like it shouldn't be this difficult, don't know if it's just me being daft or there are actually as many people talking crap out there as it seems.. :P

In reply to dmorty:

I've just been through the new boot buying dilema.

I was looking for a 3 season walking boot and I ended up purchasing these

http://www.tauntonleisure.com/scarpa-men-039-s-r-evo-plus-gtx-boots-brown/p...

After only a couple of bimbles round the Ochils they seem to be mega comfy for me but then I've always suited Scarpa boots. I'm away to Knoydart the morra so will report back if of interest.

The other boots I was very tempted with was

http://www.outbacktrading.co.uk/product/asolo-mens-tribe-gv-walking-boots/

and the lowa renagade

good luck with whatever you decide on

Gaz

In reply to kermit_uk:

Cheers for all the info and suggestions! As mentioned in my last post today, I've been given some duff information by somebody at either Tiso or Cotswold which has confused things a bit in my mind. Can you just confirm, are the shoes you've suggested suitable for Monros and other hills which have steep, loose, rough rocky terrain? Somebody instore said that Scarpa Terras, which I believe will be about as stiff as the ones you've suggested, are no good for the kind of terrain I just described, and that I'd have to get something a lot stiffer (hardly any flex by hand). Is that nonsense..?

In reply to mac fae stirling:

Yeah, there are some places where I will perhaps pay more attention to the shop staff if I know the staff pursue the activities I'm buying kit for and have a lot of knowledge, and others where I will be more wary. My brother once worked for a chain of outdoor supply stores which I won't name and actually got told off and then warned with being fired for not pushing the items they wanted the sales staff to push, and instead gave the customers honest advice and help according to what they were buying for and their budget. It really annoyed him but he couldn't stand to do it and potentially put people off who were keen to get started because they were being pressured into purchases that were so unnecessary or expensive. His bosses didn't see it like that sadly. Unsurprisingly he left. We don't buy from that chain at all.

I get that shops need to turn a profit but surely the best way to help a customer is listen to their needs, budget and then come up with a range of potential options, guide them through each and help bring them to an informed choice they make themselves than make it for them?

In reply to dmorty:

Stiffer soles usually mean more expensive boots, so I can see why you might get that advice in a store... But I am an old cynic... I guess that they might not feel really positive/secure if you were doing a lot of scramblin or something but I think that is getting a bit too pernickety about it all.
I would go up/down any Munro in Terras, outside of winter. If your feet hurt after a day on the hills, the are plenty of good insole options to explore - as a general rule the insoles you get with the boots are rubbish and I always replace them with others with more arch support. Sorry if that adds to the decision making anxiety.... But as I said above, I found the Terras really comfy, waterproof and great for 3 season hillwalking. Would I wear them on the Cuillins? Yip, probably would. Would probably have to buy a new pair after mind you... Joke... Sort of..

I find buying boots a bit of a nightmare, so I understand the anxiety. And you never really know if they fit well until you go up and down a hill or two, by which time you are stuck with them. I have had a few nightmares over the years. So you just have to take the plunge at some point and get a pair and see how it goes.

In reply to mac fae stirling:

Cheers again for all that. Don't worry, it's a 3 season I'm after. Don't see any winter walking/climbing on the horizon too soon, and I want something which also won't feel too overkill if I'm just walking along the canal for example.

Think I'm going with your advice of disregarding the push towards stiff(er) soles. If I end up having bad experiences and decide it's down to softer soles, then fair enough, I'll have learned from experience. If I go with stiffer for the first pair, I'll always wonder if I could have got away with something softer, until I actually try them for myself. As you say, you can think yourself silly, but inevitably have to just take a plunge or two and form some personal experience and opinions!

In reply to mac fae stirling:

Oh, also (for mac fae stirling) - from your experience, would you agree with the suggestion that fabric isn't great for the Scottish hills, and leather is strongly recommended? Have you used fabricy/hybrid boots before the Terras at all? The suggestion was...

In reply to dmorty:

If you're after high quality leather 3 season boots that fit properly I would recommend the Alt-berg Tethera. They come in a huge range of size/width fitting - go to a stockist to get them fitted and you'll have no problems. I use mine all year around and (whisper it) even with crampons in winter.

British company too..

In reply to dmorty:


If stiffness was all that mattered :P we'd all be wearing B3 boots all the time (and I'm sure some shops would be quite happy to sell them)...

In reply to dmorty:


No, I wouldn't agree with that, I don't really have a preference. I have had lots of different boots, some great, some not so great and some complete disasters. Not always 'their' fault tho. I had a fancy pair of Salomon fabric boots that were great but they got saturated in bog water one time, all that lovely cushioned fabric and all, and then subsequently stank so much, no matter what I did with them, that I had to bin them... rancid. I got a pair of cracking chunky leather Raichle [now Mammut] boots that I thought looked the total business but they hurt my feet all the time, so I gave them to my mate. He uses them for gardening...ffs! I got a pair of lovely new generation Scarpa Manta, wore them up and down a dozen hills before I had to admit to myself they were too bloody big... I wept myself to sleep that night. More recently I got a pair of funky La Sportiva S Evo boots. All lovely blue and yellow, lightweight 4 season numbers. Bit of leather, some gortex, nice. They let in water like a sieve. Persevered, should have sent them back, gave up. They live in the shed now, next to the kids wellies. I see it as a kind of punishment. The Terras were a kind of reaction to the Evo's, just a basic traditional leather boot. I like them so far. And I am happy to drive with them on, which is surprisingly handy. I do worry they make me look like a 'rambler' tho.. but that is an ego issue I need to confront. No idea what I will get in the future. I have had fabric boots that I wore out through use and the same with leather. The only boots I truly love are my La Sportiva Nepal Extreme - the 'Yellow ones'. Those are my friends. I am wearing them now. Not really. Every winter when I put my feet in them I am transported to boot nirvana, if such a place exits. I bought them about 12 years ago in Glasgow after a few pints in the Horseshoe Bar. So if there is a moral to this sorry tale it could be that it is probably best to buy your boots when you are pissed.

In reply to mac fae stirling:
Interesting, cheers. Obviously the points raised about benefits of leather are good to bear in mind, but nice to know it's not essential. And regarding shopping pissed, I've actually tried necking a pint as quickly as possible when starting a couple of shopping trips recently. Helps me to stop overthinking everything and getting overly stressed by it all. No regrettable purchases yet..

Realised that I'll need a heavier 4-season pair, as well as the ones I'm currently shopping for, if I ever want to do winter walking (which is quite possible in the future). So makes sense to go as light as possible for these summery ones, to go alongside the (future) heavier duty pair. I'm thinking something like this, as originally suggested by kermit_uk: http://www.gooutdoors.co.uk/mammut-t-element-mid-gtx-mens-hiking-boots-p349...

Anybody have any concerns about that kind of thing for Monros, including rough and rocky ground, in the summer? If not, I think I'm ready to find something similar that fits and get on with it! EDIT - the main reason I'm double-checking the suggestion is that somebody in the reviews suggested they were for low-level use only, not steep rock. but they may just be a pussy :-P

In reply to kermit_uk:
Hi, and cheers again for the suggestions (I think I already replied anyway, can't remember...)

As per my last post (should be just above this in the thread), I'm thinking that I'll go as light as possible with these boots, since I'll need to get a heavier duty pair at some point in the future if I ever want to do winter walking. That would leave me with a nice light pair and a heavier-duty pair to choose from, depending on the circumstances. At the moment I'm thinking of something like the Mammut Elements which you recommended. You got any experience with these, any concerns for using these on the rougher, rockier Monros in summer? If not, then think I'm gonna go for whatever I find that's like them and fits well

EDIT - the main reason I'm double-checking the suggestion is that somebody in the reviews for one of the three you recommended seemed to suggest they were for low-level use only, not steep rock. but they may just be a pussy :-P

In reply to dmorty:


Like you've been doing for two days on this thread?


FWIW, I'd suggest just going with whatever lightweight boots you want just now (even the ones you already bought) and forget 'going alongside' future purchases because you'll likely wear them out quite quickly anyway (something I'd regard as both normal with light footwear on rocky hills and a chance to evaluate your choice without unnecessary agonising and potentially costly mistakes).


No, not really, but please 'Munros', not 'Monros'!

In reply to dmorty:


I was kidding that I spent more time looking for a sleeping bag rather than studying for exams at uni one winter. I think it was true - there's a lot to learn regarding sleeping bags that I can't regret spending ages looking for a perfect bag!

In reply to petestack:


Now, now thought there were clearer-cut right answers which I started this thread tbh. Hence the confusion when I started getting different people saying wildly different things. Have pretty much come to what you said in your "FWIW" paragraph now anyway. Going to try on a pair of the Mammuts, £5 more than the ones I have, and go with whatever seems to fit better.

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/57781774.jpg
(hopefully!)


Ahh, it did seem a bit clunky when typing it.

In reply to dmorty:
Going to try on a pair of the Mammuts, £5 more than the ones I have, and go with whatever seems to fit better.

Go for it. For all our sakes; I am suffering from vicarious retail stress...
You could do the munros in a pair of baseball boots. I wouldn't, but you could. So chill and good luck.

In reply to mac fae stirling:

Suspect the Mammuts are a better buy

In reply to SiGregory:

Your not wrong..

In reply to mac fae stirling:

Back home with the Mammuts on my feet now. Think I'll go somewhere muddy now so there's no way for me to think about taking them back

They felt a wee touch more supportive, but also a bit lighter at the same time, so seemed an obvious option for an extra £5.

Thanks for everybody's input, all very helpful.

In reply to dmorty:

Phew.. I can relax now! Have fun with them.