Hiking v.s Running

Posted by: Chattaben

Hiking v.s Running - 07/11/10 11:50 AM

Recently, I went to buy a new pair of running shoes. The place I went specializes in running/walking so I knew I would get the best advice. No different than going to an outdoor outfitter for gear. I go in, the guy asks me to take off socks and shoes so he can watch/analyzes my foot and stride. During our talk about how much/how far I run, he tells me that most people's feet "flatten out" around the 5-6 mile mark and the toes can rub/hit the front of the shoe. So he recommends that I get at least a size 10 (normal shoes, I wear a 9.5) and if I were running more than 6-7 miles at a time he would have told me to get a 10.5. I told him that I also backpack/hike. He mentioned that my boots/shoes for hiking should also be at least a size 10 because of how the foot flattens after so many miles. What do you all think about this advice? Any truth to it? When I went to buy my boots (well before i bought these running shoes), the guy at the outfitter didn't mention this at all and told me that my boots needed to be a tight but comfortable fit. I have noticed on some of my longer hiking days (10 miles or so) that my toes do hit the front of my 9.5 size boots. Does the advice on running shoes correlate to hiking boots/shoes?
Posted by: Pika

Re: Hiking v.s Running - 07/11/10 12:49 PM

The advice you are getting is consistent with my experience. Also, the "enlarging feet" phenomenon seems to become more pronounced with age.
Posted by: aimless

Re: Hiking v.s Running - 07/11/10 02:56 PM

"The proof of the pudding is in the eating." -- old saying --

I presume you have already hiked enough to be able to test this theory against the reality of your own feet. You say that you have noticed this phenomenon on some of your longer hiking days, so that would argue that, for you, this advice applies, but only on some of your longer hiking days.

That other theory, that the fit needs to be somewhat snug, but overall comfortable, is right on the money, too. However, if your feet change and your shoes do not, then the fit will not stay the same from the start of the hike to the end of the day, rendering that bit of wisdom less useful.

What you need to do is take what you know about your own hiking habits (how often do you hike 10 or more miles) and decide whether you need to optimize the fit during the first 7 or 8 miles, or optimize fit at the end of a long day, to avoid rubbing which could cause lingering problems for subsequent days.

P.S. My feet do NOT swell or flatten, no matter how far I hike; they are extremely small, narrow and bony, so there's practically nothing there that could swell. The advice you are getting seems to apply more generally to larger feet than mine, and applies with greater force to people with the largest shoe sizes.
Posted by: OregonMouse

Re: Hiking v.s Running - 07/11/10 11:38 PM

Our feet are one of the most individual parts of our bodies, and since we're all a little different anyway, you'll have to discover what works best for you. Unfortunately this usually means a lot of $$$ spent on footwear that you end up not being able to use, since it's pretty hard to figure out how a shoe is going to work on the trail by hiking around on your living room carpet!

A lot also depends on the weight of the pack you carry and on any extra body weight you haul around (I'm unfortunately something of an expert on the latter).

I haven't found my feet swelling, but I do find that they tend to spread. This has been a cumulative effect over the years, aided by past pregnancies (which is like carrying a 30 lb. pack in the wrong place!). Long, long ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I wore a size 7.5 shoe. Now it's size 9.5 in some shoes, 10 in others!
Posted by: DJ2

Re: Hiking v.s Running - 07/12/10 10:55 AM

For all of the reasons mentioned so far I wear size 12 shoes, even though my foot is about a size 10.

The longer size also accomodates my wide foot, gives me room for added insoles and/or socks, makes them easier to take on and off and protects my toes from touching the front of the shoes.

Posted by: Trailrunner

Re: Hiking v.s Running - 07/12/10 01:36 PM

Personally, I always buy running shoes a half size larger. I like my hiking boots to be a tad large too but I think it's more important with running shoes.

As always, YMMV.
Posted by: potbeliedmtbiker

Re: Hiking v.s Running - 08/04/10 04:02 PM

Are you familiar with "Superfeet" brand arch supports? They are nice because the do not allow your foot to pronate nearly as much as they might if you had the standard flimsy insole. If you go into almost any running/hicking shop, they should be familiar with them.

I personally use them in all my shoes, even my everyday shoes. I use Salomon XA Pro shoes with Superfeet inserts for running and hiking and i have had great luck with them.

I guess what I am saying is look into Superfeet. They will potentially keep your feet from pronating and keep them in the more neutral position keeping your feet from extending...
Posted by: Wolfeye

Re: Hiking v.s Running - 08/07/10 02:44 PM

I know that my feet will flatten out by midday, and this seems true no matter if I've been running, hiking, or just tromping around doing chores. So I buy my shoes in the afternoon, and just get what's comfortable. I've never heard of anyone buying shoes at incrementally larger sizes depending on how many miles they plan on covering. Buy what's comfortable, and plan on readjusting your laces a few times a day during breaks. By the logic of your shoe salesman, you'd have to buy several pairs of the same shoe, then pick the pair of the day depending on how much you plan to hike/run. That'd be overkill.