Brooks ghost 5 running shoes vs hiking boots

This month I wore a pair of running shoes while out on the trail and received a lot of concerned looks by the hiking community. Why did I wear them? Well, I have an expensive pair of heavy asolo hiking boots that keep my feet warm and moist which is a perfect recipe for blisters unless time is spent with boots off to allow for feet to dry out. I bought my running shoes on sale for $90.00 and put a little over 300 trail miles on them so far this month. My pack never weighed over 32 lbs and I strictly used them for trail use only (off-trail I strictly recommend hiking boots). Granted, I did prance and frolic through a few wet spots out there but well worth it. My feet stayed completely dry and I received zero blisters. When my feet did get wet, they would dry out quickly. If they didn't dry out fast enough, a dry change of socks fixed the problem (I always carry two pairs of socks like most should). Lastly, I did pair these running shoes with "super feet" insoles because I have flat feet, not sure if made any difference in durability. Lastly, think about all that extra energy burned on lifting up that heavy boot over miles and miles of terrain vs. lifting up the light running shoe.

Many light-weight hikers are nearly as light as trail running shoes and perform well off-trail. I ditched the big boots ten years ago, and never looked back!

There are many light hikers and trail running shoes - of varying quality. Be sure you match the sole tread with your activity. I prefer an aggressive tread, made of a softer stickier rubber, because I do a lot of off-trail on granite slabs. Were I to simply hike trails, I would choose a less aggressive tread because they are easier to walk in.

The only down side I have seen is that the light hikers and trail running shoes do not last as long as a boot. In the long run it costs more. And the insole (Superfeet) are $$expensive!!. BUT, to me a comfortable shoe and no blisters in years is worth it.

There's a difference between tennis shoes/running shoes and trail running shoes.

Trail shoes will offer more protection and have a stiffer sole. That gets you (over the long term) a lot better support. Running shoes made for paved surfaces won't have the tread or the stiffness needed to keep your feet happy over the long haul.

A lot of ultralighters do use street shoes for hiking, with mixed results...

All the benefits of the shoes you wear, plus the benefits of having a shoe made for hiking, can be had with a trail runner. I've been using trail runners for a number of years, with no problems once I find one that fits. Street shoes - yeah, I hiked in some "walking shoes" on a trail. When I hit a slippery patch I fell flat - I wasn't expecting it, since in my trail shoes I wouldn't have had a problem. But down I went... Just not the same.

I switched to trail shoes a few years back. I have used them with a heavy pack (over 50lbs) and off trail. I also have weak ankles. I wear boots in the winter in snow.

My two cents: I wear my Chacos for non-winter trail outings carrying less than 40 lbs. Occaisionally I stub/bloody a toe, but the ventilation and comfort outweigh that for me. If I wanted more protection for that type of activity, I'd be wearing either some light trail runners (I use the merrell mix master aeroblock) or my approach shoes (Garmont Dragontail).

I wear Brooks Ariels....not hiking shoes but running shoes and they are fabulous...along with short gaiters.
I tried using Tevas but I hike in the Sierra where a lot of trails are dusty and it was great to just trek thru water, but then on the other side when the dust got under the straps it rubbed my feet raw...no sandals for me anymore.