Many times, I've seen threads on this forum recommending trail runners or other types of lightweight shoes. The answer is always to wear the type of shoe that is comfortable. I've never seen a thread on the importance of obtaining a proper fit. After reading this free book, I now know how important fit is, and how irrelevant the particular type of shoe is. [url=https://archive.org/details/soldiersfootmili00munsrich][/url]

About six weeks ago, I was going to buy some trail runners to see why everyone liked them. I could not find a single trail runner, running shoe or hiking shoe in the store that fit properly. I wear an 11 1/2 EE shoe, and my heel is narrow. I couldn't even get most shoes over the front of my foot without going to a size that was too long.

The width of the front of the foot expands about a half inch under a load, and people should try on shoes while wearing the heaviest pack they expect to carry. The rear of the foot doesn't expand at all.

Buying a shoe a little too large is not damaging as most problems can be resolved by wearing a heavier sock. However, shoes do not stretch enough for a shoe that is a little too small to work. In most cases, shoes should feel large in the store. The exception is for the person who has had success in buying shoes, and knows the feel of a good fit.

For the new hiker who starts hiking frequently, they will likely find their foot grows a half size to a full size in six months. There goes the theory of buying out the store when you find a shoe that works. The shoe that worked last time may no longer work the next time.

Unfortunately, few manufacturers make a shoe for the normal size foot, and people settle for a size that is too small.

Just as much care should be taken with the shoes a person wears while not hiking, as these can cause foot deformities that affect hiking.

According to the book, normal street shoes (garrison shoes) can work as well as combat boots for an infantryman as long as they are fitted properly. We have a special need for grip on the trail, so our experience will vary.

The chances are, a shoe with a good fit will have a rounded toe box with plenty of room. The side of the shoe will not touch the foot when not under a load, and will touch it very lightly when under a load. There will be from 1/2 to 3/4 inch in front of the toes. Meanwhile, the rear of the shoe will lightly touch the side of the foot so the foot doesn't slide up when walking. In time, the rear of the shoe will conform to the foot.

Many people focus on weight because of the study that said a pound on the foot equals five or six pounds on the back. That was a flawed study because it was done on a treadmill with six volunteers. The pack was heavy, weighing about 85 pounds, and they used boots weighing up to five pounds. Jardine did the calculations for how much energy it takes to carry an extra pound in the shoes along a trail. He didn't mention how much it would hurt to carry a pound less with shoes that caused foot deformities.

My point is the ultimate criteria should be if the shoe fits, is comfortable, and doesn't cause any foot deformities after long use. My solution is military combat boots. Others might prefer sandals made from a car tire.

People often say "If I had $500 to spend on gear, I'd spend $400 on a sleeping bag and $100 on the rest of the gear." (Adjust for inflation.) I'd say spend $350 on shoes and $150 on the rest of the gear. Maybe $350 is too much, but it highlights the critical nature of the right shoes.

My next pair of shoes will be recraftable as the top is generally good for four or five replacements of the soles and heels. My combat boots have lasted 2,300 miles so far on the original soles. I keep them covered with Gorilla tape to prevent wear. There is no midsole of the type that breaks down. I may have to replace the inserts soon, but they are only $18. There is no wear on the top except for a couple smooth spots. There is not a single broken stitch. There are no signs of wear in the lining. Now I'm looking for a shoe that looks similar to a low cut combat boot, but I haven't found one.

This doesn't mean combat boots are best for everyone. What I'm implying is the proper footwear for many people will likely not be what is stylish or popular.

I have been saying here and elsewhere for years that the best pair of shoes is the one that fits YOU. People keep asking for footwear recommendations and that's my stock answer. No two peoples' feet are alike (in fact, my own left and right feet are quite different), so, IMHO, brand and style recommendations are useless.

My own problem is extremely narrow heels. I've always had a problem getting a fit because of that--either the front is too narrow (a definite no-no) or the heels slip and cause blisters. Now that I have severe bunions and hammertoes (evidently hereditary--my mother had them and two of my four children have them), my forefoot is of course wider than it used to be. Finding the combination of a wide and high toe box plus extra narrow heel, plus pronation control, isn't easy. Fortunately I have one unworn pair of the 2007 Montrail Hardrocks (from before Columbia Sportswear took them over and changed the lasts) before I have to start looking again. I shopped like crazy and found five pair before they disappeared from the market for good. They fit as though they were custom made for me! Once the last pair of those goes, I'll have to start shopping again.

I never was able to get either a proper fit or proper support in any boots, especially with the heel problem. Plus Goretex linings turn my feet into a sauna and give me blisters, and there are no women's boots these days without Goretex. (I can't get a heel fit in men's or unisex footwear.)

When I tried on my first pair of trail runners that fit, I was amazed. Not only were they comfortable, they supported my feet and ankles. In fact, when I tried deliberately to turn my ankles in the Montrail Hardrocks,, I couldn't! In boots, I was forever turning my ankles, barely missing falling. In addition, I've never had a blister since I switched!

The best place to look for a trail shoe, IMHO, is a reputable running shoe store that carries many different styles and sizes. Check with the running clubs in your community.

And once you've found the perfect footwear for you, buy up a bunch. It's as sure as death and taxes that the manufacturer will change them completely next year!

For the new hiker who starts hiking frequently, they will likely find their foot grows a half size to a full size in six months.

This sentence immediately points out the problem with giving advice to others about shoes, because it doesn't matter what the author thinks is "likely" to happen, if it turns out (as in the case of my own feet) that this statement is completely inapplicable. My feet are the same size now as they were 40 years ago. They are the same size at the end of a 200 mile hike as at the start of it.

As for the author's statement that there is such a thing as a "normal foot", this is much like the "average person" who may exist, but averages being what they are, "average persons" are a blend of 49% male and 51% female.

I think this thread will lend itself well to everyone trotting out their own favorite infobits and stories & feelings about feet and footware ...


How do you separate the two?? I.e., how can the particular type of shoe be unimportant if "fit" is? I use a very particular type and model of shoe (and just as OM suggested is a good idea, I bought 8 pairs of these a month or so ago). I wear this shoe because I don't get a good "fit" from most other options.

In terms of a pound on the feet being equivalent to several on the back: regardless of study methodology, I can "feel" the approximate truth of this. And just think through the literal dynamics of this --- feet going up-and-down constantly while the body and the pack move more laterally. So, for example, if wearing snowshoes or crampons or any foot "add-on" like that, I'll definitely take it off and strap it to my pack as soon as walking on snow becomes not too difficult in just shoes. Because it's easier.


I can't recall ever seeing or hearing an assertion that the best choice is what's stylish or popular.

Feet are complicated. I've no doubt that getting the right footwear is the single hardest "gear" issue in coming up to speed in backpacking. I definitely agree also that it's the place where you can least (as in: not at all) rely on what other people like and/or recommend.

I think that trail runners get a lot of recommendations just based on a whole lot of experience. Most long distance hikers wear trail runners. The sheer number of people who choose this option today (and are happy with and successful at it) suggests to me that for those that can keep from carrying substantially heavy loads and don't have specific foot issues that require something else --- then trail runners are an excellent suggestion as a place to start.

Especially given the generations of still-living hikers who grew up "knowing" that you had to wear boots because anything else was just irresponsible and/or ridiculous.

I'd point out that trail runners offer benefits beyond just less weight. Less blisters (less of a sauna-like microclimate around the feet). They get wet faster/easier, but you can "walk them dry". I desire (and carry) no separate footwear for camp use or creek crossings. Water crossings are very simple --- barefoot occasionally, or just walk through in my shoes, no stopping necessary. I've waited half an hour or more each at multiple little water crossings with boot-clad groups while they swap footwear back and forth. And I've seen boot wearers do challenging creek crossings in pretty minimal footwear in order to keep their boots dry. This is never an issue for me in shoes.

And shoes are less expensive to replace (sort of the offset to the "less durable than boots" aspect), and less expensive to try out and find what works --- given how hard it is to get the fit right on *any* footwear.

I'm certainly not saying that shoes are right for everyone. I would suggest that they're much, much (much) more likely to end up as the right choice for the average backpacker than are the combat boots of any nation or generation. I do realize and accept that combat boots of today are different than the three different models I had intimate experience with back in my youth (standard Viet Nam era combat boots, jungle boots, and Bundeswehr Fallshirmjaeger Stiefeln).

Aimless, please forgive me for using the word "normal." I am actually trying to give as little advice as possible for the "right" shoe, while at the same time trying to get people thinking about shoe fit.

To keep the thread from spreading too broadly at once, I'll focus on one thing. BrianLe found exception to the point that the type of shoe isn't as important at the fit. Let me give the background on that. As an experiment, they took 397 soldiers and divided them into three groups. One group wore a street shoe (garrison shoe), another wore the old combat boots, and I think the third wore the new Munson boot. Each soldier was carefully fitted by an officer or NCO trained in fitting shoes. Then they took them on a 117 mile march with days between 8 and 21 miles.

385 soldiers completed the hike. The 12 that dropped out dropped out for reasons other than foot problems - sickness, other duties, etc. The worst foot injury was a pinhead blister that was essentially gone by the next day.

What I'm taking from this is some people may not be able to find a good fit in trail runners which are popular now. Others may not be able to find a good fit in the other extreme of boots. What I took from the book is that a good fit is not what many people think it is, and they have foot issues to prove it. (Granted, some foot problems can be hereditary.)

I think you make some great points Gershon. All of them are in line with my experience.

My feet do get bigger when I hike. I've given away brand new Merrells that I bought a half size too small and couldn't wear them for more than an hour or two of hiking. And they've gotten bigger of the years too. Or maybe shoes have gotten smaller? Either way since I was 20 I've gone from a 10.5 to 11.5 now in most brands.

I think almost every shoe has a toe box that is too narrow for the "normal" foot, and I'm sure this is a matter of style, not fit.

As to any style, or "Type" of shoe, being as good as another if made right and fit right, I think to a large degree that's accurate. We might except high heels and snow shoes and others outright but for the most part, yes, that's true.

Another truth is how good people are at ignoring fit while paying attention to other things, like style, weight, or function. Fit, by definition, meaning it's not going to damage your foot or back when you wear it, is often not even given any thought at all.

One of the main things to consider about fit is how your body responds to ill fitting shoes. How they affect your legs, hips, back, and all the way up to your neck because you're always compensating for that ill fit. The long term effects of that can be pretty hard.

I wish I could afford to buy eight pairs of shoes that I really liked. One of the biggest problems I have with shoes is that style is always the driving factor behind my choices. The odds of me wearing a pair out that I really like and being able to replace them are almost nil.

First of all, I think I need to define the object of this discussion in my mind. First of all, I'll state what it is NOT. It is NOT to convince anyone to use combat boots. It is to bring some science to fitting shoes so people have a better idea what to look for when they go in the store. If a person knows the science of shoe fitting, they should be able to go to WalMart and find a pair of shoes that will be comfortable. If they don't know the science, then they may test many pairs of shoes before accidentally finding a comfortable shoe.

First, let's look at the amazing things a foot does. First there is the heel strike, which absorbs impact. Then there is what I call the "foot flop" where the front of the foot lowers to the ground. Next is the push-off which should be done mostly with the balls of the feet.

With each step, a force of approximately .06 times the person's weight, including pack weight is transmitted in a horizontal direction through the balls of the feet. If you have a fish scale, multiply your weight by .06 and pull on the fish scale until it reads that weight. I'm not saying the feet are generating this force. Much of that can be done by other muscles. But it is transmitted through the balls of the feet.

Then the weight shifts to the toes which mostly provide balance, but some people push off with the toes.

Consider a person takes about 1,000 steps a mile with each foot. It is more when there are hills and the step is shortened. For a 10 mile hike, they take 10,000 steps. Pull on that fish scale 10,000 times and see how your finger feels the next day. Repeat this for a week, and there will be problems.

Now for one problem area.

1. I would say most shoes have a pointed front. Bend your hand a little and lay it on the table while pressing lightly on your four fingers. Squeeze them gently from the sides until they come together. The index finger should slide under the middle finger and the little finger should slide under the ring finger. If you look carefully, you will see the joint on the outside of the finger moves outward a tiny bit. This is how bunions form.

The toe box should be wide enough so that if you could bend your toes horizontally, there would be enough room to bend them.

Before we go on, try on a few pairs of your shoes and then tell us what you find.

(If someone knows how to add a poll to this type of post,it would be a big help. Thanks.)

Maybe. I've not been able to do that in a long time. There's a lot to be said for quality materials and workmanship.

This is such a complicated topic --- and FWIW I certainly don't put myself forward as any sort of "expert" !


This assumes a heel-to-toe gait. Not everyone walks that way; some prefer a toe-first approach. The footwear "impacts" this too (pun intended) --- some footwear will tend to push you towards a certain type of gait.

One problem (of so many) in fitting shoes correctly is that I find that even if you do find a true expert, they might or might not be able to tune their personal expertise to the complete set of your personal needs. My foot doctor is certainly a foot expert, but always wants to put me in some sort of supportive boot. I talked him out of this by pointing out that of the couple of hiking boots on the "approved list" he gives to his patients, neither offer a wide enough toe box for one of the conditions he's treated me for.
And certainly just trusting your feet to whoever happens to be working in a shoe store at the time you drop in is like, IMO, spinning the roulette wheel and betting everything on a particular number.

Feet are really complicated; about 25% of all of the bones in your body are in your feet, with an associated number (and complexity) of joints, tendons, muscles, nerves, blood vessels, and likely other things I'm not thinking of just now. I definitely agree that it's helpful to know some basic things a priori, like whether both feet are the same size (!), whether you pronate or supinate, high arch or low or 'normal', if a particularly wide shoe is normally used/needed, of course whether there are any known conditions.

Beyond that, however, I think it's also helpful to tune expectations, to realize that at least for some of us, you can't just buy a shoe "off the shelf" no matter how much you [think you] know about your feet and be certain that they'll work for you if you're hiking a lot of miles and/or with a lot of weight on your back. This is, btw, one of the benefits of less expensive footwear; if I buy a pair of trail runners and then 50 miles into a trip I find they're making my feet sore (which has happened), it's not as big a loss as if I had done the same with a new pair of expensive boots.

If just doing relatively short trips, however, I don't think that for most people it's worth a lot of stress; a blister or two or some limited soreness that wears off after the trip isn't a big deal. It can be a big deal if you're hiking long distances.

Good points Brian.

Another thing that's important to consider is that shoes are still made by hand to a large degree. That leaves some wiggle room in the fit of any of them, and some room for error in construction.

When I can, I'll try on more than one pair in the same style and size if I like them.

Bill,

I agree the quality at WalMart may be lacking. (How is that for an understatement?)

Brian,

You do make some good points. It's not worth worrying about shoes if a person goes on an occasional hike as long as the shoe is comfortable. The problems develop when a person walks or hikes frequently and the shoe starts to distort their foot. The ill-fitted shoe that feels comfortable may have the seeds of the foot's destruction. As Bill pointed out, it can have a ripple effect all the way up to the neck.

The next time for concern is when a person is approaching their personal limits they can sustain without injury each day. This person would also constantly be working on extending these limits.

In my opinion, a person can prevent a lot of problems by losing weight to the mid-range of normal for their height. And as you said, carry a light pack. (Bud lite?)

I have owned several pairs of combat boots. The first pair was given to me by Uncle Sam whilst at Basic Training. There was this guy fitting me, and he was very thorough and kept changing the size until he was satisfied. Those boots ended up being very uncomfortable because they were too small. I was able to get boots that were comfortable, but only when I sized them myself. However, they still aren't as comfortable as my trail runners. For the record, I wear an 11.5 EEEE. New Balance is the only company that gets me shoes that fit perfect. They keep changing styles, but the fit is usually spot on. I have also noticed that if you buy a light shoe that is a little big, that fit isn't as important as with a boot. A boot that is too large with cause blisters. With a heavy boot, you are relying on enough friction between the skin, sock and boot interior to lift the boot with the foot.

Thanks, FinallyME, I'll check out the New Balance.

If I'm not mistaken I think I read just recently that New Balance is made in the USA. That's a plus.

Some is, some isn't. They seem to be using Asian components more and more.

Unfortunately New Balance trail runners seem to be going to all minimalist versions and don't use the last I need (SL-2 with wide and high toe box, high arch, narrow heel, and pronation/motion control). The regular runners I have work fine for me but their tread is a bit iffy for trail use. Until my last pair of the 2007 Montrail Hardrocks wear out, I don't have to worry.