Bushwalk Australia

Just thought it would be interesting to hear what people think of using high boots instead of “normal” boots and gaiters. I’ve never seen high boots around here but back home Lundhags boots are very popular (at least a while ago when I still lived there) and makes good sense in very wet environments. I’m not sure how they would hold up on really rough rock scrambles but they are very well made. I know some people had theirs for 10-20 years of serious hiking (multi-week trips in northern Sweden, 4 seasons).

I would think they would be more waterproof than short boots + gaiters in water but they are not as high as gaiters. When they do get wet inside they would also take longer to dry I guess. Maybe the laces are too exposed and get caught?

Anyone here got any experience with these kinds of boots?

I think there are other brands with high boots too but Lundhags are the only one I’ve seen in action. Never used them myself. Hm, and as I remember they used to be even higher.
Here's a link http://www.lundhags.se/boots/#listProducts

Interesting post. Many armies world wide use similar or higher cut boots. Rather curious why. I notice with lower cut boots say like the Scarp Trek I get heel blisters where with the higher cut SL3 I do not. Maybe a million plus soldiers can not be wrong They would be a pain to get on off I would imagine unless there is a trick. Certainly would solve the gaiter issue

Cheers

Must confess i have wondered a few times about higher cut hiking boots as I have worn high cut steel cap work boots for work for years and much prefer them to lower cut styles.

I started hiking in a pair of steel toed workboots (low cuts). While they did work, they were uncomfortable, I rolled my ankle a few times, and the steel caps stubbed my toes when I was walking downhill.

Currently I hike in a pair of Danner Sierras I bought from the States. They're 8 inch hunting boots with vibram soles and a Goretex Lining. I have not tested the waterproofness of the boots over an extended period; however I have crossed creeks and hiked in the rain and they kept my foot dry. The vibram soles are also incredibly comfortable stepping over pebbles and rocks and I have not gotten a blister at all from wearing them. High cut hiking boots also seem to give you more ankle support from the way they restrict your ankles. Personally I find them more leech proof as well as you can tuck your pants into your high cut boots.

Disadvantages include: restricted movement- I find my calf muscles hurt slightly more after hiking in high cuts. I don't get the rolling action of my foot as my ankle is basically immoblised. They're also much heavier which make hill climbs harder as you're lifting your foot high up with a heavier weight. I also find that my feet sweat more wearing high cuts. Also, with high cuts the sizing becomes much less forgiving if you pick a wrong size, as you get heel lift if you don't size high cut boots properly.

This is just my 2 cents i guess. I've only had those 2 pairs of hiking boots so i cannot compare the danners with a proper high end hiking boot with a low cut. I like my danners well enough and i'm fine with the disadvantages.

In the Army we use to not lace the last two eyelets to help with movement and seemed to help with shin splints.
You can also lock them of low( a knot?) then loose lace further up, havent tried that but read about it.

Roger

You can do that, but then you have less ankle support. Its a compromise I guess. Wtih regards to the lacing, you can lace them in a specific pattern which reduces heel lift; basically involes you finishing the knot in the middle of your foot(you lace up, stop, thread it into the top 2 holes, and then lace back down), but then again you're more prone to lacebite.

Ive worn high top gp's, they arent as high as that. even so they were heavy, hot, uncomfortable, clumsy and unnecessary (except for firefighting perhaps) (and the fact that i had no choice).

norts wrote:You can also lock them of low( a knot?) then loose lace further up, havent tried that but read about it.

Roger

That's what I've seen too and what I think would be the way to go. I'm not convinced more ankle support is needed/necessary as I want some mobility in my feet/ankles. To me it is more a potential alternative to gaiters in winter as water/snow inevitable gets in between boot and gaiter after a while. On a couple of occasions I have fumbled with cold fingers to close the gaiters again and get a tight seal after emptying snow from inside the gaiters that was squeezed in. And of course when you walk in deep-ish water there is no way I can keep it out of my boots. It seems like a more elegant solution to have a high cut boot. But yeah, heavier of course.

I recently bought a pair of these and love them!> Columbia Bugaboot thermo's. Not super high, but much higher than a standard boot.



I have always been a shoe person, but after deciding to get into snow hiking, I bought some high boots. They are super comfy, but only because the sole is quite flexible. If you buy a high boot with a super stiff sole, your are destined for a sore foot. At least that's been my experience.