Preface

If you spend your whole time walking along designated paths, then there may not be too much of relevance in this article. If however, you have a more "as the crow flies" approach to distance trekking, and take on uncultivated terrain, then you'll know that some "short-cuts" are nightmarishly illusory while others are a joyous success (accompanied by an equally illusory feeling that nature itself has been cheated). So, if you enjoy the partial lottery of venturing off the beaten path, read on ...

Test subject: Reference Foot Size: 9 (EU43) / Medium Width
Kit Tests: Winter, Summer
Disclaimer: None required (items not provided by manufacturers)
 

Contents

• The Intro: Don't Let Me Down
• Ultralight vs Durability
• Conditions: Wet & Cold (Sub-Zero)
• - A Brief Note on the Goretex Mania / Fetish
• Conditions: 3-Season (Mixed Terrain)
• Conditions: Dry & Hot (Rocky Terrain)
• The Outro: Return In Style?
• Product Images

 

Context

Intro:  Don't Let Me Down

The fit of footwear is so individual that we're not going to do our normal review. Instead we're simply going to mention a few items of footwear that have impressed us. If you're trekking in places where you cannot afford your footwear to fail, these items may be of interest.

The point of Scramble can be summed up in two words: "trekking independence". What this means is a) kit should facilitate trekking over terrain that isn't prescribed in any way as suitable "trail", and b) carrying sufficient food supplies to allow one to roam freely without being tethered to re-supply points. Due to where we test gear: Scotland and Wales (mainly Wales recently), this is simulated (i.e. it's a discipline - re-supplying unless pre-planned on very long trips is simply not allowed - thus during tests we carry between ~8 [in winter] and up to 12 days [in summer] of food supplies).

Food is heavy, and amid all the gear hype in ultralight reviews it is rarely mentioned, yet carrying a lot of food will stress packs and footwear. During a trek, I'll burn approximately 6000 kcals per day, yet carry a max of ~2200 kcals. That 3800 kcal deficit, after a few days begins to use up body fat stores. But just 2200 kcals per day (which is low) comes to around 600g (at a calorie density of 3.75 kcal / gram). 600g per day over one week = 4.2kg, 10 days = 6kg. This amount of food will take up (approximately) 14 to 20L of pack space.

Adding 5kg to your kit will put a load burden on your pack and also on your knees and ankles. At Scramble we're completely on board with much of what the ultralight community preach, but there are two categories of kit where we part company: packs and footwear.

If you're in the middle of nowhere, you simply cannot afford for either one of these to fail. So although we use relatively lightweight packs (like the Crux AX50 or the Blue Ice Warthog 40), they're certainly not ultralight - but I'd put my house on them not failing. The same durability view-point carries over to footwear, but there are other reasons for our departure from lightweight when it comes to footwear, and we'll go into these in this piece.

The Middle of Nowhere

Ultralight vs Durability

Reading reviews and articles from the ultralight community the impression one is left with is that ultralight backpackers cover the ground like zen monks, gliding tippy-toed across the surfaces of high grass, golden petals and shimmering rock.

Like any religion, there's often a disparity between stated orthodoxy and actual experience. There's nothing wrong whatsoever about reducing pack weight, but I would suggest that such a quest can be taken too far. It's interesting to read ultralight articles and reviews and to note a particular recommended product, then search for customer reviews in outlets selling that product. I've done this numerous times and it's quite illuminating. One often discovers customers detailing their disappointment about how the product failed, sometimes during its initial outing. Specs are one thing, actuality another.

"You also have to honestly ask yourself whether you really need the kind of protection that high boots give on the kind of trails you hike" - backpackingnorth.com

That's a fair point (from a Finnish ultralight trekker who spent a number of years in the US) and belies a particular assumption: you're actually on a path or trail. My impression, especially of the US ultralight community is that they spend an awful lot of time walking along trails. Well if I'm on a path, then of course trail shoes will suffice, but for anyone who covers many miles over uncultivated terrain, a pair of ultralight trekking sandals or trail running shoes are, in our assessment, generally insufficient.

For example, just in Wales (pictured right above and also below), there's a great deal of marsh, often it's covered in large clumpy mounds which are in turn covered in long, wind-strewn, dry "horeshair" grass, like some demonic side-parting, which acts to cover the clumpy ups and boggy downs hidden beneath. The step differential between your foot going into bog and standing on hard uneven grassy clumps can be 3 or 4 feet (sometimes more); the problem is you often can't tell whether your next step's footing is going to be a solid jolt or an empty slide into bog.

I'd question Chris Townsend's claim that this simply boils down to untrained ankles: "doing exercises to strengthen your ankles is better than splinting them in heavy, rigid boots". I think you can do both. Yoga and Tai Chi will provide you with strong flexible ankles, for example.

Below we'll mention a pair of approach shoes (pictured above) that have worked well, but such items sacrifice ankle support and require gaiters. Deep, sucking bog and marsh simply swallows shoes; they're ripped off your feet as you yank yourself out - if you're lucky, you'll locate them; if not, you've an uncomfortable time ahead. So it's not just about ankle support.

There are many excellent points raised by the ultralight community in regard to footwear and I'd strongly recommend the article from Backpacking North called "Give your feet a break". It provides an almost direct counter to much of what is said here, and for that reason alone is well worth a read.

For us, it comes down to outright reliability, durable protection from all kinds of terrain (not just rugged rocky trails), support and a secure fit (i.e. something that can't be ripped, pulled or sucked off your feet).
 

---

Wet & Cold (Sub-Zero)

Datasheet

Manufacturer's Page

 

Altberg Bergen Boots

"Possibly the best all terrain combat boot that Altberg have ever made"

The history of Altberg is an interesting one and begins in the 1920s. One of the few companies that have resisted the desire to move manufacturing outside the UK, they've become the premier boot maker in the country, making boots for walkers, motorcyclists, gamekeepers, farmers, and service personnel. The Bergens are aimed at the latter category, but it's not just the army that lug heavy loads over long distances. We do too.

Altberg offer their boots in half sizes and uncommonly in three widths (narrow, medium and wide).

For reference I'm a size 9 medium width. The Bergens fit like a glove. Ideal in cold and wet weather, I wear a thick pair of trekking socks which don't necessitate the use of a liner sock.

Altberg's blurb:

Lightweight, cold, wet weather boot, with a Sympatex waterproof, breathable lining, and a Vibram micro, shock absorbing sole. The Alpine design one piece leather upper is suited to more extreme conditions, and the excellent ankle support and underfoot protection are suited to rough, mountainous terrain – however, the boot is lightweight enough for use in more urban, mixed terrain, conditions. The Bergen boot has seen operational use in Canada, Finland, and Northern Germany, and has been acknowledged as one of the best cold/wet weather boots in Europe.

That's a pretty fair summary. The key is their use of just one piece of leather for the upper, minimising stitching. The lacing system is superb, locks and doesn't loosen throughout the day.

The only thing I'd add is that these boots excel in the snow, mud, marsh, bog, across streams and up in the mountains. The only time my feet have felt battered in these boots is after a long bridging road section, where I covered just over 20 miles most of which was on road and paving.

As with all waterproof boots, what keeps water out will keep water in! For this reason a pair of waterproof trousers that seal at the ankle are very useful, this can prevent ingress during a quick dash across even deep streams.

Keela's Lightning trousers almost completely "seal" the Bergens at the ankle

Summary

Altberg's Bergens are the most comfortable boots I've ever worn. If the world ever turns to shit, this is the boot I'm taking with me.

 

---

Before we continue ...

A Brief Note on the Goretex Mania / Fetish

With regard to the two (now discontinued) items below, the manufacturer (in this case Dachstein) managed to avoid the mindless and rather idiotic ritual of sticking Goretex in anything with a sole. This fetish has become a mania and it's becoming almost impossible to buy a boot that doesn't "feature" a Goretex (or some other waterproof) membrane. Not everyone likes to trap water inside their boot!

When it comes to waterproof membranes in boots and shoes, there is a simple, condition-dependent question to ask.

For cold (and especially sub-zero) conditions it's this: 
- Do I want to prevent water entering my footwear? The answer is YES.

For mild to hot conditions it's this:
- Do I want to prevent water exiting my footwear? The answer is NO.

What you want for a warm / hot weather boot or shoe is the ability for it to drain. What keeps water out also keeps water in. For winter footwear, waterproofing makes sense as you'll often wear it in combination with gaiters or waterproofs and thus the likelihood of water ingress is minimised. However, this is not the case in the warmer seasons, where it matters much less if your feet get wet as (with reasonable drainage) they will dry out (rather than freeze).

If you trap water inside the shoe (via a GTX membrane for example) it won't dry out and your feet will remain moist and prone to blister. In summer, I carry lightweight waterproof shorts for the simple reason that my trousers (below the knee) will dry out quickly and so getting wet in warm weather is no big deal. However, if my shoes or boots are waterproof, then water will slowly migrate from trouser to sock into boot and remain trapped there. So I'd have to stop, take off the shoes and try and dry them out (and this will happen with or without gaiters). Genius!  In hot conditions (regardless of elevation), whether dry and dusty or hot and saturated you want water to exit your footwear. As importantly, you want your footwear to "breathe" and no matter the marketing spin, waterproof (membrane) footwear will never be as breathable as its non-waterproof counterpart.

Solution: Resist waterproof membranes in warm / hot weather footwear and demand proper drainage solutions from manufacturers.
 

---

3-Season (Mixed Terrain)

Datasheet

Google Search

 

Dachstein Super Ferrata LTH MC Approach Boots

Close to perfection ... the last of its kind?

In an earlier incarnation of this post, we wrote:

Scramble's ideal [3 season] boot is yet to be invented, but it would likely be a cross between the Spursinn Approach Shoe (~80%, see below) and [... the] Meindl Desert Fox (~20%). Taking the Meindl's drainage ability, a little of its ankle support and some of its outright toughness and keeping the fundaments of the Spursinn, you'd have a great lightweight scrambling boot for all but the winter months.

Almost immediately after posting that, we stumbled upon the Super Ferrata MC LTH boots ("SF" from hereon) and a couple of us have been using the SF for most of our non-winter treks for the last three years.

What's quoted above is a pretty good summary of the SF approach / speed hiking boot. It's extremely tough, it drains and vents really well (via its side panels), and as you'd expect from an "approach" based boot, it's outstanding on rocky terrain. The SF boot has proven to be a stellar, all-round, 3-season performer (across bog and marsh, river crossings, scrambling and climbing over rock and across scree). 

The SF boot provides a little more cushioning and support than the Spursinn and the Perwanger leather upper is extremely durable and has natural water resistance (without the need for any further proofing).

The Super Ferrata - Goretex-free, breathable with excellent drainage.

The SF boot has a neoprene ankle cushion allowing a good degree of movement around the achilles while providing support for the ankle.  The lacing allows the fit to be fine-tuned from across the toes to the ankle. The Vibram Pinter sole was designed by, and is exclusive to Dachstein (more on this in the next section).

The Super Ferrata's feature a neoprene cushioned ankle support and the (exclusive to Dachstein) Vibram Pinter sole.

A similar looking boot is Scarpa's Mojito Hike. It's more of a pure speed-hiking boot than an approach-boot, but it's quite similar.  The Dachstein uses Perwanger leather and the Scarpa uses "Crazy Horse" leather, both are high quality, though I'd argue Perwanger is perhaps the superior boot leather.  

Scarpa make a similar looking boot which of course is GTX, cannot drain, is far less breathable and uses a possibly inferior boot leather.

Of course the Scarpa Mojito, like practically every boot by practically every manufacturer forces a Goretex membrane on you and unlike the Dachstein Super Ferrata MC LTH, it has no drainage or venting panels. Instead, you will have Gore's promise of "breathability" but unfortunately will have to live without that, in reality.

The Dachstein SF is very close to perfect (at least in my opinion), but it's not quite there ...
 

Any Negatives?

The only negative to speak of is to do with the neoprene ankle cushioning:

1. It's the only part of the boot that seems susceptible to wear, and I'm not sure how easy it would be to replace / repair it, if it failed, and
2. When the boots are wet, they're not the easiest to get on.  They're a snug fit anyway (which, in use, is what you want), but when wet, the neoprene ankle cushioning makes getting them on a bit of a struggle. In such circumstances, I can only get them on by kneeling and placing my foot in vertically with my body weight forcing my feet in (i.e. I can't necessarily just sit on my arse and pull them on). Once they get past a certain point they slip in no problem.

That's pretty much it for the negatives. 
 

Summary

Dachstein made an outstanding boot in the Super Ferrata, but have since been assimilated by the Goretex borg and perhaps we'll never see a boot that doesn't trap water inside it again. I hope not. Currently, the only version of the Super Ferrata available is its Goretex doppelganger.

---

Dry & Hot (Rocky Terrain)

Datasheet

Detailed Specification

 

Dachstein Spursinn Approach Shoe

The Spursinn is (was) an approach / speed hiking shoe with a fortified midsole that provides support and reduces torsional twisting. The Vibram Pinter sole is superb on harsh rocky surfaces and really comes into its own scrambling over rock and scree. It's less effective in the lowlands on wet boggy terrain; so that's the compromise. However, we found with the addition of a trail running gaiter (like the Kantju from Alpkit) the shoe stays on your feet as you retrieve your leg from deep sucking marsh.

The Spursinn with Alpkit's Kantju Trail Running Gaiter.

One of the reasons the Spursinn has been so good in the mountains is its strong ESS shank in the mid-sole which protects the arch of the foot. ESS stands for EVA-Solid-Sponge, a highly compressed Ethylene Vinyl Acetate (EVA) which is lightweight and flexible (and has a high upper/lower temperature tolerance). The ESS shank acts like a steel shank but with more flex and provides superb protection for the sole of the foot on sharp rock edges.

The Spursinn's Vibram Pinter sole.

Although the Spursinn (or at least the incarnation referenced here) is no longer made by Dachstein, a strong shank is a useful feature to look out for and something I'd want to see in any serious approach / scrambling shoe.
 

Sizing

For reference I'm a size 9 (medium width). Dachstein's tend to be on the small and narrow side. I went up half a size for mine and pairing the 9.5s (EUR44) with Darn Tough's Via Ferrata sock makes a great fit. If you have wide feet, in our experience many of Dachstein's offerings may be too narrow.

Any Negatives?

There are a couple of negatives that relate to this type of footwear option, as much as the Spursinn specifically. When traversing the kind of clumpy, uneven and unpredictable marshland (pictured above), a shoe (rather than a boot) will have a greater tendency to "roll" (think of a ship movement) around the foot. This creates friction and on uneven clumpy surfaces, if your feet are wet, can lead to blistering across the arch of the foot (a strange place to get blisters - something that leukoplast tape will sort out). 

This leads to the second negative that is something to look out for in approach shoes but is often lacking. The Spursinn's drainage is okay but certainly not great (the leather Super Ferrata LTH have much better drainage).

In our view, approach shoes should be free of waterproof membranes and instead offer efficient drainage solutions (perhaps like those featured on Altberg's Jungle Boots).

Summary

The Spursinn is extremely comfortable and can handle long distances just as well (and in some cases better, depending on the terrain) than many trekking boots. They are light and agile in the mountains and that's really where they come into their own - the ideal scrambling shoe for dry conditions and tough enough for rocky arid environments.  They aren't so good in the wet but, with the addition of a trail gaiter, can cope with boggy lowlands (it's just not their forte). Ideally they'd drain a bit faster, but their real home is bone dry rock, not squelchy marsh.
 

---

Outro:  Return In Style?

At the end of the summer kit tests (where my one pair of boots and one pair of socks have been through many wet and dry cycles, are drenched in countryside odours and sweat and don't smell too sweet) I like to slip into something more comfortable for the return. I mainly use public transport, as often the treks aren't a loop, and prefer to be as considerate to my fellow travellers as possible (not entirely achievable, but I try). As such, if I can afford the weight, I carry a pair of Teva Mush II flip-flops and a pair of Injinji Run Original Weight No-Show socks. And my feet thank me.

A luxury summer kit test item: Injini Socks and Teva Mush flip-flops (if I can afford the weight).

The "look" works for me (but style tips are best sought elsewhere).

We'll keep testing and updating this post, but footwear requires some long-term use to assess, and so it's likely that this post (which is not a regular Scramble review) will often be out-of-date.  However, the main aim here is to provide a guide to help inform people of the things to look for in trekking footwear and the kind of things to avoid.

 

---

Product Images

 

Last Updated: 30/11/23