20 Best Hiking Boots For Wide Feet Women (2023 Updated)

Finally a shoe that fits. I’ve tried 4-5 brands of hiker’s for daughter so nice she was about 12 and she always complained the didn’t feet right. Now 19, she is moving to AK, so having quality is a priority.

We went to sporting store, again, and tried on 7-8 pairs and a Columbia pair fit, but what was in stock was more a hunting boot. but we had a size and, being older, she realized that it was the arch that did not fit in keen, vasques, rocky or the Walmart hikers.

We ordered these and after keeping them on 10 minutes, she asked if she could wear them all the time. THAT is the statement that says it all. Her everyday foot wear has be converse all these years, and didn’t enjoy hiking or hunting near as much in other hikers because her feet hurt, and she always opted to wear her converse, which have limitations when hiking on uneven rocky terrain.

I can’t tell you how happy we are that after 7 years, we finally found a hiker that fits comfortably and has all day comfort. I did add silicone repellant to the fabric weave area and seal oil to the boot leather, as stated these are going to be daily wear in AK.

And because they are on sale, I’m ordering a second pair for a Christmas present.

I love these boots. I find they fit and feel like good quality tennis shoes. I have 3 pairs because they fit well and are comfortable and wear much better than tennis shoes. I should mention though as someone else pointed out, if you do not use the top lace guides push them closed with pliers!! This is very important!! I also was tripped by the loop of the lace on the right foot catching in the eye on the inside of the left boot.

(I do not use the top lace guides) I slip my feet into my boots without lacing each time so I have them loose at the ankle. I do not need the ankle support, but I like that they are tall for keeping water out of the boot and ankle protection.

I waterproof them with silicone to protect them and they have always kept my feet dry in wet environments. I have a pair of 7. 5 to wear with light weight socks in the summer. That is what size I wear in tennis shoes.

I also have a pair of 8. 5 to wear with medium socks. I recently bought a pair of 9’s to wear with really heavy socks. I do replace the stock insoles with more padded ones and they fit fine. I have somewhat wide feet and often purchase wide shoes, but the regular width on these fits me fine.

Live in Oregon, needed a decent waterproof winter boot, for everyday running around town or play, preferably warm enough to handle a few snow days. The snow seems to be done this winter so I haven’t checked them out in that element but these definitely work in rain, waterproof and grip well.

I wish these were a bit warmer which is why I didn’t give 5 stars, that and the part above the ankle is a bit stiff. But, these do feel like a tennis shoe, light, comfortable enough for long day wear despite my arthritic toes and these look really cool – even in this teal surprisingly.

I got that color because it was on clearance and thought they’d be loud but no! It’s darker than the picture. I wear a size 9 and after reading reviews, bought size 9 Wide. Fits fine with room for a thicker sock.

For the price, I think you really get a great bang for your buck.

I love these shoes! I’m a digital nomad who moves every 3-4 weeks, and I like to do a lot of outdoor activities wherever I’m at. So I need a shoe that can handle a variety of terrain and weather. These shoes are it!! These shoes have tackled the cliffs of Gozo, the snowy trails of the Königsee in February, the forests and the water-laden tunnels of Madeira, etc.

, not to mention plenty of airports and cities because I wear them when I travel. Long story short: They’re great “all-purpose” hiking shoes. Getting down to technicals, these shoes do have less cushion/drop, which I personally like as someone who has worn low-drop shoes for years now.

They also offer light ankle support without being super heavy or rigid. (I considered a Salomon hiking boot before finding these, but it was way too clunky and confining for my taste). Waterproof-wise these hold up like a champ 9/10 times.

Of course, you’ve got a limited depth of water you can go in and I wouldn’t simply stand in a stream for hours, but they’ve held up really well in river crossings, standing water, marshland and even medium-snow.

I am a regular user of the X Ultra mid boots, having worn out two pairs each of the X Ultra 2 and X Ultra 3. Note that this review applies to the biggest available size (UK 13. 5, EUR 49 1/3, USA 14), so it may not be fully applicable to smaller sizes.

I have also worn these boots for several months, and they are probably approaching the mid point of their useful life by looking at their soles, so I believe I can provide a good assessment. In my opinion the 4th iteration of the X Ultra is a major step backwards from the excellent previous versions.

The changes seem to be related to the significant weight reduction (488 gr per boot versus 590 for the X Ultra 3), which is noticeable. However, the cost of this weight reduction is huge: 1. There is significantly less cushioning around the ankle, and the boot is also approximately one finger lower.

I continue to notice a slight friction around the ankles on every hike, although less as time goes on. In the first few hikes I stopped several times because of this, and once I even had to put some tissue to increase the cushioning.

To me this makes no sense, as it a significant inconvenience just to lose a few grams. 2. I have to stop and tighten my laces at least twice in every hike, as otherwise the fitting becomes loose. This is new to me and had never happened before.

I ignore the reason but maybe the material has some elasticity in it. Huge inconvenience. 3. The boot seems to have much less torsion resistance than previous versions. I hike in a very stony area, and at least once every day this causes slight ankle twists when placing the boot heel on a stone.

Avoiding this is the reason why I wear mid boots instead of regular shoes, and again seems to be the result of saving a few grams. Overall very disappointed with these boots to the point where I have looked and successfully acquired two more pairs of version 3.

I can not recommend version 4 to any one and I will certainly be very cautious when a (hopefully improved) version 5 comes out. Version 3 was an excellent product, this one is not.

Please keep in mind that I have never used the X Ultra 3’s, so my review is not biased. I am an avid backpacker and have worn many boots in my life. Also keep in mind that I had two REI employees ensure that I was purchasing the right size.

These, by far, are not only the most expensive but also the worst pair of boots that I have ever dawned upon my feet. My Adidas Terrex Swift R2’s that I loved finally died out on me and I decided to splurge on a new set of boots from a “quality” brand.

Salomon’s Ultra 3’s have great reviews, so I figured the new 4’s would be even better. This was not the case. It seems Salomon missed the mark on the skew between trail runner and hiking boot with these, making them not only useless, but actively harmful to users.

I took these on a 30 mile backpacking trip on Isle Royal and now have medical bills to pay directly because of these boots because they caused intense blistering, bruising of my feet, my toe nails are turning purple and will likely fall off, and of course I slipped multiple times on easy terrain due to lack of grip.

Here is a quick summary: Comfort: This is subjective to my feet, but these were a terrible fit. I do not have wide feet, but these run so narrow that they crushed my feet and damaged my nail beds on my long hike.

Also manufacturing quality is low as the right show had a completely different shape, ridges, and size than the left shoe causing uneven wear. The bottoms are paper thin, expect to feel every pebble under your foot.

Support: There is none. The point of a mid cut is to offer stability. These boots have a convenient cutout specifically around where your ankles end up when you are hiking downhill and need stability the most.

The bottom of the shoe is very flexible and unstable. Also the upper of the shoe is very flexible. This results in your foot warping the upper when planted on any incline, and sliding off the sole of the shoe regardless of how tight you tie them.

Grip: I have slipped total of four times in my hiking career. Three of those times were during the 30 miles I hiked with these boots on. The will slip on dry rock, wet rock, roots, dirt, and even mud.

The last eight miles of my hike I completed in my crocs because I could no longer handle the damage the boots were causing to my feet and the crocs had measurably better grip and stability. Durability: Waterproofing failed after about ten miles.

At the end of the 30 miles, noticeable snags int the stitching appeared. The lugs also seemed slightly worn which is surprising since they didn’t grip anything to begin with. Conclusion: I have no idea how it is possible to create a shoe that is tight enough in the forefoot to crush your toes but loose enough in the heel to shred your heels.

This shoe offers the lack of support and protection of a boot while also lacking the flexibility, comfort, and freedom of a trail runner. Truly the worst of both worlds. Again, I cannot imagine a foot type or activity scenario that these would be ideal for.

I’m deeply disappointed that Salomon has opted for perceived style rather than function and that their manufacturing quality has dropped so intensely. I use their products for my cross country skiing antics but will likely be swapping to a quality brand after this experience.

Overall, the shoes perform well for their intended use as light hiking boots. They’re well supported for their light weight, but not something I would use for extended backpacking. I end up doing some walking on concrete (in wet conditions) to get to many of the hikes I take these on, and they do not have sufficient padding to be comfortable on pavement.

Given that pavement is not what they’re built for, I’m not dinging them for that. Other shoes do offer better padding though. The tread on the bottom has fantastic grip, and has served me well in wet, dry, and dusty scrambling conditions.

That said, it does seem to be wearing through a bit more quickly than I’d like for a $150+ shoe. This may seem superficial, but I am really disappointed with the colors. I have wide feet. Not extremely wide, but wide enough that for Salomons, I usually need to pick up the wide-specific model.

I love the look of many Salomon shoe, but for some reason, these guys always pick the blandest ones for the wide fit! I feel like we’re being punished for having wide feet, and there ain’t a darn thing I can do about it! I think the Green Gables color on the X 4 Ultra Mid is one of the best looking hiking shoes in the game, and I actually purchased one originally.

Of course, it didn’t fit because it was far too narrow, so I was consigned to the boring black shoe bin. I’ve been wearing these shoes for three months and, overall, they perform well for light hikers.

They have fantastic grip and effective waterproofing, but durability remains an open question, and styles lost some major points (especially knowing how much Salomon is capable of). Would I buy again? Frankly, I hope not to.

I loved my X Ultra 3 Mid Wide GTX, and I’d like to see a version 5 or 4. 1 that brings better colors, more durability throughout, and specifically longer-lasting lugs/treads underfoot. The new lacing system is good, and I’d like to see it stick around.

If all that materialized (and I mean please, please bring us that Green Gables in wide!), then yes, count me in for another round after the next update. If you’re stuck with the version 4 as is, I’d skip it and come back next year.

I’ve had 3 pairs of Salomon walking walking shoes over the last 10 years. The first pair were awesome and lasted me 6 years (I still actually use them for gardening). The next pair lasted about a year before they developed a split in the upper.

They were replaced under warranty but the replacement pair split at the heel and caused blisters after 14 months. The fundamental problem (and this to some extent was true of the second pair) was that the cinch laces are just way too short causing excess pressure on the heel when getting your foot in.

I looked on the website and found that this was a common complaint in the reviews. I then bought a really cheap pair to tide me over which actually lasted twice as long as my previous Saloman shoes. As Salomon’s response to poor reviews has always been that they take feedback seriously and improve their products accordingly so I thought that given this was a relatively new model they may well have taken the difficult decision to invest the extra 2 cents in longer laces so took the plunge and bought these.

How they have actually managed to make them worse is a mystery. The laces are certainly no longer than in the previous version, however, the addition of the pointless soft projection at the back does (as other reviewers have mentioned) make it far more difficult to get your feet in.

Needless to say they are going back. Clearly Salomon don’t listen to feedback so I doubt that this will have any imact.

My goddaughter in New York recommended these boots after reading very good reviews about them knowing I was struggling to choose new ones. The actual boot is very comfortable and fits well. I was told by a podiatrist to always buy a size larger in a trainer and walking boot so I purchased a 5 although my normal shoe size is 4.

On my second wearing I got a blister on my ankle above my heal, I have very sensitive feet so wasn’t surprised, the ankle cuffs are a little hard. I did however read a review that advised wearers to watch a YouTube video on how to tie laces properly on walking boots.

I found a Trekkit video and was amazed at how differently they advise how to tie laces than I tie mine. I’m waiting for my blister to heal before trying this technique but I’m confident that it will make a big difference.

Overall I think the boots are comfortable, subject to more breaking in, they look good and seem to be waterproof as I walked in puddles without a problem. 10 out of 10 after a few more wears I’m confident.

I am on my third pair of Keen Newport H2’s so I thought I would try the Keen Targhee III Mids. I haven’t worn them much (other than just kicking around in them to break them in) so I can’t really give an accurate review of the Mids but I give a great review of the low-top Targhee III shoes that I have owned for the same period of time (I will include that below).

I don’t really plan on wearing the Mids until I do some backpacking this summer. I generally save the ankle protection the Mids will provide when I am carrying weight. But, the shoes are the exact same product just without the ankle protection of the Mids.

You can read on for the review of the shoe that might be helpful. I think all the points are still relevant with the exception of the loose lacing information. I do have high hopes for how these perform when I’m carrying a loaded backpack.

Review of Targhee III shoes (not the Mids you are looking at): After about 2 weeks of owning them and wearing them walking the mountain trails in my neighborhood daily, I absolutely love them. My feet are a mess of sizing troubles after childhood surgeries.

These Targhees solve all my problems. They fit my wide feet well with a perfectly sized toe box. And, I was able to size well getting the arch support for my high arches just where I need them. I was even able to get my “tall” feet to fit properly.

Silly things that I love is being able to keep them loosely laced/tied so I can slide into them quickly and easily while, at the same time, this loose lacing somehow is enough to keep my toes from slamming into the end of the shoe on steep downhills.

Even with this loose lacing I still experience no heel lift; I don’t get it 🙂 The times I have laced them tightly they felt super snug and comfy. I bought them for the waterproofness and that has paid off, too.

This PNW spring has been a bit wet and I was walking up a trail that hat a couple hundred feet of about 1/2″ deep flowing water in it and my feet stayed perfectly dry. These are stiff enough for support on easy trails with rocks and roots (I have not tried them carrying any substantial weight but I think they would be fine??) but flexible enough that I have not needed a break-in period with them.

This was all a long story to say I LOVE THEM!!!!! I hope they never discontinue them!.

I bought this boot to replace an older pair of keen boots that I have used for the past 5+ years. The old boots were perfectly fine except for there was no grip left on the sole. After putting these on right out of the box I realized there was something pushing into the back of my left heel.

I took the boot off and inspected and it seemed like either a manufacturing defect or someone had purchased these and somehow broken the counter in the back of the boot down and it couldn’t be pushed back up.

I returned these and bought another pair of the exact same boot and will leave a review there.  UPDATE: I ordered a new pair of the exact same boot with the hopes that the prior pair just had a manufacturing defect.

Turns out that is exactly what was wrong and the new pair didn’t have the same issue. Including my thoughts on the new pair below. When purchasing boots I look for two primary features of the boot – 1) Keep my feet warm at all times and 2) Ensure proper grip so I don’t slip.

Unfortunately these boots don’t keep my feet as warm as my old Keen boots. With my old boots my feet were warm at all times (even at -20 degrees F) with a pair of smartwool socks. We bought my Dad a pair as well and he has said the boots (old ones) are the best boots he’s ever owned and he is 80 years old.

With the new boots my toes are cold (not ice cold but not warm) at even 17 degrees F. This is true if I am talking a walk or standing outside talking with my neighbor. This could be the difference in the more narrow toe box versus my older boots.

In terms of grip these are great and I even walked up a steep hill this week with ice and some spots with snow over ice and I didn’t slip at all. I really hope Keen hasn’t changed something in the technology with their boots but the warmth (or lack thereof) of this boot is disappointing.

I’m keeping these boots since I haven’t found anything better and I have searched for months. If you want a nice looking, well fitting, and great gripping winter boot I would recommend this boot. However, if your feet don’t stay toasty warm without a warm winter boot I would look to get a different Keen boot or a boot from a different manufacturer.

I’ve now had these for a total of 4 years. I run hot in the feet so I actually bought these as my primary winter boots for Canadian winters although they don’t have much/any insulation. I could honestly never say my feet were cold (with wool socks of course) or wet wearing these.

Most recently, I brought them on expedition to Antarctica and used them on a combination of very sharp sediment and snow. They’re still just as warm and waterproof as the day I bought them despite enduring blade-like rock and harshly drying conditions without leather treatments.

I hope Vasque hasn’t changed their build quality since I originally bought these because I will absolutely be buying another pair when I have to. I suspect that won’t be for another two years because the ones I currently have could easily endure another Canadian winder and season in the Antarctic.

These have all metal external shoelace eyelets/d-rings which is an absolute must when traversing rough terrain (plastic ones crack and fall apart wen hit). External d-ring eyelets, rather than grommet-style punch-hole eyelets, are a higher build quality in my opinion and are used for all eyelets, not just the top ones like many other manufactures.

Great for getting a very snug lace tightness without any of the discomforts from overlapping laces. And personally, unlike other reviewers, I found the eyelet placement just right as to not overlap with seams, making the wearing experience overall very comfortable.

I have worn these boots for 2 seasons of very heavy use and they are wonderful. I won’t comment on the fit or comfort because that depends on who is wearing the boots. The soles are very grippy on all terrain that I’ve encountered including a few icy and snowy hands on scrambles.

They also have good traction on wet rock. The waterproofing has been very good, I’ve never had any issues. They don’t breath since they are gortex + leather (no surprise there), but I’ve backpacked and hiked comfortably in upper 20’s C and low 30 C temperature and was still comfortable.

If you are hiking in hot weather with these it is a good idea to air your feet out every once in a while and wear wool socks because they will absorb more sweat without feeling soaked. The leather is very nice quality and If you take care of it with wax (I make my own beeswax/olive oil mixture then use a blow dryer to melt the wax into the leather) it will have extra water resistance and last a very long time.

The rubber toecap is a good feature but I would’ve liked to have seen it over molded as I think this would make it more robust but I have not had any issues so that is just nit picking. Lastly, the metal hardware used for the laces is very robust and will last a very long time (a feature I look for in good boots.

Overall these boots have been a lot kinder to me than I have been to them. They have many battle scars and gashes from bushwhacking and scrambling yet they have still been very forgiving and continue to serve me well.

I just replaced a 3rd generation pair of Salomon Quest 4D boots with the St. Elias, and so far these are better boots in every way. I can’t comment on durability yet as I’ve only used them on 4 hikes, but they do seem very well made.

While the Salomons were good boots, the St. Elias is more comfortable and has better traction on every surface, dry, wet, gravel, mud, snow, etc. Fit: I’m a size 10 in just about every type of athletic and casual shoe, but I size down to 9.

5 in Red Wing boots, and size up for Scarpa boots (43. 5 EU for the Zen Pros, 44 EU for the Zodiacs and Ribelles). The St. Elias in size 10 is perfect for me, with enough room in the toes. I don’t have a wide foot per se, but I’m on the wide side of a regular width foot, and my toes don’t taper as much as most guys feet seem to do; narrow boots do not fit me well and these are fine.

I wear the Smartwool Performance Hike Light Crew socks (old version was the Smartwool PhD Outdoor Light Crew) which have light cushioning. Break-in: I’ve read some reviews that say there is no break-in period, but that was not my experience.

They were a little stiff and felt a tad snug around my midfoot on my first couple of hikes. I even had a blister after my first short hike (~4 miles), but I’m not sure if it was because of the stiff leather, or because I had tied them too tight.

On the next couple of hike, I was still getting a couple of hot spots where the toe cap meets the leather, but I was able to alleviate those by loosening the lacing over the top of my foot. Once I learned not to overtighten the laces, I was surprised at how well these boots hold my foot in place, even going downhill or sidehilling, with absolutely no pressure points.

Waterproofing: Yes, they have Gore-Tex, and yes, the first time I wore them, I stepped in a stream and the water literally just beaded up and rolled off. They are waterproof out of the box. However, after walking through rocky terrain and plunge stepping through snow, whatever the leather is treated with was visibly rubbing off, and the leather was already absorbing water.

If you only hike on manicured trails and step through an occasional stream every now and then, the leather treatment may last longer, but keep in mind that Gore-Tex doesn’t protect the leather. Protecting the leather, on the other hand, will help to protect the Gore-Tex membrane.

So, after breaking these in on 3 hikes, I cleaned them well, took the extra step of sealing around the outsole with GearAid Aquaseal, and then applied a couple thin coats of Obenauf’s LP. I subsequently took them on a snow scramble and was very happy with the water repellency.

I really appreciate how these boots have minimal seams and stitching, which means less potential points of failure for water to find it’s way through. Comfort: These boots are very supportive without feeling rigid (once you break them in past the initial stiffness) and Vasque puts a very nice insole in there.

I did a fairly strenuous 9 mile RT hike with about a mile of elevation gain, through sustained steep forest and snow and I was tired at the end of the day but my feet were not. The Salomon Quests might feel a little more nimble because the sole assembly is slightly softer and thinner, but the St Elias really makes up for that with better traction and protection.

If you’re kicking steps in snow or up forested hillsides, you’ll appreciate the slightly stiffer, chunkier sole with a solid toe cap. These boots do run on the warm side, like most Gore-Tex boots, and if your feet tend to sweat then I don’t recommend them for mid-summer backpacking but they are not as warm as the Salomon Quest.

These are perfect for shoulder season, and will work just fine for some winter conditions too, as long as it’s not too cold (maybe don’t go below 25F?) and you aren’t overnighting or doing anything technical.

I’m an arborist. I use these boots for work daily, and am very hard on them, using them in all weather conditions, over rough terrain, and with a lot of abrasion from dragging brush, getting covered in chain saw shavings, bar oil, dirt etc.

Pros: – They are extraordinarily comfortable to walk in, and are decent if you need to do a bit of running, I haven’t gotten close to getting a blister with these. – The waterproofing is high quality and hasn’t failed even though there is a significant hole in the leather from me not caring for the leather properly.

The only time I get wet feet is when water seeps in from the top due to the base layer on my legs getting saturated. – They provide a moderate amount of ankle support for walking on rough/off-trail terrain, without significantly interfering with the comfort while walking.

Neutral: – They are not the most breathable option possible, and get a little hot during the summer, nor are they the most insulated, and get a little cold during the winter. 50 degrees or so is probably the perfect temperature for them.

Cons: – My only complaint is that they aren’t very durable, though I feel this is mostly a deliberate design compromise rather than a shortcoming. The rubber at the toe of the boot started peeling back from the leather almost immediately (though this didn’t progress further), the soles are made of soft rubber that wears rather quickly, particularly if you walk on more abrasive surfaces, like concrete or asphalt (though it does grip better than a harder rubber), and the leather has to be cared for or it will fall apart if treated roughly.

Conclusion: Like anything else, these boots are not absolutely perfect; they’re a product of design compromises. However, despite their relatively short lifespan for what I do with them, I’m happy to spend another $200 for a new pair, because of all the boots I’ve tried, for my feet, nothing else comes close.

I love pretty much everything about these boots. Other hiking boots I’ve tried in this price range include Salomon X-Ultra 4 Mid GTX, X-Ultra 3 Mid GTX, various Merrell hiking boots and shoes, and The North Face waterproof hiking boots.

The Oboz Bridger Mid B-Dry blow them ALL out of the water in terms of quality of materials, worksmanship, and especially durability. These boots have served me well for about a year now and could easily last another couple of years.

I am a landscaper by trade and wear these to work five days a week, and often for walks/hikes on the weekend. They’ve held up extremely well to my heavy usage. I’m telling you, both pairs of Salomon boots I owned fell apart faster than I’d expect a pair of Wal Mart boots to do the same.

These Oboz boots are different. More comprehensive review below. The Oboz Bridger Mid B-Dry are made from quality materials, including leather with high-durability rubber in key places. They are plenty comfortable while also being HIGHLY supportive.

Immediately upon trying them I could tell they were a lot sturdier and more supportive than all of the others I’d tried up to that point. The insole felt high-quality by comparison. These boots are TRULY waterproof (within reason) while still being breathable enough for hot summer days in the high desert.

The rubber wrapped around the toe area and heel area of the boots seems to have done a ton to make these boots last longer. The sole of the boot might look strange at first glance, but I’ve found it a great and versatile sole shape.

I’ve worn these on all terrains in all weather while doing landscaping work. I’ve worn these on hot days, in torrential downpours, and also all throughout cold winters with heavy snowfall and ice. Somehow they manage to be breathable enough in summer and warm enough in winter with proper socks, and are still effectively waterproof.

In summary, if you are looking for possibly the best combination of quality, comfort, support, and durability in a hiking boot under $200: these are very likely the best value waterproof hiking boot out there.

Working as a landscaper is one of the best stress tests for a boot, and this one excelled. IMPORTANT NOTE: these absolutely run one-half size small. I’m normally a size 11, I ordered these in a size 11.

5 and it is perfect.

So far, I’ve put about 30 miles on the Oboz Bridgers, and I also have a pair of Keen Durands with 200ish miles on them (along with a graveyard of worn out boots from other manufacturers). This review will contrast the two to highlight what I feel are shortcomings with the Bridger.

I bought the Oboz based on near-universal praise (I like to have two pairs of boots and had recently retired a pair of $95 Propets that performed admirably above their station). However, in almost every performance measure, I find the Oboz inferior to the Keen Durands.

Fit: These Bridgers are the narrowest “wide width” boots I’ve worn, though they are broken in now and have loosened a bit. Some describe them favorably as “snug. ” I see them as too tight laterally for my feet to get any airflow.

Keens, as everyone knows, are the roomiest boots out there for people like me who have duck feet. The Oboz are fine lengthwise, FWIW. Comfort: If you’re one of those hikers who like “feedback,” which I interpret as being able to feel the trail textures underfoot, you might enjoy these Oboz boots.

To me, they don’t offer enough protection. I feel every rock I step on, and once I hit mile five of a mountain hike, my feet start to feel banged up. The Durands, after 200 miles, are still quite comfy and provide a good barrier against trail hazards on long hikes.

Traction: I’m disappointed with the traction I get from the Oboz. My debut hike began with a fairly gentle uphill slope on hard-packed dirt that was damp (not muddy) from an overnight rain. The boots slipped out a couple times as the pitch increased.

The treads pack mud as well. If rocky terrain is slightly damp, I lose confidence with their grip. By contrast, even with 200 miles of wear, the Keens haven’t lost any gripping power. There’s one area in which the Oboz perform better, and that’s toe protection going downhill.

The flat(ish) toe box and extra roominess of the Keens can be a drawback on a sleep downhill slope, as the foot tends to slide forward a bit. All that said, the Oboz do seem to be a well-made boot. I just don’t think they’re ideal for the rocky or rainy environments I hike in.

I’d like to try them on a cool-weather desert hike or one of those gravelly coastal trails in Italy.

These are my new favorites. The Oboz Bridger are a country mile ahead of anything in its class, or anything close to it. If you are considering Keens or Merrills. simply put. “DON’T when you have the outstanding Oboz Bridger available instead.

There are many other reviewers here that will go into the detail behind why so I’ll spare you here. Just do it and you won’t be dissatisfied. The dark shadow color variety is my favorite and looks just terrific.

I find these shoes so comfortable that I wear them all day even when I’m watching TV in my lounge chair. I have never had a more sure-footed feeling in a low-cut. The arch support is unbelievably great and the heel fits like a glove.

My instep is a bit high and my foot is slightly wide but the non-wide regular variety fits perfectly. These shoes seem indestructible in my foot never gets wet no matter how much I’m getting splashed either working in the garden or on the wet trail.

They tend to collect a bit of dirt on the bottom so if you do wear them indoors pop them off and rinse off the bottoms easily. I find that I’m able to slip these on like bedroom slippers without having to reach down to tie and untie them and they maintain their form and support without breaking down.

Truly a remarkable shoe unlike any other I’ve ever had. So much better than Lowe and Rachlie and Solomon. They make Keens and Merrills look like cheap Keds. I read recently that the company got bought so I’m hoping nothing changes.

Maybe I need to buy a half a dozen pair just so that I can ensure in perpetuity that I continue to have the best outdoor shoe I’ve ever had.

Already owner of an Aku Trekker Lite GTX, I can only confirm the sensations I have already had with the previous boots. On top of that, the tongue is now even more padded than what I have. I was hesitant about the sole, but I saw that the Vibram Curcuma is now the most used and therefore I hope it offers the same grip as the previous ones.

I can definitely recommend Aku to those who want grip, comfort, zero blisters and non-sore feet even after 8 hours of walking from a boot.

Bought these as a present for my boyfriend, he’s really pleased with them – he’s been away for a week in the Tatras Mountains in November where he put them through their paces. Goretex did it’s job to keep his feet dry and grippy rugged soles coped well with the mixed terrain.

TranslateShow in original languageIn aller erster Linie kaufte ich die Schuhe da ich in Island richtig auf Berg Wanderschaft war. Der Preis der Berg schuhe hatte mich angelockt. Ich hätte es besser wissen müssen.

Die Schuhe sind nicht schlecht. Man hat ein festen Stand, sie sind Wasser undurchlässig, und sie sind richtig robust. Jedoch werden sie sehr schnell unbequem und man merkt nach dem Tagestrip Schmerzende Füße.

Hier sollte man etwas mehr Geld investieren. Es gibt andere wander Berg Schuhe die mehr Komfort bieten.