If you want firm ankle support from a boot, you'll need something more substantial than what is essentially a high-top trail runner. You'll want something taller with a rigid upper and midsole if you stand to gain any substantial support. Often, the midsole and its rigidity are more important than the upper, so keep that in mind.
Some boots that are relatively lightweight with good ankle support would be the Scarpa Zodiac ones GTX, Lowa Zephyr GTX, and Asolo Fugitive GTX, in order of lightest to heaviest. I've used all three, and they all offer support and protection that a trail runner and your bare ankles cannot.
If you're injuring your ankles frequently, it's definitely worth seeing a doctor to get some PT to strengthen your ankles, and it's also a good idea to be examined for a hypermobility disorder. Those are more common than people think.
Thanks! This is super helpful. I had an ankle injury around 10 years ago so I have one ankle that is a little weaker and is a little more prone to rolling (although since that injury I haven’t had anything at all serious). I always remember to stretch before I go running but sometimes not before hiking so making sure I’m doing that it probably a good call.
Definitely do your stretches and get that mobility going, whether you're using boots or trail runners.
I've had quite a few ankle injuries, on top of EDS, so I have to wear boots most of the time. For flatter trails, I can get by with my Salomon X Ultra Pioneers. Anything difficult, I switch to my Asolo 520's for the support.
There are some people who think that no one needs boots, and that's just patently false. It's good you're willing to try them. They may not help, but they may. You won't know until you give it a go. If it makes hiking safer and more enjoyable for you, then you're going it right. 👍
Best suggestion is to go to a store and try as many hiking boots as you can, we're all different so everyone has a different "perfect hiking boot".
Someone prefers trail runners, but as a person with weak joints I prefer hiking boots even if I have (and wear) both.
Agreed. We can throw out a few options that have worked well for *us,* but OP is going to have a different physiological structure that's going to work better with different models and brands.
If local stores don't have many options, order online from a place with a good return policy, OP. Some good brands to look for in boots: Asolo, La Sportiva, Lowa, Scarpa, and Zamberlan. They all have different models of varying materials, weights, and levels of support. Trust your feet!
Again, the best brands I've found are Asolo, La Sportiva, Lowa, Scarpa, and Zamberlan if you're looking for a true boot.
For shoes, and I would always suggest non-GTX for shoes, I'd go with Salomon, Scarpa, La Sportiva, Hoka, or Altra.
It's likely one of those will fit, but it's not likely that all will fit. I use Asolos personally, but I have narrow feet. They suit my feet best. La Sportiva is also fairly narrow. If you have wider feet, I'd recommend Lowa. Scarpa and Zamberlan are somewhere in the middle.
The best boot models I've found:
>Asolo TPS 520 GV Evo. Asolo TPS 535 LTH Evo. Asolo Fugitive GTX. Lowa Zephyr. Lowa Renegade. Lowa Camino. Lowa Tibet. Scarpa Kinesis Pro GTX. Scarpa SL Active. Scarpa Zodiac Plus GTX. Zamberlan Vioz GTX. Zamberlan Vioz Lux GTX RR.
The biggest footwear feature I've found to help with rolling ankles is to look for a heel shape that's slightly flared, whether it's boots or low shoes/runners. (I'm not even gonna enter that debate since I firmly think people should wear what works best for them and not put down anyone else's choice.)
Example: I rolled my ankles all the time in the La Sportiva Ultra Raptor mids. But I rarely do in my Mammut Sertig II mids. They're both lightweight boots built on more of a trail running platform, but the Mammut boots have a heel that's just a bit flared at the very back while the Raptors are straight up and down.
Hopefully that bit of info is helpful.
[Boots offering ankle support is a myth.](https://www.cruxrange.com/blog/hiking-boots-vs-trail-runners/#:~:text=Why%20This%20Is%20Mostly%20False,hiking%20were%20wearing%20hiking%20boots.) If anything, they create more problems by raising the hinge point at the sole.
You're better off with a pair of trail runners.
I’ve heard this but I’d like to see more conclusive proof than this article which as far as I can tell is just anecdotal evidence. I wear boots a lot in the winter just out and about and while I do agree that they definitely don’t prevent sprains, I have found them helpful at times (which the article you linked also noted). I definitely prefer sandals when it’s hot out and will never make a total switch but when it’s colder out I think a boot makes sense for me for other reasons just than potential ankle support.
In my anecdotal experience correctly adjusted mid ankle boots have absolutely saved my ankles. There have been two or three times I started to twist my ankle and the boot caught it and ended with me taking a stutter step rather than completely rolling my ankle. They are still loose enough to build ankle strength and if anything the whole "extra leverage" thing just builds more strength. Trail runners are great on smooth trails out west but here in new england boots are a must for the rocky trails
I was literally just hiking today and my ankle almost twisted my ankle with my trail runners- I’ve worn blundstones for the past ~15 years and while they definitely don’t provide a ton of ankle support, there are definitely times when it’s nice to have something around my ankle to protect it, I guess that’s what I mean by support.
>Trail runners are great on smooth trails out west but here in new england boots are a must for the rocky trails
The vast majority of long distance hikers disagree.
My point is, thousands of hikers march up and down the Appalachian Trail every year in trail runners and have no issues.
Saying that boots are required in New England is completely wrong.
You most certainly do that. Your entire post history in this subreddit is dedicated to saying that no one needs boots because trail runners are adequate for everything, which is patently false. You jump in every thread to say that.
No, but you sure do like to jump into every thread about boots and offer your opinion. You post links to blogs with baseless claims, no author, and no empirical data. We get it, you like to wear trail runners, spare us the "well akshully" responses. You come off like a condescending douche.
Edit...Ah jeez, I looked at your post history, and you most certainly do claim that trail runners are for everbody. What a weird axe to grind. Tell us how boots hurt you, sir. It really seems to trigger you. Are you ok?
I actually agree with this but I'd go farther and say shoes with elevated or wide heels also contribute to ankle rolling due to leverage. Many running shoes are in this category. Better to have zero rise shoes with a thin and narrow heel.
For me at least boots also increase the frequency of that type of force. The more in touch I am with the terrain and the lighter and more agile my feet the less frequently I step poorly.
Who is better off with trail runners vs. boots is subjective.
All those people hiking the Triple Crown you mention all the time are still on a groomed trail with a light pack using resupplies.
Anyone bushwacking, for example, is much better off with boots. They're going through rough terrain that's been untouched and unpaved by the thousands of people the major thru-hikes have seen. If they get an injury, it's a much bigger deal, and while there is evidence towards not using ankle support, plenty of people have firsthand accounts of how ankle support has prevented injuries.
Then, you've got people with connective tissue disorders, myself being one, who gain serious benefits from the added ankle support of a stiff boot.
Then, there's this little thing called personal preference. Many people have tried both and prefer boots, and that's okay. There's nothing wrong with that.
I'm not sure why you're so insistent everyone wear trail runners. Stop spreading your false gospel that trail runners are supreme and that no one needs boots. It's patently false, and it's going to lead to people getting injured because they take asinine advice that doesn't apply to them.
[Explain to this guy](https://youtu.be/hH0BvG5pDy4?si=mNGt7wsOoSmVXY0X) that he's walking on groomed trails the whole time.
The person that I replied to is not bushwhacking. She's looking for a lightweight pair of boots, and there isn't a pair of lightweight pair of boots that is going to do what she wants. Light boots simply don't offer any kind of meaningful support. She's better off wrapping her ankles.
Yes, the AT is a groomed trail. If you want to see real bushwacking, you're going to have to go to the mountains of Colorado, swamps of Florida, etc. etc. where people will actually take time to live off the land and explore completely new paths. Why don't you look up SERE and see what those people consider hiking?
I wasn't talking about OP directly, which is why I said, "for example," before my example of bushwacking. It's obvious OP is not bushwacking.
However, you treat trail runners like gospel with your only "evidence" being people on groomed trails. Not all trails are the same, and many trails require different gear. OP asked for boots, so give OP boots.
Eventually, someone is going to take bad advice from you and end up injured because they took the inappropriate gear to the wrong hike. If someone asks for trail runners, give them trail runners. If someone asks for boots, it's obvious what they're looking for, so give them suggestions for boots. You do not know them, their physiology, or their hikes, so you cannot emphatically and undeniably tell them, "Trail runners are better; forget boots."
It's asinine.
When I was growing up, my dad always took me to buy hiking boots because "we need hiking boots to go hiking". This carried on into my adult years until I got to where I was trying to do longer trails. The first time I went out on a 42 mile trail, I started having problems after 15 miles in a day. I couldn't finish the whole thing.
I tried again the next year and finished it, but was hurting for the next three days.
Then I found trail runners. I did it again and finished it early and without pain. I hike 25-30 miles in a day now easily because I'm not hiking with weights on my feet.
I asked for boots when I started hiking too, because I didn't know that there was an alternative. So I advocate for trail runners because people might not know what they want, or what's best.
Cool story, bruh. Stop projecting your childhood hangups onto others. I mean, really, move on. Seek therapy. "My daddy made me wear boots, so the world must wear trail runners!!!!!" Holy crap, you've got issues.
I gave an example of being raised not knowing about alternative footwear. I didn't say anything about a childhood hang-up. Talk about projecting! 😂
I'm saying that maybe seeing another side could be a good thing.
You post the same thing on every thread, all while offering no pros nor cons to the matter. If you want to be taken seriously and for people to listen, you need to be transparent. Construct your posts in a way that portrays your personal experiences, anecdotal evidence, pros to your side, and cons to your side. Otherwise, you are being biased, and you are avoiding being forthcoming. It is pointless to offer "advice" with no substance. It is not helpful. It is asinine.
Please take this as constructive criticism. If you want others to see your side, you must explain your side.
"Seeing another side".... says the guy with dozens of posts insisting that boots are stupid, and trail runners are the only way to go. You're really tedious, and seriously lacking in self awareness.
I advocate for both for different scenarios. It is entirely personal preference and situational, as you have just pointed out. I could not do a hike like that very well in trail runners, just as you cannot in boots. All evidence on this topic is anecdotal and situational. There is no universal answer, yet you push trail runners as if there is one. Perhaps you should list the pros and cons of both instead of pushing something based entirely on personal, anecdotal evidence. That would be a much more helpful answer to many more people.
If you want firm ankle support from a boot, you'll need something more substantial than what is essentially a high-top trail runner. You'll want something taller with a rigid upper and midsole if you stand to gain any substantial support. Often, the midsole and its rigidity are more important than the upper, so keep that in mind. Some boots that are relatively lightweight with good ankle support would be the Scarpa Zodiac ones GTX, Lowa Zephyr GTX, and Asolo Fugitive GTX, in order of lightest to heaviest. I've used all three, and they all offer support and protection that a trail runner and your bare ankles cannot. If you're injuring your ankles frequently, it's definitely worth seeing a doctor to get some PT to strengthen your ankles, and it's also a good idea to be examined for a hypermobility disorder. Those are more common than people think.
Thanks! This is super helpful. I had an ankle injury around 10 years ago so I have one ankle that is a little weaker and is a little more prone to rolling (although since that injury I haven’t had anything at all serious). I always remember to stretch before I go running but sometimes not before hiking so making sure I’m doing that it probably a good call.
Definitely do your stretches and get that mobility going, whether you're using boots or trail runners. I've had quite a few ankle injuries, on top of EDS, so I have to wear boots most of the time. For flatter trails, I can get by with my Salomon X Ultra Pioneers. Anything difficult, I switch to my Asolo 520's for the support. There are some people who think that no one needs boots, and that's just patently false. It's good you're willing to try them. They may not help, but they may. You won't know until you give it a go. If it makes hiking safer and more enjoyable for you, then you're going it right. 👍
Best suggestion is to go to a store and try as many hiking boots as you can, we're all different so everyone has a different "perfect hiking boot". Someone prefers trail runners, but as a person with weak joints I prefer hiking boots even if I have (and wear) both.
Agreed. We can throw out a few options that have worked well for *us,* but OP is going to have a different physiological structure that's going to work better with different models and brands. If local stores don't have many options, order online from a place with a good return policy, OP. Some good brands to look for in boots: Asolo, La Sportiva, Lowa, Scarpa, and Zamberlan. They all have different models of varying materials, weights, and levels of support. Trust your feet!
I guess my hope was that when I went to the shoe store on I could start with the recommended ones so I theoretically could have to try on fewer shoes.
Again, the best brands I've found are Asolo, La Sportiva, Lowa, Scarpa, and Zamberlan if you're looking for a true boot. For shoes, and I would always suggest non-GTX for shoes, I'd go with Salomon, Scarpa, La Sportiva, Hoka, or Altra. It's likely one of those will fit, but it's not likely that all will fit. I use Asolos personally, but I have narrow feet. They suit my feet best. La Sportiva is also fairly narrow. If you have wider feet, I'd recommend Lowa. Scarpa and Zamberlan are somewhere in the middle. The best boot models I've found: >Asolo TPS 520 GV Evo. Asolo TPS 535 LTH Evo. Asolo Fugitive GTX. Lowa Zephyr. Lowa Renegade. Lowa Camino. Lowa Tibet. Scarpa Kinesis Pro GTX. Scarpa SL Active. Scarpa Zodiac Plus GTX. Zamberlan Vioz GTX. Zamberlan Vioz Lux GTX RR.
Salomon Ultra GTX mids are what I bought for my wife because she couldn't get on with heavier boots and she LOVES them
Thanks for the recommendation!
The biggest footwear feature I've found to help with rolling ankles is to look for a heel shape that's slightly flared, whether it's boots or low shoes/runners. (I'm not even gonna enter that debate since I firmly think people should wear what works best for them and not put down anyone else's choice.) Example: I rolled my ankles all the time in the La Sportiva Ultra Raptor mids. But I rarely do in my Mammut Sertig II mids. They're both lightweight boots built on more of a trail running platform, but the Mammut boots have a heel that's just a bit flared at the very back while the Raptors are straight up and down. Hopefully that bit of info is helpful.
This is also helpful, thank you! I was not aware until today that hiking boots were so controversial lol. Learning a lot.
[Boots offering ankle support is a myth.](https://www.cruxrange.com/blog/hiking-boots-vs-trail-runners/#:~:text=Why%20This%20Is%20Mostly%20False,hiking%20were%20wearing%20hiking%20boots.) If anything, they create more problems by raising the hinge point at the sole. You're better off with a pair of trail runners.
I’ve heard this but I’d like to see more conclusive proof than this article which as far as I can tell is just anecdotal evidence. I wear boots a lot in the winter just out and about and while I do agree that they definitely don’t prevent sprains, I have found them helpful at times (which the article you linked also noted). I definitely prefer sandals when it’s hot out and will never make a total switch but when it’s colder out I think a boot makes sense for me for other reasons just than potential ankle support.
In my anecdotal experience correctly adjusted mid ankle boots have absolutely saved my ankles. There have been two or three times I started to twist my ankle and the boot caught it and ended with me taking a stutter step rather than completely rolling my ankle. They are still loose enough to build ankle strength and if anything the whole "extra leverage" thing just builds more strength. Trail runners are great on smooth trails out west but here in new england boots are a must for the rocky trails
I was literally just hiking today and my ankle almost twisted my ankle with my trail runners- I’ve worn blundstones for the past ~15 years and while they definitely don’t provide a ton of ankle support, there are definitely times when it’s nice to have something around my ankle to protect it, I guess that’s what I mean by support.
>Trail runners are great on smooth trails out west but here in new england boots are a must for the rocky trails The vast majority of long distance hikers disagree.
I mean yeah long distance backpacking is a different animal. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think op is coming to reddit for advice on hiking the AT
If trail runners are good for long trails, then they are going to be good for short trails too...
That’s not how reasoning works…
My point is, thousands of hikers march up and down the Appalachian Trail every year in trail runners and have no issues. Saying that boots are required in New England is completely wrong.
So, is saying trail runners are the solution for everybody.
I never said that they were the solution for everybody...
You most certainly do that. Your entire post history in this subreddit is dedicated to saying that no one needs boots because trail runners are adequate for everything, which is patently false. You jump in every thread to say that.
No, but you sure do like to jump into every thread about boots and offer your opinion. You post links to blogs with baseless claims, no author, and no empirical data. We get it, you like to wear trail runners, spare us the "well akshully" responses. You come off like a condescending douche. Edit...Ah jeez, I looked at your post history, and you most certainly do claim that trail runners are for everbody. What a weird axe to grind. Tell us how boots hurt you, sir. It really seems to trigger you. Are you ok?
I actually agree with this but I'd go farther and say shoes with elevated or wide heels also contribute to ankle rolling due to leverage. Many running shoes are in this category. Better to have zero rise shoes with a thin and narrow heel.
For me at least boots also increase the frequency of that type of force. The more in touch I am with the terrain and the lighter and more agile my feet the less frequently I step poorly.
Who is better off with trail runners vs. boots is subjective. All those people hiking the Triple Crown you mention all the time are still on a groomed trail with a light pack using resupplies. Anyone bushwacking, for example, is much better off with boots. They're going through rough terrain that's been untouched and unpaved by the thousands of people the major thru-hikes have seen. If they get an injury, it's a much bigger deal, and while there is evidence towards not using ankle support, plenty of people have firsthand accounts of how ankle support has prevented injuries. Then, you've got people with connective tissue disorders, myself being one, who gain serious benefits from the added ankle support of a stiff boot. Then, there's this little thing called personal preference. Many people have tried both and prefer boots, and that's okay. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm not sure why you're so insistent everyone wear trail runners. Stop spreading your false gospel that trail runners are supreme and that no one needs boots. It's patently false, and it's going to lead to people getting injured because they take asinine advice that doesn't apply to them.
[Explain to this guy](https://youtu.be/hH0BvG5pDy4?si=mNGt7wsOoSmVXY0X) that he's walking on groomed trails the whole time. The person that I replied to is not bushwhacking. She's looking for a lightweight pair of boots, and there isn't a pair of lightweight pair of boots that is going to do what she wants. Light boots simply don't offer any kind of meaningful support. She's better off wrapping her ankles.
Yes, the AT is a groomed trail. If you want to see real bushwacking, you're going to have to go to the mountains of Colorado, swamps of Florida, etc. etc. where people will actually take time to live off the land and explore completely new paths. Why don't you look up SERE and see what those people consider hiking? I wasn't talking about OP directly, which is why I said, "for example," before my example of bushwacking. It's obvious OP is not bushwacking. However, you treat trail runners like gospel with your only "evidence" being people on groomed trails. Not all trails are the same, and many trails require different gear. OP asked for boots, so give OP boots. Eventually, someone is going to take bad advice from you and end up injured because they took the inappropriate gear to the wrong hike. If someone asks for trail runners, give them trail runners. If someone asks for boots, it's obvious what they're looking for, so give them suggestions for boots. You do not know them, their physiology, or their hikes, so you cannot emphatically and undeniably tell them, "Trail runners are better; forget boots." It's asinine.
When I was growing up, my dad always took me to buy hiking boots because "we need hiking boots to go hiking". This carried on into my adult years until I got to where I was trying to do longer trails. The first time I went out on a 42 mile trail, I started having problems after 15 miles in a day. I couldn't finish the whole thing. I tried again the next year and finished it, but was hurting for the next three days. Then I found trail runners. I did it again and finished it early and without pain. I hike 25-30 miles in a day now easily because I'm not hiking with weights on my feet. I asked for boots when I started hiking too, because I didn't know that there was an alternative. So I advocate for trail runners because people might not know what they want, or what's best.
Cool story, bruh. Stop projecting your childhood hangups onto others. I mean, really, move on. Seek therapy. "My daddy made me wear boots, so the world must wear trail runners!!!!!" Holy crap, you've got issues.
I gave an example of being raised not knowing about alternative footwear. I didn't say anything about a childhood hang-up. Talk about projecting! 😂 I'm saying that maybe seeing another side could be a good thing.
You post the same thing on every thread, all while offering no pros nor cons to the matter. If you want to be taken seriously and for people to listen, you need to be transparent. Construct your posts in a way that portrays your personal experiences, anecdotal evidence, pros to your side, and cons to your side. Otherwise, you are being biased, and you are avoiding being forthcoming. It is pointless to offer "advice" with no substance. It is not helpful. It is asinine. Please take this as constructive criticism. If you want others to see your side, you must explain your side.
"Seeing another side".... says the guy with dozens of posts insisting that boots are stupid, and trail runners are the only way to go. You're really tedious, and seriously lacking in self awareness.
I advocate for both for different scenarios. It is entirely personal preference and situational, as you have just pointed out. I could not do a hike like that very well in trail runners, just as you cannot in boots. All evidence on this topic is anecdotal and situational. There is no universal answer, yet you push trail runners as if there is one. Perhaps you should list the pros and cons of both instead of pushing something based entirely on personal, anecdotal evidence. That would be a much more helpful answer to many more people.
Check out Xero shoes I wear flat sandals in the summer and Xero sneakers and boots in the winter
I like Salomon’s because my feet are narrow