Now, I am no gear biff but boots really aren't one of my strongest subjects. Until recently i was under the impression that Scarpa boots, made on italian lasse (a naturaly thin foot), were always a thin fitment unless you bought the extra wide fitting. Last nite i went to get some summer boots of a wide fitting but one of the blokes was telling me that they are a wide fitting, i wasn't in any place to argue because this guy is a seriously experienced mountaineer, and knows about kit to 'boot'.
I wanted the storekeeper to order me in some Meindl's as my summer boot as the Scarpas just wern't comfortable. The only problem is that I have La Sportiva, Nepal Extremes as my winter boots which have been issued to me and they are fine, allbeit a size larger than the boots i normally wear, but the same guy says that Sportivas are a narrow fit.
I just wanted to know what the thought of people on here was, It wasn't in a shop, it was in my stores so i wouldn't be paying for the boot and i know the guy so he wasn't giving me duff gen.
For a long time I struggled with a pair of Scarpa SLs (fit felt fine, but I always ended up with blisters on the heel when ascending). Steve at Barkers in Ringwood took one look at my feet and told me they were too narrow for the boot. After a complete measure and inspection, he told me I should be having all sorts of problems (pronation and prominent bone at the base of the big toe). He fitted me out with a pair of Meindl Lhotses which have been absolutely faultless. Based on my experience, Scarpa SLs would appear to be a wider fitting - not sure about other Scarpas, but some are sure to be built on the same last.
Being a "seriously experienced mountaineer" means you're good at climbing mountains, not fitting boots...
Feet (and boot lasts) are a complex three dimensional shape and "narrow" and "wide" plus a number size just isn't enough information to properly describe it. For example, my feet are wide in some places but not in others and I get on with Scarpas very well, but friends with feet that are relatively wide in different places to mine think Scarpas are like razor blades... I have a very high arch, so how wide is my foot at the arch? Arguably very narrow indeed if you look at the tread, but on the other hand higher up it's probably much wider than average, so my "wide" feet will still fit comfortably in a boot that's narrow at the tread of the arch where someone with a flatter foot might find them agonising. And so on...
So the bottom line is try on in person, and don't assume that one person's view of "wide" or "narrow" will necessarily have much bearing on your feet, as "wide" can be at different places both along the foot from end to end and vertically up and down it.
The only way to find out is to try a lot of boots on. I have a narrow heel but a medium forefoot, or so I think and have been measured. In shoes I roll my foot within even the most narrow of makes, which makes me think I have a narrow forefoot as well, which is as I had always thought.
My conclusion is that measurement gets you so far, then you have to experience things. My local shop has a gold fitting service that allows you to take it home and actually wear the boot outside on walks for up to a month. If they fit you keep and are happy with good boots, if not take them back and get your complete money back no problems. That is provided you buy one of the boots they recommend. Their staff have all been trained in proper shoe measurement and fitting. Including full length and width fitting while seated and while your foot is loaded. They also look at your foot and see you walking. On top of that before you try any boot on they get you to place your feet into the inner soles of the boot while both sitting and standing, one inner sole at a time. This is as one last check that the boot shape fits close enough to your foot shape. Then as a final back up because they are so confident of their process you get the gold guarantee! Phew! What a palaver? I remember when you had a whole series of racks with daisy roots joined by a piece of string tied through an eyelet and you had to root around for your size as they were all mixed. No such thing as gender specific shoes or different widths. You got your boots and made your feet fit them. And I am only in my 30s too!
BTW if you are limited by the one shop you could be missing out on your perfect boot in a brand your shop doesn't stock.
Its not a shop, its stores at the club im in. We get issued with boots because if we fall over in our own we can't claim compensation, where as if we fall in there 'recommended' boots we can.
I know an experienced mountaineer doesn't mean that they are good at fitting boots, its just that i don't really want to get into an argument with him because hes a great teacher and i don't want to burn any bridges that I mite need someday.
I think Scarpa do the BX and BXX as well as the normal one. That does not mean they are all stocked. You could end up with the very wide and the medium width ones in stock in a British shop due to the perception that most Brits have a wide fitting foot not a narrow one. I always bought Scarpa SLs and was on my 3rd or 4th pair when I realised they did not fit me. The first ones fitted like a glove as did the second but then I am not so sure. This makes me think that my foot has gotten narrower (unlikely) or Scarpa have increased the volume of the last. Also, The longevity of them decreased from 10 years to 4 years to less than 2years. My last pair's sole went slick and then cracked and delaminated badly. Since the leather had cracked and withered where the foot creases it I thought it was nt worth re-soling.
I always look after leather boots with cleaning and nikwax products. I never dry near a fire or even store near a fire. Usually I dry with newspaper in them in my inner porche which is generally cool. Either that or upstairs in winter which due to storage heaters is pretty much a uniform temperature (always away from sources of heat). That makes me think the leather is not as good as of old and also the soles are not as hard wearing as usual.
I would not recommend Scarpa to anyone as a lot of my friends have had them and all have worn the soles away quicker than they expected them to. I think Zamberaln, who went very quiet in this country for a while, has come back with a very good and competitive range. When I got my first Scarpas there were only two makes worth getting Scarpa and Zamberlan. Or at least judging by what the shops stocked. They only had those two makes in and no others except cheap and nasties like daisy roots. Zamberlans always seemed to be lighter than the Scarpas if my memory serves me well.
An experienced mountianeer generally knows about gear and boots are gear of sorts. It is not unreasonable to expect a seasoned outdoors person to know about boots if they are into their particular activity. Kayakers talk about boats and the handling others talk about their specific gear too. It is not unreasonable for outdoor activitist to know about their gear and related gear too.
Richard - dtating the obvious but you really do need to try as big a range of boots as have been recommended to get the right ones.
An experienced mountianeer generally knows about gear and boots are gear of sorts. It is not unreasonable to expect a seasoned outdoors person to know about boots if they are into their particular activity.
It's entirely reasonable that they'll know what works for themselves but that's not really the same thing as knowing what'll be good for someone else. And where there are widespread misconceptions it's entirely likley they'll be passed on (which is why in the past I'd have recommended you Scarpa boots for "wide feet", for example, or indeed in the further past told you that you need boots for their ankle support if hillwalking, because I genuinely thought you did need that, though it turns out I was very wrong).
Kayakers talk about boats and the handling others talk about their specific gear too. It is not unreasonable for outdoor activitist to know about their gear and related gear too.
They certainly do, and with few exceptions I've found thay make the same sort of over-generalisations and repetitions of "received wisdom" as anyone else. That's partly why so much guff is written in reviews, and why so few people are any good at writing them.
its just that i don't really want to get into an argument with him because hes a great teacher and i don't want to burn any bridges that I mite need someday.
I don't really see how having tried something and found it uncomfortable is the basis of getting into an argument: you know how your feet feel and what he's saying isn't wrong as much as incomplete information. If you're getting something ordered in go and try out the stuff you want first. Make it worth the fitter's while by buying something in their shop anyway as a payment for the fitting service.
To say they are ALL wide fit, or not, is an ill-informed anecdotal load of crap. Scarpa boots come in a range of different "fits" because they do not use the same last for all the boots. For example, my Manta M4 fit my feet but Nepal, SL, ZG, Infinity boots do not.
Look on their website to see what they have to say. Always try before you buy. You know your feet better than anyone so you know what feels right when trying them on.
Also one person's experiences with a boot may be very different to yours. I've had terrible problems with Raichle build quality but others swear by them. Good luck with your boot hunt !
Peter - I guess it depends also on the type of person. I am the sort to do research before choosing stuff. I do read magazine reviews but also manufacturers' websites. I also read forum reviews. It could be a case that I think of serious, expreienced mountaineers would also want to take a similar degree of care on getting the right kit. Whilst everyone is different there are only so many variations of boot last shape and size out there to choose from. This would allow generalisations to be a valid starting point. It is why you can make generalisations about X type of boot is a potential Y is not. The original poster still has to try his X types of boots until he gets the one that is perfect or as near perfect for him. Posters on here can only help to narrow it down for him.
BTW which shop do you work in? It sounds like you work in an outdoor shop from your post. It is funny how things change almost like fashions. I remember when all boots had to be broken in. You were told to wear them around the house and on short walks at first before using them properly on a full walk. Now they mainly fit straight from the box in a lot of cases. Although I have not worn B2 or B2 boots for some time sot these could be the exception.
I do disagree with you about reviews and kayakers in particular. A lot of kayakers go to places like Tees Barrage when there is now water. If like the people I paddled with you take advantage of the demo boats and actually try them out. This makes for some people who know what they are talking about when they pass comments about one boat over the next. Also reviews are always subjective and once you find a reviewer who thinks the same way as you over a piece of gear or clothing you can generally get to know if your perceptions on gear matches. Once you find such a reviewer then you leanr to accept what they say. I find that the female clothing reviewer in TGO (Judy Armstrong I think) makes sense to me. Obviously I go for the male versions of what she recommends. I just find that she has similar critera for what works. I don't really get on with most of the Trail mags reviewer for some reason.
I guess it depends also on the type of person. I am the sort to do research before choosing stuff. I do read magazine reviews but also manufacturers' websites. I also read forum reviews. It could be a case that I think of serious, expreienced mountaineers would also want to take a similar degree of care on getting the right kit
While I commend this approach and try to research myself it is sadly limited by the quality of the information available to you, which tends to be conflicting and subjective in many cases and just inadequate in others. So it's quite easy to do your research and find Brand X is great for "wide feet", but despite having "wide feet" find that Brand X just don't fit...
Whilst everyone is different there are only so many variations of boot last shape and size out there to choose from. This would allow generalisations to be a valid starting point. It is why you can make generalisations about X type of boot is a potential Y is not. The original poster still has to try his X types of boots until he gets the one that is perfect or as near perfect for him. Posters on here can only help to narrow it down for him.
I think you missed my point, and my point is that statements like "narrow" and "wide" are effectively meaningless because they lack sufficient information to describe the boot's fit. Narrow or wide at what part of the foot relative to what others? The only generalisation it's really safe to make is that you need to try them on! So, for example, take my friend who finds Scarpas like "razor blades". She wears Meindls. Another friend, who has a pair of Meindls, has clearly obviously narrow feet looking at them, and found Scarpas she tried to have far too much space. So with this pair generalisations get you nowhere, and you can't predict it'll be different with anyone else.
BTW which shop do you work in? It sounds like you work in an outdoor shop from your post.
I work for the NHS as an IT officer, nothing to do with retail.
I do disagree with you about reviews and kayakers in particular. A lot of kayakers go to places like Tees Barrage when there is now water. If like the people I paddled with you take advantage of the demo boats and actually try them out. This makes for some people who know what they are talking about when they pass comments about one boat over the next.
But how one feels about a kayak depends very much on the way you paddle and the way you fit into it. The club I'm in has a small fleet and I've tried most of the boats in it, and others have too, and the conclusions we draw aren't the same. I wouldn't give house-space to some of them that other people love, so if I tell you I think a plastic P&H Capella is a tippy-tank (which is what I genuinely think) then that isn't necessarily useful information to you, as the folk who have it as their first choice of boat will also attest to. Similarly with paddles: I have a cranked paddle but frankly I'd not bother again, I don't find it makes any appreciable difference over a straight one despite the research I did which suggested it would make a big difference. But folk I know swear blind it makes a colossal difference. And it might, to them, but it doesn't to me. Different paddling technique, different physiology, opinion based on direct empirical evidence that's not much use at all to a 3rd party collecting opinions...
It's impossible for a review to not be subjective at some level, but what a good one (e.g. Chris Townsend's) can do is describe objective points and suggest how they might affect a user. So to the man who loves multiple pockets a pair of cargos is better than a pair of tracksters and vice-versa, but while a bad review will say "the pockets are great!" or "the pockets are terrible!", the good review will tell you how many pockets and where they are and how big, what they might get in the way of, how they affect the drying time and so on. You can then make up your own mind which you want based on the information rather than whether the reviewer liked it or not, which is far more useful to me than being limited to thinking "X likes it. I'll like it too!"
But as for boots, describing the fit isn't much use if you don't have the same feet. And as we've seen, "wide" or "narrow" isn't enough to count as the same as anything. It simply isn't enough information.
I also said it is subjective, but where I differ is that you can often find reviewers who have similar subjective viewpoints as you. Then it is less of a subjective problem more of a useful source of information. As in all things you have to learn to be descerning in which piece of information you value. It is the same with forums. It seems we both disagree, but I actually agree with selcted parts of your viewpoint. Things aren;t black and white all the time.
All opinions are valid but only some are true to the person receiving them. Valid is not the right word but can't quite remembe the right one. I mean of use not valid or worth saying.
There is a boot making company called Altberg in Richmond, N Yorks. They do a range of sizes including 1/2 and they are avaiable in 5 width fittings. All boots are made to the same last, well the same 5 lasts! They also have courteous, knowledgable, professional fitters there who help you get fitted correctly. Obviously using your input during the fitting.
I also said it is subjective, but where I differ is that you can often find reviewers who have similar subjective viewpoints as you.
But that isn't going to help you decide whether a boot will fit, as that isn't entirely subjective. You need hard information, and since "narrow" and "wide" aren't enough for the job you can't do the job if that's the best you have to go on, however objective or otherwise it may be.
That I generally agree with a reviewer's opinions is a moot point if what I need to know is whether a boot will fit my feet. And that is the job here.
Certainly I'll trust various folk if they tell me this boat will surf better than that boat because of the planing rear hull design, but what is no use is taking their word for it whether I'll prefer hard chines or a rounded hull for carved turns. There's just no way for them to know, and the fact we like the same paddles, BAs, towlines, compass, hatch covers and paddling clothes doesn't really help.
As Justin said, Scarpa boots are made on a lot of different lasts. If you take the mirage, which is made on the DL last and is generally a wide fitting High volume "volume being size across the top of the foot" fitting, These fit me perfectly. If you take the Charmoz, which is made on a FT last, and is more Asymetric and narrower, dosent fit me at all.
Scarping being narrow isnt nescisarily true, as they do produce one of the widest highest volume boots on the market "scarpa ranger, made on the RB last".
Generally a good boot fitter will know about these fits, and they do actually have a correlation to the sizes on a brannock "except the volume fitting, as i know of no test the gauges volume except something personal to the boot fitter".Generally go to a shop known for its boot fittings "may be worth travelling" and get measured up. If the offer something similar to the "golden service" take it, as it is the best way to find the boots actuially fit, by using them in anger.
Sorry about the bore, i used to be a custom boot fitter when i used to work in outdoor retail.
Scarping being narrow isnt nescisarily true, as they do produce one of the widest highest volume boots on the market "scarpa ranger, made on the RB last".
I think this demonstrates Pete's point nicely. I have tried on countless pairs of boots in a quest to find something wide (and high volume) enough for my feet. The Scarpa Ranger is, to me, way down the list - there are many boots that feel 'wider' on my feet. I'm not saying that you're wrong, just that fit is far too complex to be described by a few words...
TtG's point that a lot of experienced folk will know gear well is true across quite a few areas, but the more I find out about quality boot fitting the more I'm convinced it just doesn't work for footwear outside of what works for their particular selves.
I suspect if I was transported into outdoor retail that I could sell packs, tents, clothing, stoves etc. on the basis of fairly sound advice with little to no extra training. But there's no way I could do that with footwear without a lot of extra learning, despite being a terminally sad gear junkie
In my opinion peter, Boot fitting is a rough art. Their are no deffinate answers. The best thing is to try the boots on, and where them about. As other people have said, no boots ever fit 2 people the same. Boot fitting com,es with experience, then you can use that knowledge to make informed choices. but it may not work, so try soemthing else!
Graeme, you are correct in saying it is wrong to generalise, but, for a customer, generally to eleborate into fiting terms will confuse the hell out of them. When i did custom boot fitting, you had to know about Bio mechanics of the foot, foot problems and causes, aswell as lacing techniques ect. Their are so many options to explai.
Do bear in mind with boots, if you have certain problems "bunions" the boots can be streched around them, or, in other cases the heel counter can be hated up and moulded to you heel.
