[kraitcatcher]

Rogue,Ah yes,the breaking in period,brings me back to 72' and how I thought my feet were going to revolt.break in is a little painful ,for me any way as I have damaged feet,but it is mostly muscles getting used that haven't been used in a while.a tip,try em on right out the box and walk around the block a few times,find out what is rubbing and put double thick dr. scholls mole skin and then keep at it and as often as you can.I looked strange showing up for church in a suit and tie,and hiking boots But as for there sturdiness,I haven't seen any Guides but I would match these up to them .If I needed to plant a toe hole with these,I wouldn't think twice.I think these are going to do the job,but as I said,I need custom foot beds because of my feet.Will let y'all know after the trip,Regards,J.

[Rogue]

As I'm still comparing and relying on those who have already purchased, I'm certainly keeping abreast of the reports on how these boots work out. I wrote Alico about their slightly lighter weight Summit and got this reply today: "we sent middle November to Sierra Trading all range size (normal & wide width) of model Summit. Boots have been sent by ocean so I suppose they will be there before the End of the year but for more information you have to contact their customer service." As this boot is about 2 lbs. lighter than the Guide model, I'm also looking at them. At the moment, they have sizes that I can't even get close to filling up with socks and inserts so, I wait. It is wonderful that so many still respect the "old ways" and have such regard for a real boot. Any of the "light-weight freaks" that might read this, cover your eyes and run lest you receive permanent damage. I am 45 and still believe that backpacking to be a sojourn into the wilderness. I will never be happy with glued sole shoes and will take the weight of quality over the greed of machine-made boots any day. Craftsman like Alico, and whoever makes the North Col are appreciative of those of us that recognize their efforts and at the prices they are asking, the deal far exceeds Vasque, Raichle, and Montrail (who has yet to hear from me but, will very shortly since they discontinued the Mazama). These are my opinions and not meant to step on anyone who has purchased boots from these companies and paid way too much but, who might like the way they serve their purposes. To all who are willing to post their experences with recent purchases, many thanks, I'm sure, from everyone reading this thread. I climb down from my soapbox and yield the floor to any who would like it.

[jimmymac]

Rogue, When I was young, I enjoyed the heck out of backpacking. I took a small break for about thirty years. Now, with older kids and fewer hours required at work, I'm just starting to get my soles dirty once again. Needless to say, I've recently had to stock an empty gear locker. When I proceeded to do so, I found that little I remembered from the 1970s was still the same. I fought an uphill battle to find "real" boots, "real" sox, a "real" canteen, a "real" stove, etc. Before too long I quit rebelling and started looking objectively at the tradeoffs of various products. In some cases (boots might be one for you) I stuck to my guns. In other areas, I elected to try new versions that weren't available when I was kid. With a lot of effort and a lot of garage sale visits, I probably could have replicated my 1973 complement of equipment. Then I'd be out on the trail with my 45-pound pack, wondering why it seemed so enjoyable in the '70s. I'd be shaking my head as "reckless, pajama-clad" hikers passed me by. My feeling is that lighter weight boots would not work out for you. You have already made up your mind, and no lightweight argument will likely sway you. You seem not only willing, but happy, to bear the cost and the weight of a pair of "real" boots. From boots to electronic gear, the pursuit of happiness can sometimes mean simply getting what you want. I share my recent experience just to say that this old dog had to force himself to learn some new tricks. Luckily, today's marketplace and the Internet allowed me to make my conversion selectively and quickly. As a result, I'm traveling farther, safer, and more enjoyably than when I was 16. Here's hoping your ship comes in soon! -JM

[Rogue]

There are new tricks that can be learned and I'm not totally closed minded to those but, one must understand the times "we" grew up in. Eric Ryback took pride in "RUNNING" the AT in record time. I no longer have the desire to run a foot race to be the fastest on a trail. Years have tempered me into wanting to gain the most out of any experience. The days of lugging a camera that requires film has waned and now, a small, pluggin memory chip can hold more than we "fossils" imagined in the past. I cut my teeth on Colin Fletcher's "The Compete Walker", checked out from the library in a time when manufactureres didnt' know how to glue a sole to a boot and yes, though I have purchased "IV", I still maintain my diligence to the old ways. I will still use an external frame pack (though I may not load it to capacity) and my SVEA123R is still functioning perfectly (and I recently aquired an original 123 and it too, is in perfect working order). My love for a good, heavy to medium weight boot stems from the knowledge that my sedentary job behind a computer for the past 20 some odd years has weakened my body and I, for one, am not getting any younger physically. I firmly believe that everyone, that is "EVERYONE" should hike their own hike and that there is no right or wrong in this endeavor. The young ladies known as "The Barefoot Sisters" who may or may not have competed the AT have as much or more respect as someone like me that will never give up his Norweigan/Goodyear welt boot. I am old enough to understand what you are saying and you obviously knew what I was trying to get across or you would have not written. I wrote Vasque because I had to rid myself of a fantastic pair of boots (which no longer came close to fitting me) and here is what they replied with: "The reason for the industry moving away from this type of construction has many reasons. 1.The Consumers want low or no break-in boots. 2.Consumers want lightweight boots. 3.The human cost of building the heavy weight boots to too expensive. The muscle needed to craft such boots it too hard on the workers. To manipulate these heavier leathers over time injures. The modern cement construction allows lighter, flexible boots to be built. I hope this helps some... " Upon reading multiple trail journals, I see that response 1 and 2 are completely accurate...the people doing thru-hikes have gone to a "lighter" boot. Lighter being 3 lbs.? Yes, 3 is lighter than 4 but, are you really saving that much when they hit PA or ME and complain about the pounding their feet take from the rocky trail they encounter? Or that their boots fall completely apart after 100 miles, 200, 1000? Yes, weight plays a part but, where do we draw the line between saving weight and saving money? A 6 month sojourn for these men and women is costly enough without having to pay another $200+ for boots that didn't hold up under the rigors of the trail. I do not nor will I ever attempt to take any thing away from these people that make the effort of a thru-hike on any trail because they have accomplished or attempted something that I have not been able to do yet. I have the utmost respect for all of those that have tried or completed these journeys. If one wants to wear cheap boots and carry pepsi can alcohol stoves, I salute them but, I will continue to work my way along with heavy boots and my more than light-weight SVEA and it will be my own hike that I live. Please don't take this as any more than just my own views and not some childish flame because I, above all, feel that everyone should do it their own way. That said, I look for people who have been engaged in this "sport" more actively than I have and do not discount any information so, maybe this old dog may learn new tricks but, boots won't be the one I settle for. May your trails be happy and safe always. The soapbox is relinquished again.