Bushwalk Australia

Edit for Clarity: This is a POST-TRIP report

G'day all, bit of a long time lurker, little time poster on these forums. I had looked for some information on these forums and elsewhere on the net prior to a recent trip but could find little to no good information, so thought I would post something in the hope others would find it interesting/useful. If it has been posted before, I apologize, and please point me too it!!

I don't really want to wade into a debate about minimalist and 'barefoot' footwear as opposed to more tradition boots etc. more just prefer to relate my experiences using it. There are pages and pages of discussion elsewhere about barefoot vs. shod running and walking, from both a bio-mechanical view and safety veiw.

The Background:

I had a call from a good mate a few months ago, a regular on these forums from Tasmania. He proposed an excursion to the Eastern Arthurs, a trip we had discussed doing 4-5 years ago after a Frenchmans Cap trip from where we could see Federation Peak and the hunger to experience climbing it awoke. As I prepared for it I found myself in a little bit of a quandary. I had been using minimalist footwear for walking and jogging for the last 10 months and was finding it excellent, and the prospect of pulling on a couple of half kilo boots and slogging up a mountain didn't appeal, however would minimalist footwear cut it? I have been using Vibram Five-Fingers for bushwalking in SE Queensland for a little while, would they be ok for Tassie? And with a pack? Up Feder and the EA's?

As mentioned research availed me little, had anyone attempted a EA Traverse and Federation Peak in Vibram Five-Fingers? I suspect it has been done in volleys or similar in the past, perhaps some of the older readers can help me out here. Anyhow after some tough off track and long (30km+) day walks in SE QLD I had confidence in their (and my) ability to handle the conditions, still not being sure of the ease and comfort levels however.

The Gear:

The 'shoes' used can be found here: http://www.vibramfivefingers.com/products/Five-Fingers-TrekSport-Mens.htm. I used them in conjunction with Moxie Gear Gaiters http://moxiegear.com.au/ for about 50% of the time. I found these gaiters to be very good, however I am not sure of their longevity in hard country. I didn't use the ankle bits, which may have implications on the some of the problems discussed below.

The Walker:

I am a fit active person in my early 30's. 6 foot, about 75kg's. Total pack weight was on the lighter side, 17kg's, 7days food + 1.5l of water inclusive. As previously mentioned I have been using minimalist footwear (Inov-8 F-Lite 230's and Roclite 285's for running and Vibram 5finger TrekSport for walking) for about 10 months. I run 15-20km/ week and do a decent day walk ie. 6 hours+ at least 2 times a month and the odd multi-day in terms of time spent on my feet. I do alot of riding both road and MTBing also.

The Walk:

A trip report can be found here: http://bushwalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=8657 Big thanks to Nick!

The Verdict:
Short story, awesome.

Long story: I found them to be very comfortable, I felt stable, nimble and safe in them, even (especially) on some of the sketchy exposed sections. I had no hot spots or blisters, they pulled out of mud easily, they gripped very well on logs, on mud and rock. Constant travel on sharp rock and hard surfaces posed no problems or discomfort. I had no unusual joint and muscle soreness during the trip, aside from a slight aggravation of an old ankle problem over one day that subsided overnight and didn't re-appear for the rest of the trip thankfully. I found I would be more conscious of my foot placement and accordingly walked allot 'softer', especially during the downhill sections. I suspect that by engaging more muscles through the feet and lower legs the load is spread and the stress of walking eased, so to speak, however that is something for another forum!

Possible Problems and Things to Consider:

In deeper mud I had to tighter the strap considerably or the heal would suck off a little. I almost ran out adjustment and I have wider feet than most, so if you have narrow feet you may want to consider a different model or the lace-up version. Another minor annoyance was after a bit of mud there would be a bit of build up in the toe/fore-foot areas, easily solved by removing and a rinse in the next creek, however if you were doing tracks with more mud sections ie. Southcoast/Frenchmans, you may need to be prepared to have a little clean out every hour or so. That may be offset by the fact you are not trying to haul a half kilo of leather and gaiter out of knee deep mud. Maybe by using a gaiter this could be avoided.

I wonder about longevity. Overall the pair I used came out relatively unscathed. I had a little separation of the fabric stitching on the top of the foot, nothing to impinge on the functioning, it remains to be seen how long they will last with hard use. I tend to destroy shoes quick.

We got some reasonably cold weather, probably walking in about 10 or lower degrees, combining that with the wet and a nasty windchill to make it allot lower and my feet were fine as long as we were walking, cold but not excessively. I don't think I would like to have to walk through snow for any extended periods. I did notice that the manufacturers offer a model with an insulated neoprene upper, might be worth consideration if you are wanting to use them in area prone to snowfall?

I would hesitate to attempt a trip of this magnitude without using this style of footwear prior. One man's meat is another man's poison. I gather from reading, and also from personal experience that most people using conventional footwear will take a while to adjust as the foot, ankle and lower leg muscles adjust and strengthen. I would encourage anyone considering transitioning to this style to do their own research and trialing as much as possible.

Another thing to round off this rather lengthy post: Track wear...I wonder if using a soft edged and soled footwear would slow track wear as opposed to hard edged and soled boots in the same way that marsupial feet have lower wear rates as opposed to hoofed animals ie. sheep/cattle? Purely speculation, be interested to hear thoughts on it however.

In conclusion: for a tracked walk (or semi tracked, however you would prefer to class this walk) I personally found this style of footwear very good, and more than capable. They have negatives, as do boots, its a trade off either way, my preference personally falls toward this style over a more traditional full leather boots for probably 95% (arbitrarily produced number!) of walking most people will do.

What about toe stubbing? In a boot there is space between the toe and the boot, so there is not a lot of direct contact when you clobber a rock or log, but in these it appears that you are right there?

HI

I am curious with them as camp footwear but at $249 in Australia for the Trek and shonkey distributor that promises supplies endless but does not deliver to a local shop plus limited sizing (I am size 47-49) I will give them a miss and rely on Crocs for that role.

As for footwear in Tassie and conditions, it is a chook's lottery. The sodden Loden Plains can have a crust form that you can express over it or it could be Flanders Fields re-visited. All depends on the rain for the week or three before hand. The track is not that boney so you might be able to get away with them. Some tracks are very rocky in Tassie, especially down South.

Footwear is a highly personal thing. For me having nice warm boots when walking in "unexpected" snow and constantly flooded tracks is important but for others it does not worry them. Personally if I was doing what you propose I would be sticking with footwear that I have had a long favourable personal experience with.

Cheers

Hello photohiker, I stubbed a toe twice over 6 days of walking, neither time badly. Both times I stubbed were when I was getting a bit tired. If you did happen to really bash into a rock with a toe I reckon it would hurt, and you could end up with anything from mild bruising to a broken toe, there is not alot of protection there. As I mentioned I found myself walking differently, being more conscious of foot placement and not clomping through things like you tend to do with boots. That probably comes with practice and usage.

I got a pair from K2 in Brissy for 150odd Ent, they knocked a bit off for me cause I asked nicely! I cannot really comment much further on distributors and price tho, I would guess it varies state to state.

Ah and just to make myself clear, this is a post trip analysis, just put up here as a 'review' on how they went. Agreed about the 'I would be sticking with footwear that I have had a long favourable personal experience with.' I have had that with Vibrams, but not under these conditions before!

I watched a guy walk the Inca trail in these things.. I can't say I was impressed enough to consider it a sensible idea.
The things were soaked with water the entire trip and really didn't look like they would be a sensible footwear option for a multi day walk.
He swore by them...

I dunno whether the argument of well I do long days walks translates well to a multi-day trip.. maybe you should test them carrying a 15-20kg pack on a multi-day trip as well?

It sounds like a bit of a silly risk to rock up to the Arthurs with minimalist footwear and put yourself in a situation where you'll could need rescuing..

Personally I think they'll work pretty well on the overland track.. not convinced about the mighty SW...

Just be be clear again, this is a POST trip report, the EA's and Federation is done and dusted (or mudded)

Interesting. Doubt they'd suit my style of clumsy semi-controlled falling (and injury proneness) but I've been considering them as camp shoes. Hmmn.

ollster wrote:Interesting. Doubt they'd suit my style of clumsy semi-controlled falling (and injury proneness) but I've been considering them as camp shoes. Hmmn.

Agreed, think you would have to be very sure footed and have a light frame to be able to use them. As I fatigue I start tripping up on tree roots etc. Would be fun to try them on a daywalk, esp if rock scrambling was involved.

stepbystep wrote:Agreed, think you would have to be very sure footed and have a light frame to be able to use them. As I fatigue I start tripping up on tree roots etc. Would be fun to try them on a daywalk, esp if rock scrambling was involved.

I would also be concerned about ankle protection, and having rocks falling on my feet when scrambling and walking through scree etc. Might buy a pair of the neoprene topped ones and try them for a bit. At ~300g a pair it's a fairly reasonable camp shoe if nothing else.

I'll post this to remind people that Pete has just returned from an Eastern Arthurs traverse in them, hence the report. There's also one of him climbing Feder in the trip report.

Personally I was quite impressed by them. At the start they looked too lightweight and I did wonder what they would be like on rocky ground, but they do have a harder sole than you think. And we couldn't go the dry boots argument as by day 1 everyone had wet feet/boots, the vibrams just dried quicker..
I also think that wearing these for longer trip is something you need to slowly work into.
I'd love to try them on a summit walk like Cradle Mt though.

They are a couple of things I wondered about also Ollster, personally I found that not to be a problem, thus far at least, maybe I got lucky, or maybe that is just an element of risk accepted with the style of shoe, a trade-off for weight saving, stability, and reduced fatigue?

The reason I posted my height and weight was to give people an idea of my build, I am a bit of a whippet. If your a stocky person it may be different for you. If you are interested, Ollster has the right idea, grab a pair and try them on a few day walks. Size can be fickle, best to try before you buy, I have noticed a few pairs on ebay floating around from people buying an incorrect size.

Peter C wrote:They are a couple of things I wondered about also Ollster, personally I found that not to be a problem, thus far at least, maybe I got lucky, or maybe that is just an element of risk accepted with the style of shoe, a trade-off for weight saving, stability, and reduced fatigue?

Very cool. I'm 103kgs and a tad under 190cms, have the ankles of a 50kg woman and the balance of a drunkard with 1.5 legs. I'll see if I can find some to try on... apart from camp, I could see these being a very good shoe for scrambling, which I hate doing in the Herman Munster Scarpa SLM3, as they have very little "rock feel" through the sole.

Peter, i am fascinated by your post. I have been reading a lot recently about bare foot running and using shoes when bushwalking. I guess the natural evolution to this is walking in vibram 5 fingers. What you have written makes perfect sense, especially if you look at foot anatomy. What a lot of people forget is that for 97,000 years the method of human locomotion was walking without footwear. So the question is do we need footwear now to walk?

Your method of locomotion relies on the leg's natural ability to absorb shock using the soft tissues of the metatarsals and legs... just like our ancestors. You have some rubber to protect you from penetration and abrasion and to give more grip, but not enough to interfere with proprioception.Sounds perfectly sensible, most sprained ankles falls etc result from errors in proprioception, and I recently posted about how I noticed this when walking recently in my stiff soled boots after a long lay-off.
So why would you need boots? Not for the mud and cold as it only gets to -10 in winter in tassy, insufficient to result in frostbite (the natives of tierra del feugo in Sth America went virtually nude all year by the way). Not for protection from heavy loads as there are plenty of people who are 20kg overweight who still manage to be able to walk (therefore the foot/ankle architecture is capable of supporting lean weight + 20 kg).
Protection from rock abrasion and penetration... possibly. I would be hesitant to tackle a dolerite talus field in five fingers, although (as you point out) heavy neoprene cuffs and gaiters may mitigate the abrasion from rocks . Also (as you point out) foot placement is more secure with the increased proprioceptive feedback from not wearing stiff soled boots. My main concern would be penetration from rocks and the inability to prop over two rock points... both of which may not be a problem with the increased awareness of foot placement, flexibility and grip afforded by vibram five fingers (as you have discussed).
So... that only leaves traversing ice fields as a major reason to wear boots and to my knowledge that is not a huge issue in tassy ( I can only think of Mt feathertop or bogong {victoria}in winter where crampons/edging snow slopes may be an issue). Insaying this I don't have a lot of experience in SW tassy, but have done considerable off track walking in other areas so am familiar with the peculiarly austere conditions encountered in tasmania.

The main impediment would be retraining your legs I imagine... it's not just the lack of sole, it's the lack of heel and your gait needs to change from heel first striking to metatarsal first striking (which is how we evolved). The foot is designed to absorb energy via the metatarsals (ball of the foot) and progressively transmit the force through the talus joint to the leg, modern footwear changes this relationship considerably. One important factor is feedback from sensory nerves to the brain from the forefoot. This is delayed in boot wearing and positional awareness comes from either the flat forefoot or from the talus (ankle) by then it's too late... Most people make the assumption that wearing boots protects from ankle sprain when the opposite is true, boots contribute by removing proprioceptive feedback about the forefoot until the stiff boot sole has managed to lever the anterior talo fibular joint off your talus....ouch.
In saying this I have had no issues in stiff soled boots, including mountaineering boots in NZ, but maybe I'm just lucky. Stiff soled boots have their place, certainly.
Anyway, in musing about this i'm not going to change to 5 fingers immediately... but it's given me more to think about...

ollster wrote:

Peter C wrote:They are a couple of things I wondered about also Ollster, personally I found that not to be a problem, thus far at least, maybe I got lucky, or maybe that is just an element of risk accepted with the style of shoe, a trade-off for weight saving, stability, and reduced fatigue?

Very cool. I'm 103kgs and a tad under 190cms, have the ankles of a 50kg woman and the balance of a drunkard with 1.5 legs. I'll see if I can find some to try on... apart from camp, I could see these being a very good shoe for scrambling, which I hate doing in the Herman Munster Scarpa SLM3, as they have very little "rock feel" through the sole.

Ollster - I think I am the 70kg/177cm version of you. I redefine clumsy.

I have done two day walk in the KSO version and am realy happy with them. I wear them abuot a bit of the rest of teh time. Initially I was watching my fet as to were to place them safety. Quickly I Learnt to feel my way, walking on the balls of my feet. No stubbed toes, no twisted ankles. Even surfing down a gravel slope. unintentionally, was easier than boots.

I am not sure I am up to a multiday way, but htese are now my camp shoe, so I can venture forth if the terraine looks positve. I too worry about the protection of ankles from abrasion - being so clumsy. The gladiator shin covers in the photo does still seem to expose the ankles. But I am more than happy to keep experimenting. My SL-3's may start gathering dust.

P

I've got a pair of these and plan to take them to the Arthurs in February, though I must say they will be my camp shoes to compliment my Scarpas. The ones I have are too big for me (don't buy your boot size) so I actually wear them with Injinji socks and they aren't too bad, at least until my new smaller ones arrive.

I haven't used them too much yet but they are surprisingly good at not trasferring through sharp rocks etc compared to runners. Stability is much better than runners as you are basically walking shoe-less in regard to that, and grip is also quite good as your foot sort of shapes to the ground more.

I think they are well worth a try, though I doubt they will become my go to "boots" as my gross weight on a walk like this is closer to 115kg instead of Peter's 92kg, plus I am just a tad less fit But for some walks I can't wait to try them out, as suggested walking on big scree with them should be great.

And yeah, $250 is just stupid.

i've had an experimental pair of the trek version for about 8 months. a lot of my walks are of an exploratory fashion and not following human paths.
i will not buy another pair for these three reasons:
a) the lack of protection of my ankles- australian plants are spiky, scratchy or serrated. also, leeches and mozzies like my ankles. additionally if you were to step on a low striking snake such as a tiger you'd be buggered.
b) i have twice stubbed my toe bad enough for me to curse the shoes loudly and further discolour them with blood.
c) they are buggered already, and therefore somewhat uneconomical

in their defense, i have carried them on the last few wanders for slipping on round camp and dealing with water crossings. they are also quite novel to wear when abseiling and rock scrambling.

I also have a few different pairs of 5-fingers.... the treks (in the photo) are WAY better for grip and padding - they are great for walking so long as your feet are conditioned to this style of walking. There is very little toe protection and with a HEAVY pack they are a little less comfy. The main worry in my experience is getting a stick between the toes!
The shoes are F#@!%ing awesome otherwise - but probably not to everyones taste?!
Although i prefer the material tops on the KSO s to the leather on the trecks the soles are not so good on wet / slippery surfaces and are no comparison to the trecks. Nice to hear of others in this monkey feet like me around!
PS they are colder than boots too and a bit more fiddly to put on at first.
I have done many trips in mine and find they are no where near as durable as traditional boots
BTW there is NO WAY they are worth $250!!!! maybe $50 tops - and I am a fan of them

Hi

A few specials in Australia put them under the $100 mark but only in limited sizes. Size 47 are $249 for the Treks. Unless some common-sense is applied they will never make it into my kit. USA pricing is around $125-$100 normal. Yeap, Moosejaw have confirmed that they are on the no ship list. Warning. If you are lucky enough to stumble across a USA online shop that will ship them, then keep it quite and send by PM as it seams every-time someone mentions an online shop that ships Casacade Design (Thermarest, MSR, etc) or Black Diamond suddenly the online shop will not ship them. We have rather greedy distributors in Australia that are very proactive at working us over.

Cheers

jackhinde wrote:a) the lack of protection of my ankles- australian plants are spiky, scratchy or serrated. also, leeches and mozzies like my ankles. additionally if you were to step on a low striking snake such as a tiger you'd be buggered.
b) i have twice stubbed my toe bad enough for me to curse the shoes loudly and further discolour them with blood.
c) they are buggered already, and therefore somewhat uneconomical

I was interested in this and thought it plausable, until these 3 excellent points came up....

$250 is pretty expensive seeing I got my last 2 pairs of SLM3 for less than that each.

To throw in my 2 cents, I have done a bunch of overnighters in them and find them to be a specialist tool. I do hit my toes, but not too badly so far, and now do not take them off trail, but for river crossings and well formed sections they can't be beat. I only own the classics, but regarding price I got them on Kent St in Sydney for $100 a couple of months ago

Hi!

Thanks to all contributors in this forum. It has been an interesting read. I'm a novice hiker currently considering vibrams for multi-day hiking.

It is helpful to read that it can takes time to adjust to this funky, five-fingered footwear.

I have a friend in Tassie who just conquered Flinder's Peak in the TREK vibrams (wow! she is amazing!). She also brought a pair of runners with her on the 6-day hike to mix things up (she has an ongoing issue with her achilles, and apparently variety is the best thing for such an injury). I think she is around 60KG and was carrying a 17kg pack.

I'm planning to do the Overland track with her in 5 weeks time. I have a pair of old Columbia hiking boots that I just love, but have really worn to death They're no longer really waterproof, and the grip has really worn!! Bought a pair of Zamberlans (307 New Trail Lite HBS WMS for those interested) a couple of months ago to replace my Columbias. But I'm really finding these Zamberlans not too fun too wear -- chunky, and my heel lifts on the uphill. I could consider some sealskinz socks with my old boots, and risk the not-so-good grip. It sounds like getting vibrams at this stage with only 5-6wks to train in them may not be the best idea.

What do people think? I'd love any further footwear advise you can afford!

Perplexed!
Jenna

Hello Jenna, reading your post was a little strange, I think I know your amazing friend (and she is all that)! Also, I think you may have your peaks mixed My personal recommendation would be to try a pair ie. buy and use prior to taking them on the walk. Do some day walks, and at least one long long day walk. If you pull up unduly tender etc, think twice! That may be enough time if you do a fair bit of walking and/or tend to do the QLD run-around-in-barefeet-alot thing. I have had a very positive experience with them, which no doubt spins my opinion toward them, but I guess everyone is different and places priorities on different aspects of footwear, nay even gear generally.

I have been away from regular internet for a few days, nice to see some discussion and fellow users!

Some of the 'negative' comments have definate validity. They offer very little ankle and toe protection (from rocks and or snakebit/nasties) espically when compared with boots. This can be offset with the use of gaiters. They are not as sturdy or as hard wearing as a full leather boot, so dont expect them to last 5-10 years as some good boots will with moderate use. They are colder than boots. Also if you are fashion conscious at all, you would shoot yourself rather then be seen in them.

On the 'positive' side of the ledger: They are awesome to walk in. Your feet sing. You can jump around like a mountain goat. They slip out of mud with ease, instead of trying often ineffectually to keep your boots dry while crossing water and mud, you embrace it. They don't weigh a ton, they dry fast if there is a little sun and or wind. They grip very well, your feet and toes wrap and conform around rocks and logs allowing for confidence and stability. Legs feel considerably fresher after a days walk. It may sound a little funny, but walking along 'feeling' the ground under me gives a greater sense of immersion and enjoyment out of a walk. And although sometimes expensive, usually will cost less initially than a full leather high quality boot. ($250 is rediculous, Do not buy them for that, price around and ask for a discount!)

At the end of the day its for every person to weigh the pro's and con's of it and make a descision based on the type of walking they do, the type of person they are, and what they see as the most important thing about walking and equipment.

This walk proved to me however that the Vibrams are a very capable and versitile little shoe!

Nice find Nuts. $62 shipping hurts, but it still brings them in at about $110 delivered. About as cheap as I have seen so far.

Nuts wrote:http://www.leftlanesports.com/Event.aspx?l=00030000000000000000&et=lls&a=011612_Vasque-Arborwear&cid=LLS408&uid=28772

The curse of the big foot strikes again. All size 47 sold out. But the pricing does go to show that Aussie Distributor is price gouging

Cheers

Out of curiosity has anyone tried the treks with kangaroo leather tops. They may offer a bit more durability/protection. I doubt they'd be much help on the snake bite front but then again a trail shoe wouldn't help much either.

Yeah i have 2 pairs....
i wont be going back to the other types (have flow and normal ksos).... the kanga leather is REALLY THIN btw, so dont think too hard about the protection level of them - but the soles are way better in comfort and grip and that's where the main advantage seems to be.... I have been wearin these for about 3 years now too btw... Liam

In regards to snakebite, most snakes will strike above the foot anyway around the calf or thigh area. If you're that worried get some chain mail leggings.

Thanks Liam. They sound like they've got the right sole. As for snakes I can't say they bother me. In fact I find them beautiful. Im not one for walking round worrying about what could hurt me Carpe diem! I just noticed others had mentioned it and hence the comment. (mind you now I've said that watch me get nipped next walk ha!)

Id certainly love to give a pair a whirl. I used to run 5-7km a day but a bad Achilles stopped me in my tracks. Id be interested to see how it behaves in them (as Id love to be able to run again).