Thread: 5.10 Impacts for hiking?

I usually do one overnighter vision quest per summer. Maybe 10-15 miles per day with a fairly heavy backpack (food and booze) for 2-3 days. Anyone ever use Impacts for hiking? My old hiking shoes are worn out and I don't want to drop money on something I'll only wear a couple days a year.

I have a pair of Impacts that seem comparable to other "hiking" shoes I tried on at the hiking shoe store. They have stiff soles, decent support, sticky tread...why not? If no one posts an opinion, I'll report back with pictures of my blisters.

stiff soles, decent support, sticky tread

Bingo.

No brainer, I honestly have done longer hiking trips in trail running shoes and been completely happy in them. I personally think beefy hiking boots are more shoe than is needed in most cases and cause more foot pain than light pair of trail runners.

Only caveat would be if you had fucked up ankles or needed mega support.

are they low tops or high tops? i wouldnt want to hike in low tops with a heavy pack....

not much heal cushioning either...

IME, that smooth sole sorta sucks for walking up loose/sandy conditions. but, if you are mostly rock scrambling they should be fine.

Nice how internet stranger confirmation makes simple decisions easier. It's on and I'm going to hike my ass off in these. Low tops but about the same as the pair of shoes I'm discarding and I never had trouble with those. Should be rock and stickier dirt so no issue there.

I would just go with some running shoes but I plan on carrying some weight in beer. I know that makes your typical backpacker cringe but screw not having beer to sit by a lake.

Wait, there are people who don't take beer backpacking? Can't remember the last time I made that mistake, hell hauled four up to the Lower Saddle of the Grand two summers ago...

All I know about hiking shoes/boots is that my next pair WILL have sticky rubber!

The only downside to the 5.10's that I've found (besides the typical flat sole characteristics) is that they hold a ton of water, and take forever to dry out without a boot dryer or some such. I recommend keeping them out of the rain or creek.

I think the impact Mids would be perfect for a little hike, and for the rest of riding season. I've hiked 25ish miles in mine and they were fine.

Originally Posted by BCMountainHound

The only downside to the 5.10's that I've found (besides the typical flat sole characteristics) is that they hold a ton of water, and take forever to dry out without a boot dryer or some such. I recommend keeping them out of the rain or creek.

Hah, I know a 5.10 devotee who rides clipless only when it's really wet for this reason. His Impacts take several days to dry out.

I'll echo what others have said above. Good for short hiking trips as long as they stay dry. I've used mine for biking, hiking and even impromptu climbing < 5.8

I wear mine hiking & general shoes to where everywhere. They are fine so long as its not too muddy or wet. I really got them as a replacement for my Guide Tennies (ride clipless on the bike), because Guides have zero support & really suck for hiking when carrying a load.

Montrail Masochist
2650 miles PCT
5 pairs
& I never left a town without many cans of beer...(even left a town with bottles once)

I can't say on the shoes, my 5.10 are great bike shoes but I don't like walking in them. As for hiking with beer I'm trying the ranger IPA in a can this week end. I also like brew free or die IPA or oskar blues gubna.

For what you're doing they should be fine. Biggest downside to them as a hiking shoe in my opinion is how they hold water and they're pretty heavy - no real need for all that protection when hiking. Personally, I'd rather go in a pair of running shoes than impacts, but I'm sure they'll be fine.