Clarification on the ratio of a pound on your feet = ? pounds on your back... The second study included a table where those ratios are broken down by speed for men and women separately: Speed (km/h) Men Women 4 3.4 1.9 5.25 3.5 2.5 6.5 4.7 2.6 Differences in stride length and gait were suggested as reasons for the difference between men and women.

@coachhannah2403

10 ай бұрын

Then THAT needs to be studied...

@vandoan7462

10 ай бұрын

Why no analysis on uphill vs flat?

@realfutbol1

10 ай бұрын

Also, let's consider the deltas by weight. Assumptions: - 75kg person - 1kg weight difference between shoe and boot pairs The delta VO2 % was pretty stable around 8%. The overall mass difference is 1.3%. This suggests the difference in footwear (weight+biomechanics) has a ~6.2x greater impact than adding 1kg to a person's body mass, at all speeds. Super interesting!

@claytonmcglothlin4815

10 ай бұрын

Don't know if it's worth doing an entire video on, but I'm super curious to know if nylon packs really soak up water and just how much water they're supposedly absorbing during a rain storm.

@Grateful_Grannie

6 ай бұрын

Interesting & relevant. From my own experience as an urban walker and worker on concrete floors and sidewalks, reliable research in this subject matter is difficult to find. I appreciate your effort and approach.

I love what you're doing, please don't stop!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Slow and steady! 😉

Clicked so fast there's not even audio- such is my love for this content

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

YT: “the video must finish processing before it will be available”. 😵‍💫

@jrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjr

10 ай бұрын

Already refreshed, watched at 2x, and shared with my backpacking Slack channel. Philosophy changed!

@jrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjrjr

10 ай бұрын

It is telling seemingly no one but yourself went to the source of the claim! Thanks for dispelling my false assumptions!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

When I found the study, I fully expected a short video just saying: “rule confirmed”. The more I read, the more interesting it got!

Should do one on if stiff boots like combat boots actually reduce ankle injuries or not. Perceived needed ankle support is the biggest reason I see people choosing boots

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

I'll have to see what I can find.

@FirePrank6

10 ай бұрын

From research I looked at a while ago, and talking to a family member who is a huge hiker/alpiner and physical therapist, the support boots give comes from their resistance to flex (the same thing that costs you energy), an ankle brace is more effective for providing joint support, however boots also provide physical protection in a way gaiters do not. Such as your foot slipping and scrapping along a rock. Recommendation leaned towards if you do not require extra support from pre-existing conditions it is better to go with lighter and more flexible footwear, the flexibility can help improve joint strength in the long term without the reliance of boot/brace stiffness/support.

@greglamb4225

9 ай бұрын

This is exactly the reason for me. EVERY long hike I go on, I have a moment where my ankle twists (I'm normally exhausted at this point) and credit the boot as the thing preventing that from being a serious injury.

@dreamwalks8200

7 ай бұрын

My reason for choosing boots is also to maintain dry feet over longer time and more protection overall.

@MrTmax74

7 ай бұрын

Add this, a soft sold shoe does a better job of laying down surface area on jagged and uneven rocks. I think that's another reason trail runners are a decent option​@@FirePrank6

My dad used to teach survival classes and he tought me a few different ways to walk the conserve a lot more energy than regular walking. If you dont need to get somewhere fast, you can really conserve a lot of energy just by going slowly, locking your knees a bit more and using your hips more, and taking short strides. When you're 3 days into a hike and you've only eaten a handful of flour, a granola bar, and some foraged berries it really makes a big difference

For the last 10 years I have hiked in everything from barefoot (not many miles) to Teva sandal (800 miles) to Altra LonePeak (2000 miles) to Merrell Vapor Glove (at leave 4000 miles). The less weight and the more minimal I go the easier the days seem. This year I am kicking off the 3000 miles of planned trail with combat boots because I am really sick of buying a new pair of shoes every 2-500 miles. I bought the lightest most breathable and least supportive I could find. I never carry more than 15 pounds in my pack, I am really curious to see how the added boot weight effects things. I am wearing Danners, 38oz for the pair, they are extremely flexible and feel like a regular hiking boot on my feet.

Whenever I watch one of your videos, I want to show it to every hiker friend I have! :D Thank you for giving us so much quality content!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks! I do appreciate that.

I deeply appreciate you clarifying terms. People often make fallacious arguments or innocently misunderstand someone's statements due to equivocation on terms like "significant".

I'm excited about this series! One thing that seems to be significant is /why/ is there a dramatic jump going from 7.3 kph → 8.9 kph (i.e. crossing the 5mph threshold). I suspect this is the fast walking → running transition. The pendular motion of walking changes dramatically, once we start running. When walking, we're swinging our foot forwards but when running, we're driving the knee up, lifting the foot significantly higher, further and faster than pendular motion would. This is significant for some types of hiking too, particularly where I hike in the White Mountains. The Army tests on treadmills and paved/unpaved roads are essentially flat topography. If you're needing to constantly lift your foot to clear small boulders and rough terrain, you're not in the pendular motion regime. I suspect similar is true once the angle of incline increases enough (even if the terrain were flat) in a way that is not accounted for by Naismith's rule (and Aitken's adjustment) which only accounts for speed but not step size / efficiency. Anecdotally, I've found that switching from leather hiking boots to trail runners is very significant. A significant part of that, perceptually at least, seems to be from the reduction of weight, particularly as the legs fatigue, this becomes dramatic. There is a factor of my trail runners having other characteristics that you note (more flexible as well as wide toe box, zero drop, etc.) which incline to better biomechanics and therefore also aid in efficiency.

@downtofarm8776

8 ай бұрын

I also thought about the climbing action that is common in hiking where you are lifting your foot at the knee vs swinging from the hip and wondered how that would effect energy used/weight of footwear.

Wonderful analysis! I was getting lost until you whipped out the chart! Suggestions for other topics in this series: - Chugging too much water at once is dangerous. - “Camel Up” by drinking a liter of water at once. - Cotton Kills - If you stop for more than 5 minutes, you should wait 25 before you resume hiking.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Actually, camel-up and chugging water is covered in my Performance Nutrition for Backpackers series, in the episode on Hydration Strategies!

@jpriddle

10 ай бұрын

@@GearSkeptic Brilliant. Thanks!

So pumped for a new vid! Saving to watch on my run tomorrow

I so appreciate the quality of thought and facts you put into your video. And please continue to keep the excellent ratio of fact to humor as well.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

🥸

thank you. I followed the advice on KZread about ultralight backpacking and bought "low shoes", then I had rocks on my foot... then bought trail gaiters, and now I have to repair them... so I will be soon back where I started with "high shoes"... It's like ultralight youtuber only care more about pack weight over what is actually working

@philsmith2444

10 ай бұрын

That’s what happens when someone picks an arbitrary number for pack base weight and manages to convince enough people they’re not cool if theirs is heavier. And unless you’re hiking without consumables, base weight is a meaningless metric anyway. Your body doesn’t care how much your pack weighs with no food, fuel, and water in it while carrying a pack with food, fuel, and water in it.

i love that you are one of the few channels who actually explains what wording in science papers means vs the avg joe using the word.

Whenever GS uploads, I click.

Thank you for this series. Will watch whatever you produce.

My experience was consistent with the research. I found water resistant boots with ankle support were FAR superior to athletic shoes. I hike in the northeast where rocky terrain, water crossings, & steep slopes are the only types of trails we have.

@hyperboreanforeskin

6 ай бұрын

I found the exact opposite and I only hike in upstate NY

My favorite channel! Thank you for your great and entertaining work!

As not a serious backpacker I never heard that 1 pounds on your feet = 5 on your back, but it does explain why the first time i went ski touring I couldn't really lift my legs for a day

Wow wow wow. Glad I stumbled upon your channel last night. Like a breath of fresh air (almost). Video suggestion, although I don't know how you would integrate meaningful stats into the mix: pack loading and their dynamics. Keep up the awesome work, going to work my way through the backlog of videos this week 😊

I love this video so much, simply because it's such a great and succinct example of how to review literature properly.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks so much! Exactly what I was going for 😄

Thanks for this video! I've always been one of those "a pound on the feet" zealots, even though chronic foot issues that I've suffered all of my life have been made worse by wearing lightweight footwear and now have to wear heavier, more supportive hiking boots. Incidentally, it seems like the heavier boots tend to last considerably longer than shoes like trail runners, so there's another benefit.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Ah, durability! Good point.

This is genuinely phenomenal. Great research and simple but fascinating presentation format.

@GearSkeptic

9 ай бұрын

Thanks much! It is appreciated.

Love the concept of this new series!

Your content always informs, Love it. Looking forward to what you will cover next.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks! Much appreciated.

This is a great idea for a series, love it

Thanks for the clear description of statistical significance vs. practical or functional significance. This is something I have found challenging to explain to non-scientists when discussing scientific research.

Thank you Gear Skeptic for myth busting, good to have a thinking man in our corner. I have worn leather boots for 50 years because that''s what the terrain dictates. Recently I had a chance to wear shoes on a 400 km, partly tracked, route. It made no difference to how I felt but the tread is nearly gone and there are holes in the upper fabric from the hard, spiky, spinifex grass. The difference is that leather gets heavy with water and takes long to dry out but protects and lasts so much longer. Keep those hands of truth waving!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks! I agree that there are times to make boots a consideration, depending on the circumstances.

@philsmith2444

10 ай бұрын

A nice heavy coat of beeswax will put an end to wet leather. I use it on my uninsulated leather hiking boots that I snowshoe in down to about 15F/-10C; it keeps snow from melting on them, soaking into the leather, and freezing, making my feet colder.

love the science, can't help wondering about benefits of supple shoes and possible correlation to bikepackers benefiting from changing to supple tires

Very interesting! I am a boot hiker, always have been, but was wondering about switching to trainers for lightness. Good to know that, at my speeds, with the flexibility of my boots, I wouldn't be gaining anything. I love my high and mid boots. They've carried me far.

Thank you for your content- it is intellectually *impeccable* and invaluable to those of us who think similarly but don't have a weekend to devote to empirical trials and interlibrary loan requests. Footwear has always been a bugaboo- you know when it doesn't work, and develop prophetic myths around it when it does. Two years ago I bought a popular, high-end, relatively light-weight pair of "traditional" mixed suede and synthetic high-top boots. I LOVED THEM. They were then stolen out of my car. I bought the exact same pair of boots nine months later and, after 30 plus miles they absolutely destroy my feet (my ankles, in particular- blisters the size of silver dollars). Well, so much for the formula. I like the idea of ankle support, but- at the end of the day- I have to advocate for whatever makes yourself most comfortable.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks much, and I agree! Footwear is very personal.

Always clear and helpful

Loving this, as always. I am looking forward to the installment. I have thoughts on what I like to wear and am looking forward to see how it compares with your findings. Thanks for sharing

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thank you, sir!

Alright we've seen his hands, and we've seen his feet. We're almost there, folks.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Ha! You'll have to wait until the video on hats!

I know for me, all the additional support the boots provide really outweighs the minimal added weight.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

I hear you, especially in light of the flexible, lightweight options available these days.

@jcorkable

10 ай бұрын

@@GearSkeptic request for future video: how much “ankle support” (i.e. roll protection) do boots actually provide? I’ve rolled ankles in both boots and shoes without injury in either case. Only times I’ve wished I was wearing boots is when my ankles get smashed by rocks.

@geocacheOR

10 ай бұрын

@@jcorkable That right there is why I go with boots! Abrasion protection, not ankle joint support.

@wanttogo1958

10 ай бұрын

For me, like others have stated, the 4-6 inch boot height provides protection from abrasion and serves to keep some debris out but doesn’t necessarily prevent turning an ankle. An 8” boot will do so but at that height weight and retention of more heat and moisture become a factor. The most important aspect of more supportive footwear is a less flexible sole that provides more support when you step down on an uneven surface. More flexible footwear will too often allow my foot to roll potentially causing an ankle sprain. It’s always a trade off between weight versus support. The sweet spot for me seems to be approach shoes. They are stiffer in the sole and forefoot by design but are not much heavier than more flexible trail runners. La Sportiva TX4 is my preferred choice.

It’s always been a weird argument/perspective because (assuming properly fitting and broken in footwear) the limiting factor is just how many miles you can travel under so much weight before your feet hurt too much. No matter how fit and energetic I am, if my feet hurt beyond a point, I can’t go any farther. I personally find that if I only have to go 5 miles, even with a heavy pack, I can wear the most minimal Vibram FiveFingers type shoes before the trauma on my feet slows me down. In contrast, if I need to go 10+ miles/day for a string of days, I need heavy boots to protect my feet. I already know I’m expending probably an order of magnitude more calories due to the scale of the effort. Frankly, a lot of ultralight thru hikers look thin and weak. So if they can get it done in running shoes and a 10lbs total pack weight, more power to them. My packs tend to be a bit heavier, and I tend to be a bit heavier. But I get it done, and I pretty much need real ass boots to do it in.

@marrty777

10 ай бұрын

In case my perspective wasn’t clear, thank you for essentially teasing out the ridiculousness of the conventional wisdom in this case. You need the right footwear for the objective. Maybe something interesting in the vein of this channel would be to quantify footwear supportiveness and overall weight. Maybe there is an outlier of amazing modern materials and design.

@nakkajin

10 ай бұрын

I agree with all of your points and i think that the original (or maybe not original but the oft quoted) study for 5lbs on the back worth 1 lbs on the foot is probably overly biased towards military men who tend to weigh more than the average ultralight hiker and have a pack weight more closely approximating the total body mass of the average ultralighter than it would their packs

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Yah, shoes are VERY particular to your own feet. There are also lots of other variables I deliberately stayed away from in this specific video: pack weight (as you mentioned), rain/waterproofness , heat/breathability, all the issues of stability and support.

@d.thorpe2046

10 ай бұрын

RABBITHOLES! @@GearSkeptic

@JJJ599

10 ай бұрын

And add to that the complexities that one's own physiology brings, and it's a difficult formula to solve. For example, support or lack thereof for flat feet (like me) has a massive influence on walking comfort, and apparently also some influence on energy expenditure. See study from Energy cost of walking with flat feet by Otman, Basgöze & Gökce-Kutsal@@GearSkeptic Thank you for your videos as always, much appreciated!

👍👍👍 .. interesting. I recently came across your Channel and immediately subscribed. The research and actual testing that you are doing as been so far, judging by some of your later posts that I saw first, for me, any eye-opener .. tending to dispel some 'Mantras' that have evolved over the years .. or, at the very least, have me take another look at them. This one, weight on foot as opposed to that on back, is a good starter and I'm going to work my way through the rest. Thanks for that .. take care ..

@GearSkeptic

6 ай бұрын

Thanks very much! I really appreciate that.

@thomasmusso1147

6 ай бұрын

​@@GearSkeptic 👍

Well done, again!!!!

I love your work. Awesome job. Just a couple of comments: The 0.6 increase in VO2 is statistically insignificant. That means it might be 0.6, or maybe 0.0. Or even -0.6. It is unacceptably likely to be a random bump up. It doesn’t differ from the baseline reliably enough to be clear that it actually DOES differ from the baseline. So that test does not demonstrate ANY difference at 4 kph. Also, this sort of testing (VO2) is usually done on treadmills, not trails. No way to assess any lower extremity stability effects a higher level of ankle support might confer on the typically more irregular terrain of the hiking trail. If present, improved ankle stability might translate into reduced energy expenditure over rough terrain, for example. For me, a traditional hunting-style boot seems to end my day with more comfortable feet. Hiking boots are a close second. Trail shoes leave my feet feeling more tired. Purely subjective. Ultimately, some personal trial gives you a feel for what feels good. And that may be the ultimate metric

A note on military boots, the high (10in) top of the boot actually causes long term tendon and muscle strain injuries based on a mix of VA claims data and anecdotal case studies. Many special forces groups and individual units have switched to mid-height (6in) tops in order to retain the ankle support needed for rough terrain while relieving the strain caused by this dated boot design that is partly retained due to uniform traditions. The need for higher boot tops to protect against abrasions has gone away with our shift to urban and vehicle-based combat, so the uniform is finally shifting to something more ergonomic!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Good to know!

@acg1189

10 ай бұрын

I think that's a significant misreading of a statistic out of context though. I wouldn't take very general VA data like that make a more specific claim on footwear. LITERALLY EVERY GRUNT would tell you in context that Infantry guys are made to do wildly unhealthy shit on ruck marches for your feet....and ankles....and back....and shoulders. The simpler explanation is its from overloading line infantry with more weight and stuff. And old, extremely well documented issue. And one created out of operational need, "two is one" attitudes and leadership having no incentive to lower a pack list. Which probably isn't going to change anytime soon, its literally a back-and-forth as old as the Roman Legions. In the context of SF guys? Yeah sure, they are often working with less weight and have an actual input and choice in the matter. Which is why you see commercial hiking boots and the occasional tactical sneaker. The idea that somehow the shift to mechanized infantry is "new" is....an odd argument? A counterpoint to all this is Hotshot wildfire crews. There are the old school all leather, super stiff supper supportive logger style boots. And for about 15 years there have existed of a variety of 6 inch hiker style boots certified for fire use. The overwhelming consensus is hiker style boots are all well and good for engine crews or fire crews operating with just a simple gear belt rig. But anyone running hiker boots in a Type 2 IA or hotshot crews? With the weight of a saw, gas, everything else you learn very very rapidly why everyone owns Whites and Nicks.

@luckyomen

10 ай бұрын

I've volunteered as a wildland firefighter in limited capacity, not a hotshot, but I was required to wear the boots and clothing while doing controlled burns and even daily wear of the boots and pants when working around the station, those are still my favorite boots, White's btw. I was merely sharing what I've heard from some army guys. I was a Marine and we still prefer the taller boots. The anecdotal evidence is dubious but I wanted to share it all the same in case he decided to research it further. And my mentioning of mechanized infantry as new is moreso the operational focus on it becoming the majority of infantry forces post WW2, which is recent history in the field of military footwear. Thanks for adding more context though, I forgot all about my logging style boots.

@philsmith2444

10 ай бұрын

One thing you see on hiking boots but not any of the combat boots I was ever issued or bought is an “Achilles notch” at the back of the boot.

@wanttogo1958

10 ай бұрын

@@philsmith2444on a six inch boot the notch makes a difference, on an 8 inch boot having a leather/nylon upper that is more flexible out of the box relieves a lot of the wear and tear on the Achilles tendon while breaking in the boot. My experience anyway after almost 29 years in the Marine Corps.

I have to thank Brady Patterson at Outdoor Adventure School for directing me to your video. Very well done explanation/investigation - finally with a scientific foundation! I found it very informative and useful. Oh, and nice hands by the way...

@GearSkeptic

29 күн бұрын

🖐🏼🤚🏼 🤓

I wonder if the results would be the same when tested on a stair-master.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Interesting. They might be different 🤔

I imagine the average boot in 1983 is also alot heavier than modern boots today. 12:40 40 year old Leather combat boots 😆

How about a video on the belief that if you sleep in less cloths in a sleeping bag you will stay warmer. I have always heard this but never found proof.

Fantastic video. So happy youtube recommended your channel.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks! Sometimes those algorithms work out 😉

Good video, great explanation and research

Thank you for making this video 30 years later is better than never. I like the: " rate @ which we swing our feet" at the end. So technique, and/or specifically the length of someones leg on trail affects the frequency of swinging over same distance. I got short legs. lol. also affecting the results of data collected between research participants. Cool video style sounds affects and visuals. Thanks

Great stuff! I really would like to see a study added to this focusing on walking / running with elevation gain. I would think lifting your feet like going up stairs is different than swinging them while walking on a flat ground.

Brilliant! Thanks for the fact checking!

Another great one!

great video gear skeptic! your videos never disappoint

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks! Always appreciated.

The best part of this video is that the author understands and can explain statics to the general public! Statics is the language of power and influence and it is done in professional manner. Well done! Keep up the great work.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks much! Very kind of you, sir.

LETSGOOOOOOOOOOO THANK YOU FOR THE NEW VIDEO!!!

More great work, thank you!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

You are very welcome!

Yay! I'm not Crazy! I'm wearing boots on my AT hike and no one can stop me. (I'm actually already wearing boots daily and my feet feel better for it.)

@nicademusx6624

10 күн бұрын

I own 2 pairs of boots, that's all. I've worn boots every day for the last 30 years, the weight does not seem to be a factor.

Incredible video as always, love your content! I think it is also worthy to look at it from a purely biomechanical perspective. as the shoe weight increases, force at the hip flexor and quad has to exert more force with each step. Would be interesting to see the biomechanical changes associated with increasing foot weight at different speeds. When you are doing big miles in the mountains, every gram starts to count somewhere. Just depends on each person's weak link in the chain. Hike up, run down.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Yah, others have asked about the difference between no-slope walking and stair-like uphill trekking. If I can find more, I'll post it!

Something that I noticed is that when comparing delta VO2 to speed around 4:30 is that the increase in speed wasn't accounted for. As a backpacker, I don't care what my oxygen uptake per time is, I care what oxygen uptake per distance is. If I had the percentage change as opposed to the delta, I could correct for it but I don't and I don't care enough to dig it up. I think that the graph at 4:30 may not show the whole story. Awesome video, I really enjoyed it!

I love your videos, the content is very interesting and engaging 👍👍

Loved the science. Preference for hiking shoe or boot should be based the fit and comfort, endurance for the trail hiked (eg asphalt vs dirt vs rock, and conditions such as mud, rain, snow or heat.

Did I just watch a TED talk given by Thing from the Adams family? Good stuff, that claim always seemed a bit exaggerated.

I have always hiked in boots but this year, I am going to try trail runners for the first time. Two reasons: one is slightly lighter weight - I will be saving about 20 ounces in the weight of the shoes. The other reason is that the runners are quick drying which has two benefits: I won't be carrying "camp shoes" which I have always used for water crossings - saving about 12 ounces. The other benefit of quick drying shoes is that I can just plow through stream crossing, saving time by not having to switch shoes before and after the water crossing. I am concerned about more debris getting into the runners and so I plan to also use light weight gaiters.

Very informative! I have different kind of shoes and boots for hiking and the outdoors. But keep in mind that trail runners are made for running. It's just that the hiking community adopted those from the trail running community.

Really excellent video

One topic which always interested me is condensation on double or single walled tents. I got the lanshan 2 and the lanshan 2 pro and to me it seems the condensation is the same and with the regular lanshan just behind the inner wall

@gregvanpaassen

10 ай бұрын

Ryan on Backpacking Light did an in-depth video on tent condensation.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Agreed, the Backpacking Light analysis is very thorough.

This is excellent information thank you so much

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

You are most welcome!

I also ran in my mid-high all-weather Lone Peaks because that why I had with at least a little bit of grip on the muddy forest trail I was planning to run on. Worked great, maybe even better than the low ones because less stuff got inside of them.

The main reason I avoid boots is the stiff soles. I feel ao much more nimble and percise with the more flexible sole from most trail runners. I also can't stand the heat. I don't doubt that the energy expenditure is about the same, but the comfort of a trail runner is at a completely different level for me.

Yay, I can't wait for the spreadsheets! 😉😉📉📉

“BABE, GEARSKEPTIC POSTED”

Does this suggest that there’s an optimal walking speed in order to conserve food? Sounds like a bell curve, where if you go too slow you need to consume extra food to make up for the time, too fast and your calorie requirements outweigh the time saved.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Ha! I like it.

@frstesiste7670

10 ай бұрын

Sound logical, but I'd expect the optimal speed will differ significantly from person to person and the shape they're in. A lot of people thruhiking will start somewhere around 2.5 mph as suggested in the video. Some will stay at that speed (out of preference I'd assume) but many will easily do 3+ mph on a well-maintained trail like the PCT after some weeks on the trail - without increasing effort. Then at some point you cant really walk faster. For me that was between 3.5 and 4 mph where I'd have to do something between walking and jogging to get to 4mph. I've seen a few thruhikers walking at around 4 mph though, maybe longer legs and a lighter pack. Anyway, it's impossible to determine the optimal speed calorie-wise without having a way to measure it, which you don't have on the trail, but I expect what feel like effortless walking also would be close to optimal.

@christopherhaak9824

5 ай бұрын

I do a huge amount of walking for my zone 2 and other training. For sure, when you go faster, calories per unit time goes up, which is pretty obvious. But, interestingly, as long as you stay in zone 1, or the lower part of zone 2, calorie expenditure per mile is nearly constant. Your body is operating in an efficient metabolic zone. Once you get into upper zone 2 and beyond, calories per unit distance go up in a nonlinear way. So, as long as you stay in an efficient metabolic zone, energy expenditure per mile is nearly constant. Speeds for those zones can vary significantly per individual.

@mtadams2009

5 ай бұрын

@@frstesiste7670 Hiking on the PCT is much easier than say hiking in the White Mountains of the many trails on AT, especially in the Whites in NH or Maine. Over 2.5 miles per hour would be blazing fast in the Whites. No switch backs, straight up and straight down takes its toll. Out west I can hike thirty plus miles a day and in the Whites and Maine it more like 14 to 20, never anymore.

@frstesiste7670

5 ай бұрын

@@mtadams2009 To me 2.5 mph was easily achievable on most of the AT, but there certainly were sections that was much slower and my average speed was also slower on the AT. Used almost exactly the same amount of time on both trails, including a similar number of zeroes and despite a lot of snow on the PCT and none on the AT.

I've noticed this winter that there is a point where boots feel enough heavier that they affect my stride a lot, and hence my energy exertion. So I would guess the effects of weight would be strongest when wearing a shoe heavier than normal the first few times, like the first days in heavy insulated winter boots when you're used to lightweight trail runners.

Great video! I’ve switched from boots to shoes for hiking, but not for the energy savings. I just find that it’s better for my knees. Swinging the heavier weight of the boot at the end of the leg “lever” put more force on my knees. I would like to see a video explaining the difference between the shoes/boots and the force exerted on the knees and hips!

@frstesiste7670

10 ай бұрын

Interesting point and suggestion, but I believe you'd get used to the extra weight and the problem would go away if you used boots more regularly.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Good points. Adaptation complicates all those things. There are people who dismiss the need for sole stiffness over obstacles by saying you should just get your feet used to the strain. But, others talk about how that strain adds to your difficulties and energy loss.

@stephanieg9876

10 ай бұрын

I was going to make a similar comment. I had always heard the boot vs. shoe weight claim in terms of strain on knees, etc., not for cardio… I’d be curious if shoe weight (and type) has an effect on stress fractures (from backpacking) in the legs and feet.

@philsmith2444

10 ай бұрын

@@GearSkepticRight, getting your feet “used to the strain” means the strain is still there. The stiff soles on my backpacking and mountaineering boots limit the strain that’s placed on my feet, transferring it through the boot to my legs.

Never change!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

In the words of Stewie from Family Guy: “I don’t like change”

Good analysis. One factor somewhat ignored is that hiking trails are usually rough. You are not just moving your feet back and forth. Instead, you must lift them, sometimes dramatically, as you step over or on roots, rocks, and other obstacles. Even if you were marching in place, there would be some energy penalty from essentially strapping varying weights to your feet and doing thousands of leg lifts. Because an intrepid hiker tries NOT to step up onto every root or rock, their body/pack stays more level while their feet do the raising and lowering, so I would expect an energy differential there.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Agreed, but those obstacles also greatly reduce your speed, which seems to lessen the penalty. The snow study seemed interesting that way. Making post-holes in snow is such slow, hard work on its own that the didn’t find any difference from boot weight.

@wanttogo1958

10 ай бұрын

@@GearSkeptic I’ve actually found that a little heavier and stiffer boot aids your effort moving through deeper snow especially when moving upslope and when steps have to be kicked into the snow. The same can be true for muddy slopes where a little stiffer boot allows you to gain purchase on an otherwise slick, uphill climb, by using the toe area and letting the stiffer structure of the boot support the rest of the foot as you step up. I am of the opinion that too many people have bought into the weight concerns expressed about footwear and have never worn a stiffer shoe or boot so have little understanding of the benefits and the actual trade off. The same goes for Goretex (waterproof?) lined boots versus those that are not.

U already talked about flexibility being a factor, bot what I missed was grip. There will be a energy loss on the trail if u don't have grip on the loose or wet ground. Anyway, nice vid!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Good point, but nobody seems to have tested for that!

Thank you!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

You're very welcome!

I might be missing it from the video, but what is the delta VO2 for carrying 1 extra pound of load on torso? Without that I can’t double check the foot-to-torso conversion ratio myself. Also, is the torso delta V02 constant for any starting torso baseline weight? I can imaging 1 extra pound of weight when you pack is already 50lb might be different to when your pack is 20lb.

@marambula

10 ай бұрын

discussion and conclusion in this video were poor.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

In the second study discussed, there is a graph (Figure 5) shown. The vertical axis is the VO2 per kg of shoe mass. Your second question is a good one. I didn't see any study that looked at varying packs. The 2nd study tested subjects in 3 conditions: barefoot, with boots, and with a waistpack (but not packs of varying weights). And the study mentioned quickly at the end did use pack weights that were 35% of subjects' body weight, but again not packs of different weights to see the difference.

@tanvach

10 ай бұрын

@@GearSkeptic​​⁠​⁠thanks for the response. I see the scatter plot and delta oxygen uptake for different walking speed, but to get 1-to-5 ratio, that would mean I need the delta oxygen update for 1 additional lb in the pack. That doesn’t seem to be in the video, maybe it’s in the study? Concrete example, let’s use 8km/h pace, the additional uptake for 1lb of footwear is ~120ml/kg/min according to fig 5. If 1-to-5 ratio applies at this region, it means the baseline oxygen update for 1lb addition lb of wait in pack is 120/5= 24ml/kg/min.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

They don't provide the raw data. I did find a table where they break the ratios down by speed for men and women separately. Speed (km/h) Men Women 4 3.4 1.9 5.25 3.5 2.5 6.5 4.7 2.6 I pinned this in a comment so everybody can see it.

@tanvach

10 ай бұрын

Awesome thank you!

Love trail runners, I do not wear boots anymore except in bad weather or on cross country none trail hiking.

Thank You for another great video😁

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

You’re welcome!

Great video. Suggestion for a future video: pack weight distribution. Should heavier items be packed higher and close to your back? I've often wondered it's not better to pack heavier items closer to your center of gravity, which is lower on your back, just above your waist.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Interesting idea. I did see something once that used a mechanical body model to illustrate that one type of weight distribution is better for going uphill, and another for down. Kind of pain to have to repack each time, especially on trails that change a lot.

A glass of Justin Isosceles for your scholarship. Personally, when a "Cliff Clavin" spouts these types of claims I respond "Whatever blows your skirt up dude".

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

I'll toast to that!

I always thought this comparison wasn't about energy expenditures or decreased output. I believed it was about soreness, lower back pain, and hiking up inclines. I'm curious what a study about just that would look like

Great content 😊

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Thanks much!

I wear steel toes at work. There is a significant difference in fatigue (no science here), with heavier boots, after 12 hours. On the trail tho, my more reasonable weight hiking boots have the stability advantage of less fatigue on ancillary muscles. I'm in my mid 50's, and use sticks because ear damage, so it may just be me.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Yah, the issue of wear and tear on the body with different scenarios is a tough one. Each person is so different and conditioning comes into play.

Great stuff! I wonder if all these tests were done on a flat course because there must surly be more energy expended ascending (and, maybe descending) with greater weights on your feet.

@GearSkeptic

6 ай бұрын

Agreed! There should be more energy expended going up hill. But, that is true regardless of the footwear. Question is: does heavier footwear create disproportionately more work, and if so…by how much? These studies show that extra foot weight does create work, just not as much as was commonly believed. The assumption that a grade will automatically increase the ratio of penalty is a tricky one, though. That ratio appears highly dependent on the speed of walking. Even if a hill makes the base ratio rise, a hill might also cause the speed of walking to decrease, which serves to bring the ratio back down. Countervailing effects. I would love to see some data on it!

One other, and less confusing explanation of the 0.5 alpha significance level, is that such a difference can occur by accident around one time in twenty trials. One in twenty is far less impressive than 95%. Most people have twenty digits. Also, I spent much of my career walking often from eight to ten miles a day, doing archaeological survey. My holy grail was a light boot that did not scoop up grass seeds (foxtails and such), and was high enough to provide stability on very irregular footing. A sprained ankle in the middle of no where in particular could be a very serious problem for more than just the person with the sprain. At the same time, toward the end of the day what ever we had on our feet felt just as heavy.

Thank you for looking at this more closely.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

You are very welcome!

MOAR!

The very idea that a bear can smell a ramen noodle pack cooking from 10 miles or 1 mile and will be attracted to your camp is just ridiculous. That’s like saying a dead mouse will draw a bear from 10 miles away. This could be a topic about hanging food in the breeze.

This is really great to see this level of analysis applied to backpacking. Can I ask what you do for a living? It's clear you know what you're doing with prob and stats.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

I always say that the focus should be on the information as presented, not the presenter! :)

You ask about the 5% of body weight boots - but the "bunny boots" we wore in Nome, AK might well have been that! They are incredibly warm and watertight, but have a sole that I swear is made out of oak! Perfect for hiking the tundra - and for just about nothing else. After those, anything I wore on my feet made me feel like i could hike for days!

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Somewhere, you can always find the argument that any burden is a positive…in the sense that it can be used for training! 😉

It seems like the studies you’re quoting don’t include hikers with a backpack. It seems like the treadmill studies have people running and walking but not caring 20 or 30 or 40 pounds on their back. And it didn’t seem to indicate whether the treadmill’s we’re going uphill and downhill or if they were just a flat treadmill.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

The army study didn't use pack weight. The second tested people in 3 conditions: barefoot, with boots, and with a waistpack. And, of the last 3 studies I mentioned quickly at the end, the 2nd one used a packweight that was 35% of the subject's body weight. But, to my knowledge, none of them tested a given subject under different pack loads to see the difference.

Great vid! Suprisingly little research available, but that seems to always be the case with these type of questions :P. By the logic presented that it might actually the impediment of 'biomechinal motion' of the foot that costs energy, would a high top altra also take a bit more energy than a low top? I have to admit since I have started hiking in my lone peaks my feet are less tired, more stable and most of all more comfortable, but wonder if I would feel the same in the high top.

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

I would guess some energy is lost at the mid top, but the sole and arch part of the shoe are sneaker-like in their flexibility. A long way from the overall stiffness of a leather boot!

@cheapknight1293

10 ай бұрын

Yeah that's certianly true!@@GearSkeptic

The energy cost related to boot stiffness makes a lot of sense. I ride a motorcycle and boots in that sport can be heavily reinforced for protection, especially racing boots, making them extremely stiff. They work great on a bike cause your range of motion is minimal, but off a bike, they can be hard to walk in and quite tiring, as you're having to expel a lot of energy getting the boot to flex.

@easternmenace

10 ай бұрын

Yeah and also changing gears can really work the tibialis anterior muscle. Only in the left leg though

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Lighter, more flexible boots can be really sneaker-like. But, even so, I'd agree that the choice for mid-top sneakers is still situational.

This will make no one change their footwear, instead they will tell you why they will continue to use the footwear that they like. Whether it is the "best" footwear or not makes no difference. Good video anyway Another thing to consider (which is shown out on the video) it takes four times as much energy to walk twice as fast. Double the speed and you quadruple the energy required. This is a physical law, don't argue with it. Weight works the same, double the weight and quadruple the energy required to move that weight.

I suppose looking at energy expendature is only half the story. Because the muscles pulling your feet up and forward are probably more effected by shoe weight, but those aren't the muscles that get the most strain while hiking. So the fatigue would most likely not increase by the same amount. This is just my thoughts, so please tell me if my thinking is wrong.

I have to wonder if there is also a psychological effect for a lot of hikers, if you're used to light weight sneakers in day to day life then hiking boots seem big, heavy and clunky. I wear steel caps all day and even heavy hiking boots feel like a breeze in comparison

@GearSkeptic

10 ай бұрын

Conditioning should definitely apply!

My boots weight 1.3 kg and shoes weight 550g. 1 pound does not equal to to 5 lb, but weight is weight especially from the ultralighter perspective.

I wonder if any studies have looked into movement on a steep slope, and if this factor affects outcomes at all. I can imagine weight and stiffness/rigidity would have a greater effect at a 20% grade than on flat ground.

I’m curious I just started hiking this year wearing shoes, but I wear steel toes at work and do about 18,000 steps a day in them. I feel bouncier and maybe able to walk further