My shoes and socks
on the PCTI chose to hike the PCT in trail runners like the vast majority of thru-hikers. Since I considered that adventure to be a field for fun and experimentation, I changed model and size several times to see what worked best for me. What I’m giving you here is the result of my experimentations. Those are the different shoes I hiked the PCT with, how they behaved and what I liked or disliked.
All weighs are given for the pair. In the city I wear a EU 40 (US 7).
Saucony Xodus Iso 2 - EU 42 (US 8.5) - 700g
Saucony Xodus Iso 2
EU 42 (US 8.5) - 700g
Campo (mile 0) to Big Bear Lake (mile 266) – 266 miles
I picked this model before starting my thru-hike, and I had a chance to test it in France on the occasion of day-hikes in forests with a fully-loaded pack, as well as in Morocco during a full week with very light packs, in deserts (dunes and rocks) and then in mountains.
It’s an all-terrain shoe, well balanced in my opinion, fairly heavy as far as trail running is concerned but very light when compared to hiking shoes per se. Cushioning is very generous, the shoe feels very comfortable and lacing it is quick and easy. Durability is good – note that if I replaced this pair after a short 266 miles, it was only because the size had become somewhat too small for my feet. But they were still in excellent condition when I ditched them. Despite the excellent breatheability due to its mesh top, the amount of dust it draws in seemed reasonable to me. Of course the grip is not comparable to that of a proper hiking shoe, and even less so to that of a hiking boot, but for such a flexible, comfortable, cushioned shoe I think it has more-than-decent traction and grip on all types of terrain, going up- or down-hill, with one exception though: on muddy terrain the outsole lugs retain mud and the shoes instantly turn into ice skates. To me that’s the only technical defect of this shoe. Otherwise it’s great.
I picked this model before starting my thru-hike, and I had a chance to test it in France on the occasion of day-hikes in forests with a fully-loaded pack, as well as in Morocco during a full week with very light packs, in deserts (dunes and rocks) and then in mountains.
It’s an all-terrain shoe, well balanced in my opinion, fairly heavy as far as trail running is concerned but very light when compared to hiking shoes per se. Cushioning is very generous, the shoe feels very comfortable and lacing it is quick and easy. Durability is good – note that if I replaced this pair after a short 266 miles, it was only because the size had become somewhat too small for my feet. But they were still in excellent condition when I ditched them. Despite the excellent breatheability due to its mesh top, the amount of dust it draws in seemed reasonable to me. Of course the grip is not comparable to that of a proper hiking shoe, and even less so to that of a hiking boot, but for such a flexible, comfortable, cushioned shoe I think it has more-than-decent traction and grip on all types of terrain, going up- or down-hill, with one exception though: on muddy terrain the outsole lugs retain mud and the shoes instantly turn into ice skates. To me that’s the only technical defect of this shoe. Otherwise it’s great.
Saucony Xodus Iso 2 - EU 43 (US 9.5) - 720g
Saucony Xodus Iso 2
EU 43 (US 9.5) - 720g
Big Bear Lake (mile 266) to Kennedy Meadows (mile 702)
then Dunsmuir (mile 1.500) to Ashland (mile 1.718) – 655 miles
then Dunsmuir (mile 1.500) to Ashland (mile 1.718)
655 miles
This pair was the exact same as my first one, only one full size up. I replaced the standard insole with a Dr. Scholl Gel sole (as pictured) which I bought in a supermarket. It gave me extra cushioning and comfort.I just love the Xodus Iso 2, and if I did wear other shoes it was mostly to use the PCT as a place for experimentation and to try new things, but this model was by far the one I preferred.
Unfortunately, Saucony is not making the Iso 2 anymore. They’ve replaced it with the Iso 3, which doesn’t work at all as far as I’m concerned. The insole is less comfortable, the toe shell didn’t seem to be as protective (although apparently it’s been extended compared with version 2), and there’s a new plastic heel cup that is supposed to bring extra support to the ankle but to me mostly made it very uncomfy on the Achilles’ tendon. But most importantly, the upper is now tongue-less: putting the shoe on implies stretching the upper open with both hands and pulling it up the foot like a sock… once on, it’s fairly comfortable (although in my opinion not a decisive improvement over the previous model), but the fitting is completely unpractical. I tried them on in Ashland in a store, with clean socks on, and even in those near-perfect conditions I struggled to put them on. I can only imagine what it’s like on the trail with dusty and/or soaked socks, repeating the operation several times a day… I’m sure the tongue-less upper is a plus if you do day-jogs, putting on your shoes at home on dry socks and taking them off at home too once you’re done. But I think they’re inadequate for the life on a thru-hike.
So I bought one of the last pairs of Iso 2 I could find online, my third pair, and sadly it looks like it’ll be the last one. When it dies I’ll have to switch to something else…
This pair was the exact same as my first one, only one full size up. I replaced the standard insole with a Dr. Scholl Gel sole (as pictured) which I bought in a supermarket. It gave me extra cushioning and comfort.
I just love the Xodus Iso 2, and if I did wear other shoes it was mostly to use the PCT as a place for experimentation and to try new things, but this model was by far the one I preferred.
Unfortunately, Saucony is not making the Iso 2 anymore. They’ve replaced it with the Iso 3, which doesn’t work at all as far as I’m concerned. The insole is less comfortable, the toe shell didn’t seem to be as protective (although apparently it’s been extended compared with version 2), and there’s a new plastic heel cup that is supposed to bring extra support to the ankle but to me mostly made it very uncomfy on the Achilles’ tendon. But most importantly, the upper is now tongue-less: putting the shoe on implies stretching the upper open with both hands and pulling it up the foot like a sock… once on, it’s fairly comfortable (although in my opinion not a decisive improvement over the previous model), but the fitting is completely unpractical. I tried them on in Ashland in a store, with clean socks on, and even in those near-perfect conditions I struggled to put them on. I can only imagine what it’s like on the trail with dusty and/or soaked socks, repeating the operation several times a day… I’m sure the tongue-less upper is a plus if you do day-jogs, putting on your shoes at home on dry socks and taking them off at home too once you’re done. But I think they’re inadequate for the life on a thru-hike.
So I bought one of the last pairs of Iso 2 I could find online, my third pair, and sadly it looks like it’ll be the last one. When it dies I’ll have to switch to something else…
I just love the Xodus Iso 2, and if I did wear other shoes it was mostly to use the PCT as a place for experimentation and to try new things, but this model was by far the one I preferred.
Unfortunately, Saucony is not making the Iso 2 anymore. They’ve replaced it with the Iso 3, which doesn’t work at all as far as I’m concerned. The insole is less comfortable, the toe shell didn’t seem to be as protective (although apparently it’s been extended compared with version 2), and there’s a new plastic heel cup that is supposed to bring extra support to the ankle but to me mostly made it very uncomfy on the Achilles’ tendon. But most importantly, the upper is now tongue-less: putting the shoe on implies stretching the upper open with both hands and pulling it up the foot like a sock… once on, it’s fairly comfortable (although in my opinion not a decisive improvement over the previous model), but the fitting is completely unpractical. I tried them on in Ashland in a store, with clean socks on, and even in those near-perfect conditions I struggled to put them on. I can only imagine what it’s like on the trail with dusty and/or soaked socks, repeating the operation several times a day… I’m sure the tongue-less upper is a plus if you do day-jogs, putting on your shoes at home on dry socks and taking them off at home too once you’re done. But I think they’re inadequate for the life on a thru-hike.
So I bought one of the last pairs of Iso 2 I could find online, my third pair, and sadly it looks like it’ll be the last one. When it dies I’ll have to switch to something else…
Merrell Moab 2 ventilator wide width - EU 43 (US 9.5) - 888g
Merrell Moab 2 ventilator wide width
EU 43 (US 9.5) - 888g
Kennedy Meadows (mile 702) to Dunsmuir (mile 1.500) – 800 miles
Kennedy Meadows (mile 702) to Dunsmuir (mile 1.500)
800 miles
This one is not a trail runner but a low-upper hiking shoe. It does the job. Let’s say that I consider it the most neutral shoe I used on the PCT, in the sense that I couldn’t find anything to complain about, but I wasn’t thrilled either. It’s much more rigid than the Saucony (or than any trail-runner for that matter) and quite logically it’s also less comfortable. I think it was adapted to the High Sierra, where the terrain is less stable and more technical than in the desert. To compensate for the lack of cushioning, and still with the purpose of experimenting, I wore this shoe with 2 insoles on top of one another: the standard one plus the Dr. Scholl Gel. It helped. It made the shoe a little more comfy. I found the outsole to be somewhat heavy, and globally I had the sensation of a lack of precision. Traction and grip are better than that of trail runners’ for sure, but not as good as on a pair of proper hiking boots like my dear Asolo, which had surreal grip and were extremely precise.The mesh toe provides good ventilation but thanks to a relatively thin net the shoe doesn’t draw too much dust in, which is a real plus.
Needless to say, it’s also much more robust than a trail runner and when I ditched it in Dunsmuir, after 800 miles on very aggressive terrain, I think it was still fit for a few hundred miles at least. But man when I put my Saucony’s back on, I felt like I was walking on a cloud!
This one is not a trail runner but a low-upper hiking shoe. It does the job. Let’s say that I consider it the most neutral shoe I used on the PCT, in the sense that I couldn’t find anything to complain about, but I wasn’t thrilled either. It’s much more rigid than the Saucony (or than any trail-runner for that matter) and quite logically it’s also less comfortable. I think it was adapted to the High Sierra, where the terrain is less stable and more technical than in the desert. To compensate for the lack of cushioning, and still with the purpose of experimenting, I wore this shoe with 2 insoles on top of one another: the standard one plus the Dr. Scholl Gel. It helped. It made the shoe a little more comfy. I found the outsole to be somewhat heavy, and globally I had the sensation of a lack of precision. Traction and grip are better than that of trail runners’ for sure, but not as good as on a pair of proper hiking boots like my dear Asolo, which had surreal grip and were extremely precise.
The mesh toe provides good ventilation but thanks to a relatively thin net the shoe doesn’t draw too much dust in, which is a real plus.
Needless to say, it’s also much more robust than a trail runner and when I ditched it in Dunsmuir, after 800 miles on very aggressive terrain, I think it was still fit for a few hundred miles at least. But man when I put my Saucony’s back on, I felt like I was walking on a cloud!
The mesh toe provides good ventilation but thanks to a relatively thin net the shoe doesn’t draw too much dust in, which is a real plus.
Needless to say, it’s also much more robust than a trail runner and when I ditched it in Dunsmuir, after 800 miles on very aggressive terrain, I think it was still fit for a few hundred miles at least. But man when I put my Saucony’s back on, I felt like I was walking on a cloud!
Hoka One One Speedgoat 2 - EU 44 (US 10) - 650g
Hoka One One Speedgoat 2
EU 44 (US 10) - 650g
Ashland (mile 1.718) to Timberline Lodge (mile 2.097) – 380 miles
Ashland (mile 1.718) to Timberline Lodge (mile 2.097)
380 miles
This one is a case apart. The most amazing shoe I got to test on the PCT, but also the most disappointing, by far.The comfort provided by the enormous midsole is just unbelievable, I had never experienced that before on mountain hikes. I chose to use a Dr. Scholl insole again, but the standard insole provided with the shoe is already comfortable enough I think. All this soft material between your foot and the ground gives the weird impression of floating on an air cushion. Every impact is very absorbed and there’s a sort of strange instability when the shoe touches ground. It’s somewhat unsettling in the first moments but once you get used to it, hiking reaches levels of comfort never known before. The upper wraps around the foot very nicely and, while it fits tightly once laced, it’s very easy to put on and take off. That’s really really great. Note that the size 44/10 was a tiny bit too large for me and the tip of the shoe sometimes hit salient rocks or roots. That’s why I came back to a size 43/9.5 for my next pair of shoes.
Unfortunately, all this goes with major downsides. So much comfort and flexibility makes the shoe very unprecise, traction is mediocre, on dust or fine sand I almost felt like I was on ice skates. Going downhill the grip is vaguely decent, and I would certainly not take my chances at stepping on steep boulders with these shoes. The very wide net of the mesh gives excellent ventilation, but the price to pay in return is that it draws in an awful lot of dust.
In addition to that – and to me that’s the main defect really – the shoe is extremely fragile. I used it on a very short 380 miles, after which they were literally destroyed: the toe shell was peeling off, the midsole was grated like cheese, the toe-mesh was perforated… it was just totaled. I do realize that thru-hike conditions are a real test for the gear, but ending up the way these $140 shoes did after only 380 miles doesn’t seem acceptable to me. Especially when the Saucony (which can reasonably be considered an equivalent model) can do 650 miles easy peasy!
Hoka’s customer service is not exactly what I would call responsive, and their website is particularly tortuous when it comes to making a claim, but after keeping their helpline under siege I finally got to speak to someone who told me to return the shoes by post. And then they just sent me a brand new pair, without asking any question. Thanks for this at least…
Hoka’s customer service is not exactly what I would call responsive, and their website is particularly tortuous when it comes to making a claim, but after keeping their helpline under siege I finally got to speak to someone who told me to return the shoes by post. And then they just sent me a brand new pair, without asking any question. Thanks for this at least…
So in spite of their exceptional comfort I would absolutely NOT recommend these shoes in the context of a thru-hike. The value for money is poor, and in my opinion they’re just not adapted to that kind of adventure.
This one is a case apart. The most amazing shoe I got to test on the PCT, but also the most disappointing, by far.
The comfort provided by the enormous midsole is just unbelievable, I had never experienced that before on mountain hikes. I chose to use a Dr. Scholl insole again, but the standard insole provided with the shoe is already comfortable enough I think. All this soft material between your foot and the ground gives the weird impression of floating on an air cushion. Every impact is very absorbed and there’s a sort of strange instability when the shoe touches ground. It’s somewhat unsettling in the first moments but once you get used to it, hiking reaches levels of comfort never known before. The upper wraps around the foot very nicely and, while it fits tightly once laced, it’s very easy to put on and take off. That’s really really great. Note that the size 44/10 was a tiny bit too large for me and the tip of the shoe sometimes hit salient rocks or roots. That’s why I came back to a size 43/9.5 for my next pair of shoes.
The comfort provided by the enormous midsole is just unbelievable, I had never experienced that before on mountain hikes. I chose to use a Dr. Scholl insole again, but the standard insole provided with the shoe is already comfortable enough I think. All this soft material between your foot and the ground gives the weird impression of floating on an air cushion. Every impact is very absorbed and there’s a sort of strange instability when the shoe touches ground. It’s somewhat unsettling in the first moments but once you get used to it, hiking reaches levels of comfort never known before. The upper wraps around the foot very nicely and, while it fits tightly once laced, it’s very easy to put on and take off. That’s really really great. Note that the size 44/10 was a tiny bit too large for me and the tip of the shoe sometimes hit salient rocks or roots. That’s why I came back to a size 43/9.5 for my next pair of shoes.
Unfortunately, all this goes with major downsides. So much comfort and flexibility makes the shoe very unprecise, traction is mediocre, on dust or fine sand I almost felt like I was on ice skates. Going downhill the grip is vaguely decent, and I would certainly not take my chances at stepping on steep boulders with these shoes. The very wide net of the mesh gives excellent ventilation, but the price to pay in return is that it draws in an awful lot of dust.
In addition to that – and to me that’s the main defect really – the shoe is extremely fragile. I used it on a very short 380 miles, after which they were literally destroyed: the toe shell was peeling off, the midsole was grated like cheese, the toe-mesh was perforated… it was just totaled. I do realize that thru-hike conditions are a real test for the gear, but ending up the way these $140 shoes did after only 380 miles doesn’t seem acceptable to me. Especially when the Saucony (which can reasonably be considered an equivalent model) can do 650 miles easy peasy!
Hoka’s customer service is not exactly what I would call responsive, and their website is particularly tortuous when it comes to making a claim, but after keeping their helpline under siege I finally got to speak to someone who told me to return the shoes by post. And then they just sent me a brand new pair, without asking any question. Thanks for this at least…
Hoka’s customer service is not exactly what I would call responsive, and their website is particularly tortuous when it comes to making a claim, but after keeping their helpline under siege I finally got to speak to someone who told me to return the shoes by post. And then they just sent me a brand new pair, without asking any question. Thanks for this at least…
So in spite of their exceptional comfort I would absolutely NOT recommend these shoes in the context of a thru-hike. The value for money is poor, and in my opinion they’re just not adapted to that kind of adventure.
Salomon XA Pro 3D - EU 43 (US 9.5) - 770g
Salomon XA Pro 3D
EU 43 (US 9.5) - 770g
Chinook Pass (mile 2.323) to Stevens Pass (mile 2.464) – 140 miles
Chinook Pass (mile 2.323) to Stevens Pass (mile 2.464)
140 miles
Very interesting shoe. To me it’s somewhere between a low-upper hiking shoe and a trail-runner, although I’m perfectly conscious that people who do actual trail-running would never call that a trail-running shoe, and Salomon markets it as a classic hiking shoe. Obviously it’s slightly heavier than the Hoka or the Saucony. And it’s also less flexible. But still it’s very comfortable (I wore it with the standard insole and it was fine), it allows the foot great freedom of movement and the higher rigidity (when compared with a trail-runner) provides much better precision. Grip is good on every type of terrain, as long as the way downhill is not too steep and the rocks on the trail are not too wet. Everything in this shoe looks sound and robust, the toe-shell is hard enough to offer excellent protection, everything is well-assembled. I only tested this pair on a short 140 miles but as far as I could tell they really are as robust as they look. Ventilation is really good, especially for a shoe that offers so much protection. I can’t tell whether they draw a lot of dust in or not as I tested them in Washington State, where it was raining most of the time. I love the Quick-Lace system that allows you to lace/unlace your shoes in the blink of an eye, it’s a real plus on a thru-hike.It’s very important that the shoes you’ll wear on the PCT are quick and easy to put on, to adjust to your exact liking and to take off, because on the trail you’ll take them off all the time. That’s one of the secrets of your feet’s health in the long run: take them out of their shoes and let them breathe as often as you can.
140 miles is a bit short to forge a definitive opinion about a shoe so I will continue testing them, but so far I’ve been really impressed and, although they’re very different in their philosophy, they could be a good alternative to my late Saucony’s.
Very interesting shoe. To me it’s somewhere between a low-upper hiking shoe and a trail-runner, although I’m perfectly conscious that people who do actual trail-running would never call that a trail-running shoe, and Salomon markets it as a classic hiking shoe. Obviously it’s slightly heavier than the Hoka or the Saucony. And it’s also less flexible. But still it’s very comfortable (I wore it with the standard insole and it was fine), it allows the foot great freedom of movement and the higher rigidity (when compared with a trail-runner) provides much better precision. Grip is good on every type of terrain, as long as the way downhill is not too steep and the rocks on the trail are not too wet. Everything in this shoe looks sound and robust, the toe-shell is hard enough to offer excellent protection, everything is well-assembled. I only tested this pair on a short 140 miles but as far as I could tell they really are as robust as they look. Ventilation is really good, especially for a shoe that offers so much protection. I can’t tell whether they draw a lot of dust in or not as I tested them in Washington State, where it was raining most of the time. I love the Quick-Lace system that allows you to lace/unlace your shoes in the blink of an eye, it’s a real plus on a thru-hike.
It’s very important that the shoes you’ll wear on the PCT are quick and easy to put on, to adjust to your exact liking and to take off, because on the trail you’ll take them off all the time. That’s one of the secrets of your feet’s health in the long run: take them out of their shoes and let them breathe as often as you can.
140 miles is a bit short to forge a definitive opinion about a shoe so I will continue testing them, but so far I’ve been really impressed and, although they’re very different in their philosophy, they could be a good alternative to my late Saucony’s.
Socks!
Socks!
A good pair of socks teams-up with your shoes to provide your feet with the perfect hiking conditions. It’s a key element of your hiking gear and you must choose them very carefully. Socks should bring you comfort (thicker or thinner to fill the space left in your shoes and add the level of cushioning you require), protection against blisters and proper perspiration and water transfer. A mix of synthetic material and merino wool is most hiker’s go-to choice and, although there is an infinity of makes and models out there, 2 brands are really standing out: Darn Tough and Injinji.
Darn Tough (rhs) makes classic socks, very comfortable and very resistant. They are known for replacing your pair for free if it ever gets a hole. Most of the outfitters selling them along the PCT will exchange them right away if you bring them your damaged pair, without asking any questions.Injinji (lhs) specializes in toe-socks. The sensation may be weird at first if you’re not used to wearing toe-socks, but once you get used to them they’re very comfortable, and they’re also a good way to avoid getting blisters between your toes.
Both brands sell models of various heights to go with low-upper and high-upper shoes.
Note: I’ve seen some ultra-light (ultra-excessively-light?) hikers with one single pair of socks on their PCT hike. Just one, that’s it. The one they were wearing every single day. To me that’s not reasonable. Feet must be protected to the best of their owner’s ability, they need to breathe, they need to be kept as dry as possible in clean socks that keep dust and debris away. Wearing unclean socks repeatedly may lead to fungus, blisters and other booboos that will seem meaningless at first but will soon turn out to actually jeopardize your chances of completing your thru-hike. There are many ways for ultra-light-hiking enthusiasts to save weight, but I really don’t believe this is one, and all of the hikers I’ve seen do that had feet that looked and smelled terrible and were obviously not in the adequate shape for a thru-hike.
As for me I’m carrying 2 pairs of socks at all times: every morning I wash the pair I’m not wearing in the first stream that crosses the trail, and I lay it to dry on the top of my pack, using 2 safety pins. That becomes my clean pair for the next day, etc.Also, every time you take a break during the day, take off your shoes and socks, turn them inside out and lay them out in the sun, even if they don’t feel wet or moist. UV’s kill all the germs and this simple routine will help you keep your feet healthy.
Here are the sock configurations I have tested on the PCT:
A good pair of socks teams-up with your shoes to provide your feet with the perfect hiking conditions. It’s a key element of your hiking gear and you must choose them very carefully. Socks should bring you comfort (thicker or thinner to fill the space left in your shoes and add the level of cushioning you require), protection against blisters and proper perspiration and water transfer. A mix of synthetic material and merino wool is most hiker’s go-to choice and, although there is an infinity of makes and models out there, 2 brands are really standing out: Darn Tough and Injinji.
Darn Tough (rhs) makes classic socks, very comfortable and very resistant. They are known for replacing your pair for free if it ever gets a hole. Most of the outfitters selling them along the PCT will exchange them right away if you bring them your damaged pair, without asking any questions.
Injinji (lhs) specializes in toe-socks. The sensation may be weird at first if you’re not used to wearing toe-socks, but once you get used to them they’re very comfortable, and they’re also a good way to avoid getting blisters between your toes.
Both brands sell models of various heights to go with low-upper and high-upper shoes.
Note: I’ve seen some ultra-light (ultra-excessively-light?) hikers with one single pair of socks on their PCT hike. Just one, that’s it. The one they were wearing every single day. To me that’s not reasonable. Feet must be protected to the best of their owner’s ability, they need to breathe, they need to be kept as dry as possible in clean socks that keep dust and debris away. Wearing unclean socks repeatedly may lead to fungus, blisters and other booboos that will seem meaningless at first but will soon turn out to actually jeopardize your chances of completing your thru-hike. There are many ways for ultra-light-hiking enthusiasts to save weight, but I really don’t believe this is one, and all of the hikers I’ve seen do that had feet that looked and smelled terrible and were obviously not in the adequate shape for a thru-hike.
As for me I’m carrying 2 pairs of socks at all times: every morning I wash the pair I’m not wearing in the first stream that crosses the trail, and I lay it to dry on the top of my pack, using 2 safety pins. That becomes my clean pair for the next day, etc.Also, every time you take a break during the day, take off your shoes and socks, turn them inside out and lay them out in the sun, even if they don’t feel wet or moist. UV’s kill all the germs and this simple routine will help you keep your feet healthy.
Here are the sock configurations I have tested on the PCT:
- Darn Tough alone. Comfortable, but the chaffing between my toes generated some minor blisters.
- Injinji undersocks + Darn Tough socks. Excellent.
- Injinji thin running socks (thicker than undersocks, but thinner than hiking socks) + Darn Tough Socks. Perfect. The double layer provides additional cushioning that really makes a difference.
- Injinji hiking socks alone. Very good. A little less comfortable than #3 of course, but it spares me carrying 2 pairs (I carry 2 instead of 4).
#3 is by far the most convincing in terms of comfort and foot protection.
#4 is better in terms of function/space usage ratio.
#4 is better in terms of function/space usage ratio.
To each his (her) own, and I think it also depends on the hike you plan to do. In the future I’ll most probably do either 3 or 4 depending on the terrain I’m tackling and how much weight I can afford to pack in.
Gaiters
Gaiters
The Pacific Crest Trail is extremely dusty, and dust is your feet’s enemy. Gaiters are the ideal (must-have I would say) accessory to keep dust, sand, tiny gravel and debris from getting inside your shoes from the ankle side. No need to buy anything fancy or too technical, you mostly want them to be light and easy to put on and take off. Dirty Girl offer great value for money (and they’re fun!)
You can plan on consuming 2 or 3 pairs on your thru-hike.
If I had to do this all over again...
If I had to do this all over again...
These are the shoes I would wear on the PCT if I did it again today, based on my 2018 experience:
- For all non-mountain parts (Desert, North California, Oregon): Saucony Xodus Iso 2. Of course, since it doesn’t exist anymore, I’d have to find an equivalent, that is a trail-running shoe, lighter than a hiking shoe but with enough grip and traction on all types of terrains.
- For all mountain parts (say Kennedy Meadows to South Lake Tahoe and then White Pass to Manning Park): Salomon XA 3D Pro.
- Injinji Trail socks midweight mini-crew.
- And most importantly I would get orthopedic insoles, made to my exact measurements. That’s something I really wanna test on my next hikes, because according to what I’ve read so far in that respect, it’s the ultimate weapon for long-term comfort and perfect posture, with positive effects on the whole bone structure.