Lone Peak ALL-WTHR Mid 2

I am not really a "hiker", but I am a package delivery guy. I cover 8 to 10 miles per day of various terrain, stairs, mud, rain and the 3 steps in my truck up and down 120 times a day. I am hard on shoes. I use trail runners in decent weather (currently Altra Wild Peaks), light hiking boots (Keen Targhee), and insulated boots in the winter. (Keen Polar). My wife disapprove of my shoe fetish, but I need a variety to keep my feet happy. Trail runners eliminate the seam rubbing on my ankle bone, so they are more comfortable out of the box. My answer is "all of the above".

I've found you'll get a lot of reflexive hostility to any mention of ankle support, well-meaning folks telling you to just build up ankle strength; they don't seem equipped to relate to what our bodies need, earnestly giving the best advice- for themselves. I put my foot in a hidden hole a few month back, and that ankle appreciates a bit of support as I recover. A \~3" wide wrap over the sock has helped quite a bit- three times around the ankle, once under the foot, then a few more times around the ankle, with the velcro end placed where the shoe will help hold it in place. I have flat feet, and am highly intolerant of any significant arch, as such very quickly become a big stone in the middle of the shoe. Looking for a low to no arch shoe that was light enough for trail running while still providing some ankle support, I was drawn to the Altra Lone Peak 2 All-Weather Mid at REI, spent a half hour running around the store. Problem is, the sole at the toe tappers significantly, and the sole itself is rather flexible; these features can be good things independently, but not together for me with this shoe; placing the toe when running, the ground feel is great at the moment of contact- but because of the sole flexibility, as the stride brings the forward mid sole into contact, the toe portion is also still in contact with the earth, and, because of the tapper, the shoe is bent into a defacto arch! I really liked the shoe- the toe box was wide, the heal and mid section hugged my foot just right -but my toes quickly cramped as they were constantly reaching over this lump that appeared on every stride! If you aren't so afflicted, I'd give the shoe a try, if you can find it; the fit and weight (lighter) differs from the A LP 9 waterproof Mid commonly stocked (you might try that shoe too, but I didn't find it as amenable for running). For me, the answer came from Xero shoes. My REI doesn't carry variations of the mid trail "Scrambler" that would offer the level of ankle support I'm seeking -but they do carry some other Xero trail running shoes so that you can get an impression of fit. Xeros are minimalist/barefoot shoes, flat soled with zero drop; as others have noted, zero drop shoes and minimalist shoes may require adaptation for healthy use; for me, they are just better for the way my body works. Regarding the ankle, there is some correlation between the thickness of the platform and a propensity for rolling. Folks commonly remark on Xeros having a narrow fit, so I was concerned this would be a deal killer with my relatively wide size 11US feet; slipping on the Prio running shoe my REI had in stock, I was instantly delighted and put at ease- flexible enough that laces made for a close fit without being overly constrained. Re-assured, I ordered a pair of Xero Scrambler II's from the REI outlet, discounted for the holiday, then dropped the membership 20% off on top of the Black Friday price. Just got 'em in the mail yesterday, pleased by the fit. If you do some research on this shoe, you'll find there are several variations in sole, with differences in stiffness and resistance to wear; the model I selected isn't suitable for roads, which will eat it up. If you don't plan on completely submerging your shoe, the waterproof model has a fantastic price right now, has been well regarded, and reported to really keep feet dry; I periodically run in flooding with water above the ankle, so opted for breathability instead. Incredibly, my scale puts these boots at \~1.5 lbs- for the pair; by contrast, the Asics Gel Venture 10 trail running shoes I've been wearing weigh in at \~1.6 lbs! Let us know what you end up with, and how you arrive at that destination.

u/TheAlpackaaa, I've had a few runs with the Xero Scrambler II's- some feedback. So far, they are most everything I hoped for. As previously indicated, despite being mid-boots, they are a bit lighter than my Asics trail running shoes. The toe box is wide, while the heal and mid are snug in a way I have seldom had the opportunity to experience; there is something about the light, semi-conforming sole that allows the laced shoe to hug tight without suffering hot spots. Combined with the very, very low stack height, my foot neither rotates in the shoe, nor has opportunity to pronate or supinate. The mid height provides much appreciated support at the ankle without unduly restricting movement, reducing the chance of rolling the foot due to fatigue, and providing some protection when catching or dragging a toe. The sole provides for great ground feel and sufficient protection for my use; while I've yet to suffer any bruising from anything stepped on, my usual run features a lot of branches and roots, and only limited gravel- how they might perform on large, sharp stones, I can't say. The lugs are relatively small and spaced far enough apart that any trapped muck dislodges when the shoes are slapped together. All that said, they run nothing like my Asics, or any other shoe I'm familiar with, demanding a different form. It's already clear they are training me to be a better runner, demanding that I place tow and forward ball first, never heal. Until adapting my gait, the experience jarred my back as I attempted to just throw my foot forward and plant a heal; without the comparatively gigantic pad common to most running shoes, any heavy footedness is felt by the spine. My foot speed increased, stride slightly shortened with knee lifted a bit higher. It feels a bit closer to dancing than my running was before; the concentration required and associated fatigue of the first outing was greatly reduced by the second. With an easy to remove insole, the shoes dry relatively quickly; I had planned on alternating the Xeros with my Asics when wet, but the rate of drying hasn't required it. The bad news: there is already just the beginnings of some delamination between the fabric and welded elements at the toe. Some others (not all) have remarked on this defect- I don't know if this is associated with production at a particular location and time, or what. I'll see what Xero has to say about it- I don't look forward to applying Shoe-Goo to a new pair of shoes with ony 12 miles on them.

The symptoms remarked on in the lead post are classic for zeros and the stride they demand. As you've indicated, the OP may be suffering symptoms typical of a new stride, too- but switching to zeros and attempting to heal strike seems as destined for injury as keeping a high drop shoe and moving the point of contact forward. To say "you should always run with the stride and foot strike that's natural to you" seems misguided- techniques and habits are developed. I tried Lone Peeks, running around an REI for 20 minutes; problem for me, they really aren't "zero drop", as the toe box curves UP- when placing toe first, the shoe bed flexes to conform, creating a defacto arch my flat feet won't tolerate. Every shoe is going to be a conversation with stride.

I didn't provide my example as a recommendation, only as a demonstration that one size does not fit all. It was literally offered as a warning about anecdotes. I'd prefer this to be a conversation, not about "winning". Having reconsidered your words, I was moved- not in totality, but enough for redaction of a quip before offering further reflection. I'd prefer this to not be a debate contest where we stand behind an argument no matter what we really believe.

I wear barefoot shoes all the time, and really only switch to something more sturdy when going out deep in the backcountry or during the winter when I want more ankle support. When I switch to more regular shoes, I quickly develop knee pain and have problems balancing. The extra sensation and flexiblity helps me quite a bit to the point that regular shoes feel really clunky, especially when I need to watch where I place my feet. I think I'm used to being able to use the muscles in my feet for walking and running, and quirks with my gait ar exaggerated by the more common shoe design. Lone Peaks are a great compromise between minimalism and protection. Their wide toe box and light weight are probably a bit part of it, but I attribute it mostly to the more flexible sole and zero drop. In short, they work for me when quite a few other options don't. I think Lone Peaks are the first non-barefoot shoes I've bought in years that I haven't immediately returned after wearing around the house for a few hours. I'd honestly love more options with a similar fit.

That's actually why I got the Lone Peaks; they are the mid-rise ones, probably the "ALL-WTHR Mid 2" model. They've worked well so far, but I haven't really put them through their paces. I've mostly used them around town after big snowstorms and tromping around between the car and the ski hut.

I wear the Lone Peak mids and I LOVE them. Most comfortable shoes ever. I’ve tried so many hiking shoes/boots that I can’t even count. Seriously…it’s a ridiculous amount lol and the LPs are still my fav (I’m on my 4th pair I think and will be buying another for the new hiking season). I tried the Olympus and they were WAY too thick for me. I don’t like that there is zero ground feel and they felt huge on my feet.

yea im selling a pair of lone peak mids size 11 for the same reason. i dont got time to change my feet and i ski and ice skate so am used to jamming my foot into molded boot. hmu if there's interest