Superior Series

Altra trail runners. Or any trail runners really. You don’t need climbing specific approach shoes.

I've put over 2000 miles into a couple pairs of Altra runners. I have boots I use for more rugged adventures with lots of ankle rolling risks, but for 90% of trails, runners are too comfortable and light to not wear.

Go to REI and let them Guide you. I ended up with Altra trail runners. They’re great

2 pairs of the Superior 5, terrible traction when wet on limestone. 1 pair of the Olympus 5, much better traction but the midsole packed out around 200 miles in and that’s probably because of the inner flex thing because there’s less foam there. I’ve got some topo pursuits with 400+ miles that are great and Nnormal tomirs with 400+ miles that’s are also still great. I just don’t think altra makes a great shoe for me, especially because I have a narrow foot and would lose multiple toenails after marathon+ distances.

Altra uses 3 different foot shapes, not all their models use the same shape. https://www.altrarunning.com/en-us/about-us/footshape.html. I started off w/ the Altra Lone Peaks then didn't understand why i didn't like their Superiors as much. Turns out i only like their shoes w/ original footshape (LPs, Timp).

I’m going to do my best to answer your question with the experience I have. The pros of military (also often seen as “tactical”) boots is they’re generally heavier duty and, like you said, a work/hiking hybrid. I don’t know when you were in but you may have noticed that a lot of brands for the Army and Air Force have moved towards a sneaker style boot. Some examples of brands doing this are danner, Nike, or under armour. Your Bellevilles and Bates are almost certainly more of a work style boot than a sneaker style boot. With that, the sneaker style boots are not nearly as durable as the heavier duty work style and can wear much faster. The main cons of military style boots are their bulk and weight. Some brands (see above) cut down on the weight by making them into a sneaker style, which is why so many in the force use those types. Another con is their height, 8-10in (for everyone other than SOF dudes) are just over the top for most hikers. MANY hikers and backpackers consider anything over 6in to be excessive as it doesn’t seem to provide actual ankle stability. However, Garmonts are massively popular for a reason so it really comes down to the individual. As someone that has hiked long distances is military boots, “tactical” boots, traditional (think leather based) boots, and trail runners; I prefer trail runners. You probably have seen that pattern already though. I like them for their lightweight, great grip, and relatively low price. I really have loved my Altras but also my Mount to Coast T1s. People kind of sleep on Mount to Coast in the hiking world but ultra runners love them so I figured they’d also be good for backpacking, and I’ve found that they are. Also, if you’re really hooked on something a bit more familiar and heavier duty I really recommend Crispi, those things are borderline indestructible and have a phenomenal fit. Hope this short essay helps!

I ended up finding some 5s to try. Agree that the toebox is wider than the 6s. Overall width and length fit my hobbit feet better. I might be imagining things, but wearing them around the house, my feet feel hotter in the 5s. Wish the 5s had gaiter attachments.