Thanks Michael for featuring us in another awesome video! Loving how these are breaking in! We'll have to get you over to WI to see the workshop at some point!
Hoka for anything performance-based for me, and the traditional option for taking my time. I've used Hoka Bondi's to aid me through various lower limb running injuries over the years and they do a great job. The rocker sole is a game changer for people with feet issues.
The obvious solution is to wear 1 on each foot and walk 30 miles and see which leg feels the best. Or you and your twin could have an Appalachian hiking race and see who makes it to the end first.
I switch between wearing Hoka sneakers and boots when I don't have to wear my Steel cap boots at work. I used to wear Merrell Moabs for hiking and Asics sneakers.
The science ultimately says -- regarding high vs low cushion / barefoot -- that yeah, a mix is ultimately the healthiest. As much as I love my barefoot shoes and boots, and totally agree that they've made a positive impact on my health, the movement reads a lot like the ~2010 era keto movement. There are a lot of health benefits, but ultimately the answer is a healthy mix of footwear, exercise, and diet. On the hiking front however I would argue that pillowy stack height is excellent for SPEED in running, but if you're looking at longer distance hikes then harder boots are generally recommended.
Loved the comparison style video Michael! For anyone wanting some extracurricular reading (I guess technically listening), Stitchdown Shoecast did an episode fairly recently with Luke, the new owner/operator over at Russell.
In surfing, the term “rocker” is used in reference to the curve of the board from the tail to the nose, specifically the section closest to the nose as that’s where you usually have the most curve or “rocker”. In Hoka’s case I think they’re referring to how the shoe cures upward toward the toe.
I have a few pairs of custom Russells with barefoot style sole stacks. I go off trail where there are chunks of lava hidden by grass. Ground feel is key, and I can move fast without getting hurt. Take that away, and they are downright dangerous for my uses. Strictly for use on relatively smooth, developed trails, the Hokas are going to be more comfortable short term, but I chose barefoot style for a reason. Gore tex is useless IMO, where i have lived and hiked. The little grit on and off all of our trails will perforate it quickly. I suppose if it's fully enclosed in leather, it can be protected, but my triple layer Russells, when i keep them waxed, are waterproof, too, without an unnecessary membrane that just makes them less comfortable.
I love my Hoka's. I usually buy their shoes for everyday walking. I do not recommend doing anything else but walk in them. I have pierced the sole of 2 pairs. Walking in bark at a dog park I have collected pieces of wood stuck inside the foam soles. Also while kick starting my scooter, the kicker stabbed right through. The last example is my fault because I already knew it was the wrong shoe to wear! Either way pick the right shoe/boot for your body and the activity!
This HAS to be the MOST underrated channel of RU-vid! I've been watching you for a while you're great. This video is great. All your videos are exceptional. I hope you get 1mil subs asap! You're awesome! See you next time.
Well done & engaging review and comparison! I would not want to have my feet anesthetized (essentially all but immobilized in the case of the Hoka) and my toes gathered together out of alignment by either one of these boots. Ground feel and proprioception are so important to not falling and turning ankles.
Hello good sir, you talk about main pieces in one's wardrobe, but I think a video or two on accessories i.e. socks, watches, glasses would be sick :') Great videos though!
i one hundred percent agree with you. i have a job that requires boots and is really tough on my knees and feet. there are days after work, and there are even weekends, when i know i should stay off my feet. i use more cushy shoes during those times. when not working, i run, for EXERCISE; NOT for time or distance. the goal, for me at least, is exercise over anything else, so i dont use cushy running shoes. i use barefoot style shoes, vivos. if my legs, feet/ankles/knees cant handle it without cushy running shoes, then i just dont run and instead let my body rest. the second runner you quoted was alluding to barefoot shoes and barefoot running/walking, and i cant help but want to rant on that: im not categorically into barefoot shoes. as someone who needs protective boots i dont care for the thin soles or the flexibility of the shoe. but i do think the zero drop heel is legit, as is the wide toe box. weirdly bent and twisted toes, ingrown toe nails, hammer toes, bunions.. these are all things that are caused by shoes that dont have room for your toes. its fucking stupid. Jim Green and Rose Anvil have recently created "barefoot" style boots that are zero drop with wide toe boxes if anyone has been looking for that, like i have for the past few years. they have their barefoot style African Ranger that came out last year and they have a new, taller boot that comes out soon. about hokas vs russels specifically: besides functionality, i wouldnt buy either but style wise i just gotta go with the russels. hokas are the trendiest of the trendy. russels are a timeless moccasin boot. you're gonna be replacing your hokas because you're gonna feel outdated in them long before they actually wear out. hokas also just... they're loud, and are kinda just overkill to wear while running errands or doing anything else that doesn't call for peak physical long-distance performance. russels, you can go hiking in them, and then dress them up and go out to dinner in them.
I haven't tried this pair of Hokas, but I have a pair of trail runners that I have used damn near every day since late 2018, and they are the most comfortable shoes I have ever worn. Surprisingly the sole still has some life, but not too much more. The body of the shoe is wearing down more than the sole, which has never happened to me before. I also have issues with my right ankle so I have to be selective with my shoes or else I get a lot of pain when I step. I need to save up for a pair of these boots. I would love to try the Russells, but that is way out of my price point.
I really liked this type of video. It's definitely was interesting comparing modern tech vs traditional construction, but I'll be honest. I'd watch any video that you made.
I've been hiking/camping/backpacking my entire adult life, and I would never wear a leather boot when new foamy hiking shoes are available. I can replace the Hokas. I can't replace my feet and legs.
Also, outside of winter hiking, waterproofing is a non-issue for hiking shoes. You should not be wearing waterproof shoes. You should be wearing shoes with mesh uppers. Walk through whatever you want. Your feet will be dry in 10 minutes.
I hiked the grand canyon in my Timberland 6" side zip earth keepers. No problems. were pretty much the same consept as those Russel boots . Just sucks Timberland discontinued them. Moved on to Northface Future light with vibram tread. I think the hookas are pumped up hype.
Hoka are great if you are running trails, but I'll take the Russel's over them any day. The Russel's can be re-soled by a good cobbler for 1/4 of the price of the original boot. Russel's are pretty much a lifetime boot and will keep your legs/feet stronger in the long run. You can't re-sole a Hoka without it being cost prohibitive and you might as well throw it in a landfill when it wears out.
I liked it!!! (Now, you know!) 😁 I have three kinds of Hoka's and I LOVE them!!! I would love to have a pair of Russell's---and not just because the name is WAY cool--hahahahaha, but because I know that they are very well made boots and the style is tried and true. If I ever win the lottery, I will certainly buy a pair. Thanks, Michael, for a GREAT video! 👍👍
Yeah, I’m sorry but $685 for these boots is absurd. I’m struggling to see what’s unique about the construction of these boots that justifies the high price vs other American made boots like Truman.
@@JRRob3wn I mean it's hard to fond a true moccasin style constructed boot like this with premium leather, but I'm more of a working guy than a hunter or hiking guy, so for that price I'd probably buy a pair of Nick's.
@@JoeyDecay Purely based on materials and the type of construction I think it’s a hard sell for me even if they’re made in America. Obviously, the market sets the price though. Ever since COVID, the prices on boots and other heritage type items has skyrocketed.
@@JRRob3wn well ever since a certain president decided to borrow ton of money from the federal reserve at is really the reason. The more money in circulation, the less it's worth like anything else, but the real problem is the federal reserve. A private bank that lends the government money at interest creating perpetual debt. I think Woodrow Wilson was the single worst president in US history, he initiated the fed and income tax.
i love my hokas, but i’m not really into the tactical/techy look anymore and i only find myself using them to hike. i typically change back into cowboy boots after the hike.
I really want a pair of the Russel moccasins that you have but I’m always disappointed to see they don’t have the brown color. Seems like they only sell black ones. Do you know if the brown will make a comeback?
Ehh. A pair of redwings or grant stone boots are a little more than hoka. I see the benefit of hokas for certain individuals but I’d rather have traditional boots.
There are no boot materials that warrant $700.00. It has to do with profit margin on a product they know you‘re not coming back to buy another pair in 5 years. In order for the company to stay alive they have to charge more. What about arch support and support in general with a backpack weighing around 60lbs, which boot was better?
The two questions I have are how these boots hold up after longterm use as I’ve seen people complaining about diminished quality in recent years and who are these hikers who prefer them? Of the thousands of miles I’ve hiked and all the people I know who have done king trail thru-hikes including the AT and PCT, none of them have seen these on the trail and only a handful of leather boots at all. The only people I’ve ever seen wearing them are elderly park rangers who work in national forests.
technology is awesome and new things are friggan rad. But its impossible to deny the draw towards a design that has stood the test of time over something thats new
Hoka's look amazing. But they wore out faster than any running shoe I've ever owned. On top of that for a company that makes nothing but shoes they made a LOT of silly mistakes that I would expect a company that makes nothing but shoes to not make. The laces were slippery and came untied literally every run, the foam at the heel folded over and made that annoying bump. They aren't dealbreaking mistakes but my other shoes don't come untied... why can't my Hokas?
The problem for me is that the Hoka uses Goretex which we can't tell the environmental impact of vs chrome tanning, I can't see if Russell uses Chrome or Veg tanned leather. Also, Hoka is an example of too much tech imo as well. When we remove the need for our body to be strong in order to handle certain types of movement, that's not a good thing. I think excessive tech, like hokas, and excessive lack of tech, like barefoot shoes, are not the best solutions. One harms our bodies ability to be capable on it's own, and the other just doesn't fit in the modern world, step on a tack by accident and it's right in your foot instead of the midsole of the shoe you know?
Goretex isn’t going to hurt the environment. Poor political decisions by the politicians who allow mass homeless to overtake their city’s has a real impact on the environment. Those politicians are also making you scared of a naturally occurring gas in the air.
The hoka sky kaha is the best. Durability can get stuffed get a new one when you blow through the old one. The kaha has seen me through every day of a 50-60 hour work week as a head chef and a shitload of hikes. It doesn’t have the lockdown of my Salomon quest gtx 4 but the hoka kaha is so comfortable I feel like regrading the comfort of other shoes to a lower level. I’m a heritage guy and love my beckmans selvage denim it all, but the kaha is the boot for a hiker or a person on their feet all day in situations you need traction
i dont know many hikers that still wear boots to begin with. i see 90% altra lone peaks, maybe 5% hokas, and the other 5% are old men that insist on wearing 8 lb steel toe boots for some reason.
It’s not a coincidence max cushion shoes became popular right after barefoot shoes. Barefoot cultist say you’re stopping the performance of your foot but when you look at high preformed shoes barefoot design doesn’t exist.
If anything true hikers stick to what they bought back then. Teacher at Uni who brought me the hiking was using gear and outfits from 80s and 90s. Upgrading only if something was damaged beyond repair and boy those people new how to make things that last, they all were losing color and looks but not utility. He was also having industrial alpinism sidehussle. For person not in a club he was looking like a broken hobo. For those who new he was museum of vintage and tried-and-tested gear. How to spot newb on a trail? He looks like he is just of a youtube gear recommendations for rich people.
Fast packing on a trail with a 5lbs base weight pack is fine with shoes. Get off trail for some of those XXk trail miles and you’ll appreciate some boots.
Sorry but I can't see how either of those would be good for more than day hikes in dry conditions, on trail. Are these really considered as hiking boots in the US? 😶 Good luck hiking the Scandinavian wilderness or the Alps with those...
