Waterproof Boots: Are They Worth It?

My hiking partner and I have been having a running debate. She favors waterproof boots. I hadn’t. This question hits close to home for anyone preparing to travel much by foot, be it for recreation or disaster; so let’s take a look at it.

Opening arguments: Waterproof boots

Ok, this one’s dead easy. Buy waterproof boots, spend more time with dry feet. Dry feet blister less than wet feet. They’re less prone to fungal diseases. They’re warmer. And depending on your inclination, they range somewhere between “a little” and “worlds” more comfortable.

Bonus points: Waterproof boots also keep the interior of the boot more dry, not just the feet within. That can extend the lifespan of the interior linings. Deteriorating linings of boots generate blisters faster than a web browser generates ads, so it’s not an inconsequential point. Also dry feet are much less prone to frostbite, which is a Very Big Deal if cold weather travel might be necessary.

Opening arguments: Non-waterproof boots

Light. Cheap. Waterproof. Pick two, if you’re lucky. Getting all three is pretty much right out.

My good quality hikers cost about 1/3 and weigh about 2/3 of what Doc’s good quality waterproof hikers cost and weigh. You may laugh at a few extra ounces on your feet — but if you do you’ve probably not done 20+ mile hikes. Weight matters; particularly when you have to keep lifting it up every step. The importance of the cost depends on your situation, so I’ll leave that one to you.

Since I don’t hate wet feet, and my recreational hiking has so far been in fairly warm weather, I’d always gone non-waterproof. It helped that I don’t tend to blister much.

The Unexpected Waterproofed Experiment

But my hikers have many hundreds of miles on them and were beginning to break down. Time to get more. And with beautiful timing, a prepper friend lets us know of an Unbelievable sale on Merrell tactical boots. Pairs that normally cost around $150 were selling for $15 + shipping! Alrighty then, time to try out some Moab 2 8″ Waterproof Tactical Boots!

My $15 waterproof boots.

First impressions

Once they arrived, the priority became Go For Hike! So I put on my pack and headed out. Wait, am I just such a hardcore prepper that I practice hiking in full pack regularly? Well, I can’t claim that I am, honestly. But my hiking partner Doc has been known to invite me on amazing adventures on short notice; things I could not do if I didn’t stay in shape for them. So I do.

First steps: Way more comfortable than I’d feared. My feet can be picky about such things; but these were perfect with no break-in required. They were heavier than my non-waterproof hikers, by about 1/3. They were also warmer. That was dandy in October but will take more consideration for trips to warm climes. 

Since you can’t really do waterproof low tops, these were also stiffer around the ankles than I favor. I had to change my stride, flexing the ankle less with each step. I had a. little soreness the day after — not something I’m used to from a seven mile hike. Those who want ankle stability from their boots can mark a plus in that column.

But were they Really waterproof?

Of course I picked a route with a water crossing. On the way out, I took the shallow crossing. Up to the ankle bone in icy creek water, my tootsies were completely warm and completely dry. I stood there for a minute or two to see if the water would soak in. Nope. When I stepped out, the boots shed the water like — well, water off a duck’s back! Not even a hint of color change in the material to hint of any water uptake.

My test bed: a low water crossing on a back road.

So how far up did the great waterproofing go? I knew the tongues of the boots were free starting about at the grommets, just a bit above the ankle bone. With the boots tightly laced, was the material water repellent enough to keep the boots waterproof, even briefly, above that height? I took the deeper crossing on the way back. 

All the No. The moment the water went above the tongue slot, each foot was thoroughly wet. Less than three seconds dry survival, so not even a single step. Not enough leaked in to make my feet literally slosh, but I left very wet footprints later when I got the boots off.

Did they become miserable once the waterproof failed?

I’d done the deeper water on the way home in case these were like some boots that become monster blister generators when wet. There was no hint of that, though. They were still perfectly comfortable over the last mile and a half. They did not fully dry out overnight though. Next time I’ll try stuffing them with wicking material (like newspaper) to speed up the drying. On a multi-day hike, drying out overnight’s kind of a big deal, so I want to test it.

Waterproof worth it?

Ok, Doc, you win. It is more comfortable to have dry feet. It’s very nice not to have to debate about wet feet vs. time lost changing and worse footing at every little creek crossing. Also, my light hikers get dew-soaked very quickly in morning grass. While I can’t ford creeks much above ankle height, I’m confident they’d resist any amount of dew.

Then there’s the Greatly reduced risk of cold injury. I didn’t wear my light hikers in the snow more than once; snow melted through them straight away. These waterproof boots will keep me able to feel my toes, snow as it may.

…Unless of course the plan is to hike dry country. In dry terrain and hot weather, the light hikers are likely to be the better bet. But not for Missouri, with little cricks at the base of every other hill.

p.s. We have no connection with Merrell; other than they had a great sale on boots so I bought a couple of pair.