4 ms·
You're absolutely right, I think this article is using the colloquial term for "hiking", i.e., a 1-hour walk back and forth without terrain or elevation changes
by lusus_naturae 3y ago
You're absolutely right, I think this article is using the colloquial term for "hiking", i.e., a 1-hour walk back and forth without terrain or elevation changes. Everyone can enjoy whatever they want, but I think a new term is needed without it being confusing.
- SketchySeaBeast 3y agoI mean, that's going for a walk.
- fasthands9 3y agoI hiked the grand canyon rim to bottom in sneakers. A trail runner would probably be better, but for hikes like this (that are clearly more than 'walks for 99% of people') hiking boots are a bad idea. A large fraction of hikes are not going through the bushes or through mud. Its on a difficult path, but a path nonetheless where the important factors are simply you dont get tired and you know how the shoes move.
- SketchySeaBeast 3y agoWell, we're not really discussing that here. Hiking to the bottom of the grand canyon is NOT "a 1-hour walk back and forth without terrain or elevation changes." I don't think it's just a matter of bush or mud. When I've worn hiking boots it's because of the gear I was carrying on my back - the extra cushion and ankle support is important when you're on hour 8 of having an extra 40 lbs on your back.
- fasthands9 3y agoI was obviously exhausted but the path is very well maintained. Its not like you have to do any climbing or walk through brush. I think the shoes you would wear for a 6 hour walk in a city are what are also good for this type of hike.
- SketchySeaBeast 3y agoI'm not saying your shoes were inadequate for your hike, I'm saying when hiking boots come in handy,when you're doing an actual multi day hike.
- relyks 3y agoI agree with you. I hiked the Hoh Rainforest in Olympic National Park for literally miles and I would not have been able to do it with sneakers.