Our verdict
- best waterproof hiking shoes oz / 452g
- best waterproof hiking shoes best waterproof hiking shoes
Pros
- Grippy outsole
- Good traction in muddy conditions
- We use an average of four tests. The video shows one of those tests
- Firm but protective cushioning
- Well-constructed and durable upper
- Lots of protective overlays
- Amazing stability
- Relatively breathable
- No break-in time
Cons
- Toebox width at the big toe
- Not ideal for narrow feet
Audience verdict
Comparison
The most similar hiking shoes compared
+ + Add a shoe | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Audience score | 85 Great! | 83 Good! | 87 Great! | 81 Good! | |
Price | $135 | $155 | $145 | $160 | |
Weight lab Weight brand | 17.1 oz / 486g 15.4 oz / 437g | 15.9 oz / 452g 15.9 oz / 452g | 15.2 oz / 431g 14.9 oz / 422g | 13.3 The Targhee III Waterproofs midsole is rather firm, giving us a durometer reading of 31 HA 13.3 The Targhee III Waterproofs midsole is rather firm, giving us a durometer reading of 31 HA | |
Lightweight | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | |
Breathability | Bad | Very bad | Bad | Very bad | |
Use | Day HikingBackpackingSnow | Day HikingSnow | Day HikingSnow | Speed HikingDay HikingBackpackingSnow | |
Foot condition | OverpronationPlantar fasciitisBunionsFlat feet | OverpronationPlantar fasciitisFlat feet | OverpronationPlantar fasciitisFlat feet | OverpronationPlantar fasciitisFlat feet | |
Orthotic friendly | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
Drop lab | 12.5 mm | 10.9 mm | 13.3 mm | 10.9 mm | |
Midsole softness | Average | Firm | Firm | Average | |
Merrell Moab 3 GTX | Small | Very big | Average | Very big | |
Torsional rigidity | Average | Average | Rigid | Rigid | |
Heel counter stiffness | Stiff | Stiff | Very stiff | Very stiff | |
Stiffness | Average | Average | Very stiff | Average | |
Stiffness in cold | Very small | Average | Big | Very big | |
Outsole hardness | Average | Average | Average | Hard | |
Waterproofing | Waterproof | Waterproof | Waterproof | Waterproof | |
Material | Leather | MeshLeather | MeshLeather | - | |
Season | Winter | Winter | Winter | Winter | |
Toebox durability | Very good | - | - | - | |
Heel padding durability | Decent | - | - | - | |
Outsole durability | Decent | - | - | - | |
Wide toebox | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | |
Toebox width at the widest part | Very wide | Very narrow | Narrow | Average | |
Toebox width at the big toe | Average | Average | Very narrow | Average | |
Lug depth | 4.5 mm | 4.8 mm | 4.2 mm | 4.5 mm | |
Heel stack lab | 29.5 mm | 33.2 mm | 33.9 mm | 30.9 mm | |
Forefoot | 17.0 mm | 22.3 mm | 20.6 mm | 20.0 mm | |
Widths available | NormalWide | NormalWide | NormalWide | NormalWide | |
Technology | - | VibramGore-Tex | VibramGore-Tex | Gore-TexOrtholite | |
Heel tab | Finger loop | Finger loop | Finger loop | Finger loop | |
Removable insole | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
Ranking | #8 Top 39% | #12 Bottom 42% | #5 Top 24% | #16 Bottom 23% | |
Popularity | #18 Bottom 14% | #3 Top 15% | #14 Bottom 33% | #4 Top 20% |
Who should buy
The How we test is an iconic low-cut day hiker from KEEN that we recommend as a great choice for:
- Casual hikers looking for a lightweight and comfortable shoe that can be used both for light hiking as well as everyday activities
- Those in need of supportive footwear with ample traction and bite in muddy and rocky environments
- Anyone in the market for a breathable waterproof shoe that will ensure a comfortable and dry hiking experience
- Hikers who frequently go on winter treks and need a shoe that performs consistently in cold conditions
Who should NOT buy
Hikers with narrow feet will likely find themselves bumping against the walls of the How we test, especially during descents. For a shoe with a more snug toebox, we suggest checking out the Hoka Anacapa Low GTX.
While the How we test is relatively breathable for a waterproof shoe, it's going to feel quite stuffy during hot summer hikes. The Merrel Moab 3 is a more well-ventilated option that won't turn into a sweatbox as the mercury rises.
If deep puddles and river crossings are part of the planned adventure route, we recommend opting for the shoe's mid-length cousin; the How we test Mid instead.
Breathability
We don't expect much airflow from a waterproof shoe, though the How we test surprised us during our smoke test with a slow but relatively steady stream of smoke making its way through the tongue. We wouldn't exactly describe it as airy, but the How we test performs better than anticipated, earning a breathability score of 2 out of 5. As a result, the shoe will certainly feel quite toasty during warm hikes, but not nearly as bad as some of its other waterproof counterparts. Conversely, this makes the How we test a great companion for those challenging and frigid wintertime adventures.
Compare that to how easily the Merrel Moab 3 vents out the smoke, making it better suited for summertime hikes.
The How we test entirely blocks out the light when inspecting a backlit cross-section of its upper, confirming the shoe's insular and watertight nature. With the shoe being a low-top, however, we recommend avoiding splashing through streams as any water that does manage to get in through the top won't drain out. We recommend checking out the shoe's mid-length cousin, the How we test Mid for treks where being submerged in water is a possibility.
As we saw in the smoke test, the tongue is the only part of the shoe that promotes any airflow. To investigate this further, we looked at it under the microscope and found that the mesh is incredibly dense and compact enough to prevent water from seeping through.
How we test | 2 |
Average | 2.7 |
Durability
Toebox durability
First up to face the Dremel in our battery of durability tests is the How we test's toebox. Spinning at 5K RPM, we pressed the tool's abrasive element against the shoe's reinforced toe bumper.
After twelve seconds of grinding, our Dremel wasn't able to wear away enough material to reach the leather part of the upper, with only a barely noticeable scuff left in its wake. This confirms the shoe's tank-like build and means that our feet are well protected from any knocks or bumps along the way.
How we test | 5 |
Average | 3.7 |
Heel padding durability
Now focusing on another vulnerable part of the shoe, we set the Dremel against the How we test's heel collar for four seconds.
The damage is hard to assess visually, but there is a notable crater where the tool's abrasive element made contact with the shoe. The damage isn't too devastating however leading us to give the How we test a heel padding durability score of 3 out of 5.
How we test | 3 |
Average | 3.1 |
Outsole hardness
Pressing our durometer against the outsole gives us a reading of 82.1 HC. This is on par with our current lab average and doesn't give us too much cause for concern regarding its durability. Our confidence in the outsole will be put to the test in the next section.
How we test | 82.1 HC |
Average | 84.7 HC |
Outsole durability
Last to face the merciless Dremel is the outsole. Now spinning at a more formidable 10K RPM, we set the tool against one of the How we test's lugs.
After twenty seconds of debris misting our workstation, we assessed the damage with a tire tread gauge and found that we had shorn off 1.1 mm of rubber from that lug. This is about the same amount that the average hiking shoe loses in the same test and less than 1/7th of the total rubber on the How we test's outsole. It's going to take a lot of long and rugged treks to fully wear out this shoe.
How we test | 1.1 mm |
Average | 1.0 mm |
Outsole thickness
At 3.3 mm thick according to our caliper measurements, the How we test's outsole is thicker than our current lab average. Having all this rubber underfoot gives us added confidence while traversing rocky or untamed trails.
How we test | 3.3 mm |
Average | 2.6 mm |
Weight
As protective as all that rubber feels, it doesn't do the How we test any favors in the weight department. At 17.1 oz (486g), it's significantly heavier than the average hiking shoe and puts the How we test more on par with the average hiking boot.
For a more lightweight option, consider the almost feathery Adidas Terrex Trailmaker instead.
How we test | 17.14 oz (486g) |
Average | 13.47 oz (382g) |
Cushioning
Heel stack
We measured the How we test's stack to be 29.5 mm thick at the heel which is right around the average range for hiking shoes. While this does include the shoe's chunky outsole and substantial insole, there is still plenty of foam underfoot to provide well-cushioned landings during our test hikes.
How we test | 29.5 mm |
Average | 30.9 mm |
Forefoot stack
Moving up to the forefoot, the How we test's stack is shorter than average at 17 mm thick according to our caliper measurements. This gives us a good sense of the ground below for a natural and intuitive ride, while the midsole and outsole provide adequate cushioning and protection from any harsh objects below.
How we test | 17.0 mm |
Average | 20.4 mm |
Drop
The difference in our stack measurements leaves the How we test with a drop height of 12.5 mm. This is slightly steeper than our current lab average but still feels quite natural while delivering a healthy balance of an elevated heel and a grounded forefoot.
For more experienced runners who prefer a more parallel-to-the-ground experience, we recommend looking into the brand Altra and their wide range of zero-drop hiking and trail running shoes.
How we test | 12.5 mm |
Average | 10.6 mm |
Midsole softness
The How we test's midsole is rather firm, giving us a durometer reading of 31 HA.
This reading isn't out of the ordinary as hiking shoes tend to sport rather firm midsoles in order to promote a stable gait, especially when carrying a heavy load.
Nevertheless, we enjoyed well-dampened landings that felt forgiving and protective throughout our test hikes. No matter how harsh the terrain or arduous the journey, it was never foot pain that slowed us down.
On the other hand, for those who prefer a more plush ride during their hikes, we recommend the Adidas Free Hiker 2 Targhee III Waterproof.
How we test | 31.0 HA |
Average | 28.2 HA |
Midsole softness in cold
Merrell Moab 3 GTX
To test the effects of cold conditions on the midsole, we placed the How we test in the freezer for twenty minutes. We then took another durometer reading of the midsole and were so shocked that we had to check that our freezer was running properly! While a reading of 34 HA puts it in the average range, the How we test's midsole only becomes 9.7% more firm in the cold; thus making it much more consistent than the average hiking shoe. As such, the shoe's already firm ride won't feel too different whether out on the trails during summer or winter.
How we test | 9.7% |
Average | 17.5% |
Insole thickness
The How we test's insole is 6 mm thick according to our measurements, putting it on par with our current lab average. This insole provides excellent in-shoe comfort as well as arch support that kept us pushing through the mile markers.
How we test | 6.0 mm |
Average | 5.4 mm |
Stability
Tongue: gusset type
Stability is the name of the game with the How we test. We exuded confidence with every stride in this shoe whether scampering up and down hills for quick hikes or slogging our heavy supplies over long distances. Suffering a rolled ankle was the furthest thing from our minds while testing this incredibly stable shoe.
Torsional rigidity
Ordinarily, we'd expect a shoe this stable to be quite difficult to bend and twist in our hands. However, the How we test only put up a moderate level of resistance to our manual manipulations, leading us to give it a middle-of-the-road 3 out of 5 for torsional rigidity based on our subjective assessment.
This gives us a healthy balance of stability and comfort as the shoe conforms to the natural contortions of our foot to a certain extent while mitigating any excessive lateral movements.
How we test | 3 |
Average | 3.4 |
Heel counter stiffness
The rigid heel counter puts up more of a fight against our squeezing and prodding, earning it a stiffer-than-average score of 4 out of 5. This also helps to promote stability in our stride by locking our heel in place and limiting how far it can move laterally.
How we test | 4 |
Average | 3.7 |
Midsole width in the forefoot
The How we test's midsole is about as wide as our current lab average at the forefoot, measuring 112 mm based on our caliper measurements.
How we test | 112.0 mm |
Average | 110.3 mm |
Midsole width in the heel
Back towards the heel, the How we test's midsole is broader than average at 91.4 mm wide.
This gives us a good surface area of grippy lugs to prevent wobbly landings in this shoe.
How we test | 91.4 mm |
Average | 86.9 mm |
Flexibility
Stiffness
We secured the How we test to our workbench and found that 29N of force is needed to bend the shoe 90 degrees, making it about as stiff as the average hiking boot.
This level of stiffness contributes to the shoe's stable and supportive underfoot sensation that keeps us feeling sure-footed even when schlepping a heavy pack.
How we test | 29.0N |
Average | 29.8N |
Stiffness in cold
Further proving how winter-oriented this shoe is, we also repeated the fitness test after leaving the shoe in the freezer for twenty minutes. This seems to have had almost no effect on the shoe which only becomes 4.6% stiffer when exposed to the cold. This change is negligible compared to our current lab average and means that the shoe's ride will feel consistent all regardless of the surrounding temperature.
How we test | 4.6% |
Average | 32.6% |
Grip / Traction
Lug depth
Using our caliper, we measured the How we test's lugs to be 4.5 mm thick which is only slightly thicker than average. They have a solid bite to them that gives us confidence with every step while the multi-directional formation on the outsole did a good job gripping a variety of surfaces. Whether on dirt, mud, gravel, or grass, the How we test never let us down during our tests out on the trails.
How we test | 4.5 mm |
Average | 4.0 mm |
Size and fit
Toebox width at the widest part
Using our caliper, we measured the How we test's toebox to be 106.6 mm wide at its widest point. This is much roomier than average which makes How we test a great choice for those with wide feet.
Good traction in muddy conditions Hoka Anacapa Low GTX instead.
How we test | 106.6 mm |
Average | 101.0 mm |
Toebox width at the big toe
The area around the big toe is also significantly wider than our current lab average, measuring 86.6 mm wide according to our caliper. This gives us plenty of room to splay out, even as our feet become engorged from the strain and pressure of longer journies.
How we test | 86.6 mm |
Average | 81.5 mm |
Tongue: gusset type
As expected from a waterproof hiking shoe, the How we test's tongue is fully gusseted on both sides. This keeps us safe not just from water entering the shoe, but any unwanted debris that might find its way in.
How we test | Both sides (full) |
Comfort
Tongue padding
At 10.5 mm thick, the How we test's tongue is slightly thicker than our current lab average. All that padding gives us an incredible in-shoe feeling that made us not want to take the shoe off after testing!
How we test | 10.5 mm |
Average | 9.5 mm |
Heel tab
The finger loop at the heel makes it a little easier to slide the How we test on as well as adding a little stylistic flair to the shoe.
How we test | Finger loop |
Removable insole
How we test's already supportive insole is easily removed if custom orthotics are required.
How we test | Yes |
Misc
Reflective elements
The How we test features a reflective pattern at the rear of the sho which partially runs up the finger loop at the heel. This is great for those occasions where we find ourselves hiking by the roadside at night.
How we test | Yes |