Why I will never buy another motorcycle boot again!!!

Well in my case the stiffness of my motorcycle boots may very well have saved my ankles. Did an emergency swerve at 2am and the road caught my left dangling foot going at 70mph. Rode 1 hour home only with a small fracture and sprained ankle.

 

Good job Bob. You knew, no one has an opinion about boots....

I've put a lot of miles on the bike in hiking boots, but they make me nervous when I'm having a good time.

Also - don't know about you, but as I (and my feet) get older, my mountaineering boots have gotten lighter and shorter.

Fit is critical. I discovered the more natural foot shape (for me at least) of the TCX line. They have hiking style boots and the like, but I use these if I'm planning on some day hikes and want something more substantial than the Keen sandals stuck in the left pannier.

The shoes sport a nice soft rubber for grip on the bike. It's harder than my old climbing shoes, but still a good feel in the mountains.
And - they're waterproof.

TCX X-Roadster Waterproof Shoes

• $179
• Exclusive Soft Touch micro fiber uppper with padded interior
• Breathable Air Tech interior
• Polyurethane heel guard, shift pad and ankle reinforcement
• Replaceable high-resistant polyurethane toe sliders
• Zipper and VELCRO® brand closure
• Reinforced mono compound rubber sole with specific grip areas
• Waterproof lining
• CE Certified
• CFM (Comfort Fit System)

TCX also manufactures stuff that looks more like the old Danners, but with hardened toes, malleolar protection and the like -

These are about $200. Also in black.

 

I recently bought a pair of Daytona Roadstars which I am very pleased with. They fitted comfortably straight out of the box. Gave them a baptism of fire with a tour round the west coast of Scotland which provided the "very wet test". Can't fault them albeit they are expensive. Also were fairly comfortable to walk in round town, and as they wear in they will be even better.

 

I have the Altberg All weather Hogg boots. These are very comfortable and brilliant for walking in, the are a purpose made 'dual use' motorcycle/walking boot. Proved to be very good on my recent trip to Cornwall especially walking round Tintagel Castle, lots of steep rocky paths. The boots gave very good ankle support, were comfortable and of course are very good on the bike. Can be resoled/repaired if required and looking forward to many years of good use.

 

All this talk about boots.
I have my BMW boots that I bought in June 09. Still wear them a bit over half the year. Entirely waterproof. Easy to walk in. Still in good shape except for the Velcro "tab" that really does nothing and the leather is getting a green tinge.
Otherwise I use some low cut Alpine Stars that have been in service since December 14 as the BMW boots are really HOT to wear in the summer, especially.
Prior to the BMW boots I had a couple of pairs of Daytonas. The first pair lasted from December 2000 to June 2006. The second pair from June 06 to June 09. Wore out the soles.
Prior to 2000 I was not as OCD in tracking purchases as I have been since (and the software I used then to record purchases was MS DOS based).....
Back in 1988 (I know the date because it was just after my eldest son was born) I bought a pair of hand-made boots here in Melbourne from Medal Boots. Soles that are so stiff they would easily support the weight of a motorcycle sideways (also are capable of impromptu panel beating). They are leather (cow) on the outside and what looks like pig or kid in the inside. They are cut high, and have an outside zipper with a row of snaps on the flap. A lot of the older Australian riders would know these boots.
I still have them.
They have not leaked, they are in good shape. They are probably better for riding from a safety viewpoint, but they are hell to walk in over broken ground or stones (like they spread around Philip Island in the spectator area).
Before that time, and we are getting into ancient history, I had a beautiful pair of Axo boots when they were still made in Scandinavia (later reborn in Italy). Non-gortex, but lined with other leather.
Before that I mainly wore Rossi's which are made in South Australia. Leaked like a sieve.
BTW in my case, the boots are worn 5 or 6 days a week.
Ah, a walk (hobble) down memory lane....

 

I've got the Pro version of these. They don't seem to make Pro versions any more. They were expensive but they are also very comfortable for walking. I'd happily walk 5 or 6 miles in them.

http://www.daytona.de/en/index.php?section=mediadir&cmd=detail&lid=1&eid=16

Edited to add, here they are:

http://www.motolegends.com/boots/daytona-travel-star-pro-ce-boots.html

 

Interesting, I looked very closely at the TCX-X boots just before I went with the Danners. I was afraid the water would wick down the ankle collar like they do with my normal hiking boot.

Some one mentioned the Bates boots. They also looked good to me too. In fact it was a toss up between one of the Bate models and the Danners I bought. As I was trying them on, the choice was the Danner as it was lighter and looked to be cooler.

FWIW While the Danners does not have extra layer for the shifter, with about 15-20 k miles, there is only a shiny spot ...no sign of wear thru.

 

You guys got me looking into what CE means. CE-13634:2011 seems to be the one that applies to boots and most other MC gear. The only place I found it , they wanted money to buy it to see the real spec....I was too cheap!

Here is a part of an article from Web Bike world....helps with definition and how clever market wording is deceptive.

CE "Certified" vs. "Approved"? There Is a Difference.
by Rick K. for webBikeWorld.com
More: wBW Reviews Home | Comments (Below) | wBW Motorcycle Clothing Reviews





See Also: Motorcycle Clothing Safety Standards
DOT vs. ECE Helmet Safety Standards

Included Below:
▪ List of CE Standards for Motorcycle Clothing
▪ CE Standards in France
▪ Future CE Standards
▪ Update to Future CE Standards

Background
Motorcyclists of the world: you've been had. That means me too, and I don't like it one bit.

We strive to bring you precisely accurate information on webBikeWorld.

That is information for intelligent people to make intelligent, logical decisions on what to buy.

In the rare instance when I -- as the Owner, Publisher and Editor -- discover a mistake or omission...well, let's just say it makes me very upset.

In a series of email discussions with Covec, Ltd. and Bull-it staff during our recent review of the Bull-it SR6 jeans, I learned that many of the motorcycle clothing manufacturers have been playing with words, making us believe something that isn't.

I'm referring to the European motorcycle clothing safety standards -- the only thing we as motorcyclists can count on for even a smidgen of an idea on whether or not our clothing is actually going to do anything to protect us.

So we put together this informational document (see the webBikeWorld article "Motorcycle Clothing Safety Standards" for more) to try and explain the issues.

Many thanks to Keith Bloxsome from Bull-it and Reinder Wondaal from Covec, who provided much of this information and some of the graphics.


Multiple stitches on the Bull-it Cargo Sahara jeans (review).
Tested, Certified or Approved?
First of all, it's important to note that there is a difference between the terms "CE Certified" and "CE Approved". Too many manufacturers (and you too, distributors and retailers) toss those terms out hoping, as I've learned, that we won't look too far under the covers.

Manufacturers sometimes state something like "tested to meet CE Level 1". That doesn't necessarily mean the garment was tested in an approved testing facility. or "CE Certified" or "CE Approved", when the only part of the garment that might have been tested, certified or approved is the protectors. This is also false: just having certified or approved protectors doesn't necessarily mean the rest of the garment meets the standards.

Tested: Usually means that the manufacturer tested the garment sample or samples in their own facility to meet (possibly) certain standards. But the sample may not have been sent to a certified testing facility for the official testing procedures.

Certified: Garment samples were tested at a certified testing facility and may have passed specific tests in one or more zones.

Approved: To be "CE Approved", multiple samples of the garment must have been tested by a certified facility and certified to meet or exceed the relevant standards in all zones.

To repeat, here are the cautions: "Tested" usually means the garment was tested in the manufacturer's facility and may not mean the entire garment was tested in each zone. Also, you have to depend on the truthfulness of the manufacturer's claims that the garment was indeed tested according to the specific regimen outlined in the standard.

For "Certified", it's important to know which part or zone of the garment was certified. Also, look for the official documentation from the certified lab. Here is a sample entry from an official report. Note also that multiple samples must be tested for an average.

More Subterfuge
Be very careful when reading a manufacturer's testing claims. Here's a real example; this happens all the time:

Example: A manufacturer of motorcycle pants claims 5.5 seconds of abrasion resistance. What they don't tell you is that result was for one version of their pants only, and then only in one zone. Or, they'll claim a specific performance for all of the versions of a particular jacket or pants, not telling you that the test result was for one model that had different fabrics. Call it what it is: lying! And it happens much too often.


Sample EN 13595-1:2002 Clause 5.4 (Abrasion Resistance) test results.
What Does the EN 13595-1 Test Report Look Like?
If the garment really is CE "Approved", then it should have all of the relevant documentation to back up that claim (although the consumer will usually not get a copy of the full official report). Here is a sample .pdf report that illustrates the EN 13595-1 testing regime. The manufacturer and the testing results have been redacted.

And Watch Out for Fakes
We have ranted about the fake CE certifications many times and that's bad enough. But it's usually pretty easy to see through those lies. If you don't get the consumer version of the CE documentation with test results that lists the certifying, approved laboratory and the test results, then your CE "Approved" clothing isn't.

This frequently happens with protectors included in motorcycle jackets and pants. The manufacturer molds a fake "CE" logo on the protector and tell you it's "CE Approved". No documentation? Don't believe it.


How to read a CE label. Image courtesty of REV'IT!

 

I bought the Falco Oxygen 2 WTR, €179,-, light and comfortable, so far they are water proof. I bought these after I read a "long term" review of boots in an English motorcycle magazine. The guy that wrote that review had worn them for a year in rainy England and was still happy with them. So am I so far.

 

Here is an excerpt from advrider....which give a list (FWIW) of" approved" boots. Remember "certified" is NOT "approved"!!!

Note that 5 tests are optional!!! The impact test to shin and ankle is optional...so a boot can be "approved" but not have been tested in this area.

My bottom line conclusion (opinion here) is that almost all boots are NOT tested an approve to EN-12634 including the 5 optional areas except for a very few top on the line models maybe the very expensive race boots?? (maybe Daytona's...I do not know)

So I have concluded, maybe rashly than most boot CE marking does not really mean much unless one verifies it is "approved" and approved including all 5 optional tests.


Boots: EN 13634

Once again, two of the tests - abrasion and cut, taken from EN13595 - allow for two levels. Current revision is 2010, old one is 2002. Major changes: transverse rigidity (i.e. resistance to being crushed) test now has two levels (the old one corresponding to L2), and the pictogram now has 3 numbers (abrasion, cut, transverse rigidity). See sample label.

Five optional tests are specified: "impact energy protection to the shin and ankle, resistance to water penetration, resistance to fuel oil of the outsole, slip resistance of the outsole and finally water vapour permeability of the upper."

• Alpinestars
  • Many models are certified, including some offroad. Toucan boot confirmed L2, 2010 standard.
• Oxtar/TCX
  • Just about all of their current boots, including some of the short ones. Optional shin/ankle impact test mentioned.
  • Jupiter 2 (short) boot certification in question - clearly fails the height requirement.
• Alt-Berg "The Yorkshire Bootmakers" :freaky
  • Clubman Roadster, Clubman Classic, L1?, 2002 standard.
  • Bahn Rider, Roadrunner, L2, 2010 standard. Made-to-order option on all models.
• Vendramini
  • According to WBW, at least the Marathon model is certified. Custom-made option, but little model info on the website.
• BMW
  • Transition touring boots. Discontinued?
• Daytona
  • Travel Star Pro boots. The "Pro" model not shown on the website, for some reason.
• SoubiraC
  • Many models are certified, 2002 and 2010 mentioned. See 2012 catalogue (French/English).
• Spidi/XPD
  • XP7, L2, racing (all versions). The mention of EN3886 is likely an error. See 2012 catalogue instead.
  • XP3-S, L1, racing.
  • VR6, L1, touring/racing (all versions).
  • VS1, L1, touring.
  • XP5 (XP7 replacement) is pending certification.
• Halvarssons/Jofama/Lindstrands
  • Brick, L1, touring.
  • Champ, L1, touring. Impact to the shin/ankle and WP tests also passed (spotted in a photo of the booklet).
  • Chipseal, L1, touring.
  • Tarmac, L1, touring.
• Icon
  • Reign WP, L1, touring. Optional WP test passed. No mention of EN13634 on the website, but this scan of the brochure has a detailed explanation.
• Stylmartin
  • Various models on their website, probably L1.
• Sidi
  • All racing boots except B2 and Vertigo (missing CE label/booklet), L1? (2002 standard, reportedly).
  • Adventure, Strada, Cobra, all versions, touring.
  • Doha (shorty, fabric!) touring.
  • Crossfire, offroad.
• Axo
  • Q2 and Q4 models, L1?, WP, touring.
  • Prime, L1?, offroad.
• Forma
  • All racing models, many others. 2010 revision.
• Dainese
  • Most models are certified, 2010 mentioned occasionally.
  • Some models, like SSC Alpha C2b, are just said to be "Category 2" approved. A bit dubious.

 

Aussie.I have had the velcro tab replaced by a boot repairer,.I can't remember the cost but it wasn't a lot. Managed 12 years out of a pair of Alpine Stars.

 

Vtbob thanks for the article. I especially like the list of "approved" boots separated by manufacturer. The entire system of labeling protective gear AND helmets seems to be sales trickery laced with truth.

 

I really got my money's worth out of one of my leather hiking boots. I bought a pair of Air Force jump boots from the AF uniform store in 1965 for only $5.60. I still hike in those boots today and they still are in good condition, although I did resole them about 15 years ago. The leather of those boots is really thick and has never cracked. While I do wear them while riding my motorcycle to a hiking area, their thick Vibram lug sole makes it kind of difficult to operate the shift lever quickly. They don't make boots like that and at that price anymore.

 

They don't even sell shoe laces for $5.60.
You are a tougher man than I am. The last pair of jump boots I was issued were so stiff I couldn't bare to break them in. I'd use them for inspections then switch to something a bit more comfortable.

 

Altbert Hoggs are great for on/off the bike. I'm also looking at maybe a pair of these -
https://www.revzilla.com/motorcycle/alpinestars-belize-drystar-boots#overview_tab
As I currently ride a different pair of Alpstars. However, I'm similar to Richard230 here, I did a lot of riding in college as I had no car and a bike was easy on gas. I had a pair of vietnam-era combat boots which I bought at an army surplus store. They took forever to break in, were not waterproof, were probably about $19.99 but lasted for I don't know how many years.

 

I am very picky on footwear - running shoes, boot, hikers whatever. (my wife refuses to shop for shoes with me)

After a myriad of boots the one I found to be as close to perfect as possible was the Dainese Nighthawk C2 (no longer made, but a few on ebay)
I have to walk 1-2 miles on work rounds before hitting the office and these are sooo comfy to walk in its crazy. Great on the bike. Never had a leak in 7+ years. In <30' weather, thicker socks are needed.

Now as they are starting to get a bit too scuffed, scrapped and close to the end of their life ... im dreading finding a replacement. The Daytona Arrow Sport GTX is on my list and despite the cost I may pick up a pair. Theres higher boots, more race techy boots, but I think these are great compromise for everyday use and certainly better protection than just wearing hikers.

I have 4 barely used boots in the closet ... like i said, I'm really picky on footwear. But those boots were worth their weight in gold given the versatility, durability and comfort both on and off the bike. Like all goretex, I do get sweaty feet in >90 ', but thats too be expected.

Im actually even debating getting just another pair of ebay and not taking the chance on the daytonas.

Of course, everyone's feet are different , but these were heaven for mine.

 

Who'd a thunk it, eh? Good to hear that the boot likely saved you from worse injury. The dangling foot is something that we don't usually pay attention. I once had an outside toe area of my boot scrape the pavement when I was leaned over after pulling off from a stop light and straight into a turn. Doesn't take much and I was surprised that my toe area was so low.

Seriously though, that is the point I was making earlier ... depends what you want this boot to do. Like motorcycles, in my opinion, there is no boot that will do everything.

• If you want a totally waterproof boot then it will likely not flow air - that is logical.
• If you want a boot that provides good ankle protection then it has to be sturdy in way of the ankles - the sturdier / more rigid the better
• If you want a boot that provides good sole protection then you need army / construction boots level of robustness
• If you want a boot that will be comfortable all day for walking about then it needs to be very soft and supple both in sole and instep area
• The boot should also look decent and should fit into whatever apparel you wear with it. A black leather boot goes with everything, as opposed to wearing white track boots worn to work at the office.
• Etc., etc.

For me, good ankle and slide protection is paramount, then 100% waterproofing, then surefootedness while on the bike is last. If I can get a boot that gives me all of that and be reasonably priced so that an everyday user (commuter) will see some value for money, then that is sufficient for me.

Just wanted to give my 2 cents so that VTBob does not give up on motorcycle boots entirely.

Now that I have some time as I watch the hurricane rescue efforts on TV, I will go put some treatment on my cheap boots and gloves. Can't ride these days anyway ...

 

Actually, the Tourmaster Epic boot fits all your criteria. It's a new design that just came out this year.

Chris

 

Not a bad boot. Not Gore-tex and "built to meet CE standards" (does it meet it)? For no Gore-tex and not CE certified, maybe toward the upper end of price to be deemed a good value, for me. But it looks better than my current boots ...