White's Boots
-
Not having owned a pair of White's, I don't have any personal experience with the Arch-Ease system, and owners consistently praise the comfort of the boots after the initial break in period.
Having said that, I'm really curious about how a podiatrist would evaluate the underlying justification for Arch-Ease. According to White's, it's intended to realign your foot into a relaxed, natural position, which is more comfortable and reduces fatigue. This implies that the position your foot assumes while standing barefoot is somehow inferior and/or wrong. Maybe I'm off base, but I have a hard time accepting that our feet are inherently flawed and that the way billions of people have walked for millennia is completely wrong.
Feet are exceptionally complex, and the way they behave in motion and bearing weight is understandably different than the way they behave while hanging static in midair. I'm just wondering how much of the Arch-Ease concept is grounded in biomechanical science, and how much of it is marketing puffery.
By the way, this isn't meant as an attack on White's; the company has been making beautiful, well built boots for decades. I'm just genuinely curious about the orthopedic validity here.
-
I see what you're saying, all I can say is that it works for me. I too would be interested in the professional validity of the system.
-
I think the pain will go away, Ron. I had the same problem, but love them now. My SJs were very painful at first, and it took a long time to get used to them. Really flat shoes like my Danner's feel funny now. Also, that quarter inch lower makes a huge difference. I'm sure the pain would be greater with the standard height. If Whites put in an insole layered with cork instead of hard leather insole, that might make them more comfortable out of the box.
As far as the usefulness of arch ease goes, I don't think it makes a difference one way or the other. There was definitely is a change in my foot, but I think it's like someone described above as using different muscles.
-
sh!t, not knocking anyone, but i'm sure you can pay for someone to bruise your feet & it would be alot cheaper than them boots. . . . well maybe not cheaper, but you will probably enjoy it more.
never got dudes with uncomfortable footwear (or tight clothes but i'll stay on footwear) shit the boots are beautiful but if they cause that i will pass
-
I never got a bruise, but the kind of pain I'm taking about with White's is like what happens when you go from wearing running shoes for a long time to high tops. Although I'm sure someone with flat feet would really have to struggle to make the SJ feel good.
-
I wear my SJs to my IT job where the hardest thing I do all day is sit on my ass
-
The talk of the pain caused by these boots is perhaps making it seem more of an issue than it is. To be fair, I think that it can best be summed up by saying that if you have flat feet, these are probably not the boots for you, if you have a high arch they should be perfect, and if you have a normal arch then you may experience some pain, which will pass.
Also, Ed is totally right about the leather and lacing making a huge difference.
-
I've not had a pair of White's yet, but it sounds like their special design is similar in some ways to various corrective insoles, but on a more structural level. I had knee pain for years before I started wearing decent insoles in some of my more regular wear boots, to compensate for high arches, and was advised to only wear them a few hours a day to start with, as your legs and feet need to get used to walking in a different way. So some initial discomfort could be usual.
On a more general footwear note, and in fairness it's many years since I sold walking boots and the like for a living, but shoes or boots should not hurt to the extent that you can't wear them without bruising your feet/legs if they fit properly. In theory, you shouldn't even get breaking in blisters if the fit and style is right for your feet. Now, having said that, I'm sure we've all had the breaking in blisters, and that's often just because our feet aren't used to the style, are perhaps slightly unsuited to a type of shoe, or just wearing the wrong socks, but anything past the first few wears is a sign you're wearing the wrong size or fit. It's like the classic example of leather shoes that feel a bit tight when you first try them on, but you decide they'll stretch. I've been told this by high end shoe shops, and in training from the guys at Karrimor, Brasher and Zamberlan, and if they're to tight when you try them on, they're too small!
-
I've worn White's and the arch-ease never bothered me at all, but I do have a high arch (which causes pull on boots to be a pain to put on). Mine never had much of a break-in period either. I had a really bad time with Red Wing Gentleman Travelers . My feet never could get used to them and got blisters everytime I walked more that a mile in them. I sold those for a hug loss on Ebay since everytime I thought of wearing them I'd cringe. Also never downsize in boots, it's a really bad idea.
-
Too much chatter and not enough flash around here recently….
My footwear pride and joy(s)
-
Awesome! Mmm, I don't have a decent pair of black boots…
