How long do you expect walking shoes to last?

[slightlyglitterbrained]

Am wondering if my expectations are too high. I got a pair last year and have pretty much worn them since. They're now a bit shabby (colour gone a bit over the toes, lining has worn out) but still wearable and comfortable. But will prob need another pair for winter I think.

How long do you expect shoes to last? For sandals I wouldn't expect them to last more than a season, if that, if worn every day but I expect walking shoes to last 2-3 years. But thinking about it, that's probably only by literally wearing them to pieces! Am I just buying crap shoes or do all shoes nowadays generally wear out after a year tops?

Do you mean proper hiking shoes? Mine last years.

It depends how tough they are. I had a pair of Solomons and they lasted 3 years, and I've got a pair of Merrills now and I reckon they will do me 3-4 years.

But they are 'approach shoes' and I wear them as my go to shoes doing to the school run etc from about September to April. I only use them for light country walks though as they are not fully waterproof. My walking boots have lasted me 14 years... I love them and might cry when they go.

You do have to look after them to squeeze extra life out of them. My boots have a habit of splitting but then I have a habit of leaving them caked in mud. If I wipe the mud off and dry them, they last longer.

Proper hiking shoes? Um, sort of. I always used to buy those, bought some cheap ones when my nice Merrills gave up the ghost, then some more like these when the cheapies started leaking after not that long www.hotter.com/gb/en/ramble-shoes on the grounds that they would work with semi smart work stuff better than the more Goretexy looking bulky boots do.

Except everything now seems to be quite a bit north of 50 quid, which is my mental barrier. And I'm not sure if I should just say fuck it, and buy some Nice Decent Shoes and have them last, or whether I'll just end up with expensive but-almost-as-quickly-leaky shoes.

Ooh - this is the quote I was thinking of but couldn't find earlier:
(Sam Vimes Boots theory of economics)
"But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet."

Does it actually work for women's walking shoes?

I think that principle applies.

Ive had some Asolo shoes for ages and prior to that had Solomans which were still going strong at 7 years old when the dog decided to eat them.

My hiking boots are over ten years old, Merrils, but I don't use them as much I guess.

It all depends on how much use they get. I've had a pair of boots for about 2 years now, I wear them dog walking every day, sometimes twice. They get a lot of use. They're still fine but the sold has been super glued back on. They are only Karrimors but I did pay £90 for them.

Thinking about it, boots have generally lasted me about 3-4 yrs max since having the dogs. I don't think that's unreasonable.

I love that Sam Vines theory, nd think it applies to many things, especially shoes, especially outdoor walking shoes. I wear my approach shoes much the same as Elgar. They are made by Keen and cost £90 in a sale 2 years ago, but still going strong.