Review - Raichle Mt boots. Crest GTX

Rating: 8 out of 10. Service life: 10 years (with long breaks). Current status: retired. Pair weight: 1800 grams (size 45). Price: $180
Disadvantages: After many years of cutting steps, both boots have worn through the sole on the toe. The multi-component stacked sole slowly delaminates. The skin on the bend of the foot was severely cracked. Not the highest repairability - if one of the seams on the plastic heel fails, it will be difficult to restore it. The boot doesn't fit the leg too tightly, possibly due to insufficient height.
Advantages: Comfortable, wide last. Until I “killed” the sole, the boot was absolutely unsinkable. In 10 years the membrane has not worn out or leaked. You could walk ankle-deep in water and not get wet.

How I chose my boots

After my first boots (a budget Campus model) fell into disrepair in 2005, I went without “big” hiking shoes for a whole year. In the summer I walked a lot in sandals and sneakers (90% of my hikes then were in the Crimea), and on winter hikes I took not quite tourist Sorel Conquest boots.

And only in 2007 I decided to buy “adult” shoes. Firstly, I finally had at least some money in my pocket. Secondly, ambitions began to awaken - shouldn’t we climb somewhere higher than Goverla? Taught by the bitter experience of my first boots, I decided not to save money and buy the best that would be available in my favorite store. I was looking for a reliable all-leather boot for heavy trekking. Minimum fabric, minimum seams, maximum leather. Pure mountaineering was not part of my plans, so the rigid La Sportiva Makalu (several of my tourist friends had these) were discarded. And oddly enough, there were only two options left - the Asolo, which seemed creepy to me (obviously narrow last and unusual “full grain” leather, not nubuck) and Raichle boots, previously unfamiliar to me.

The seller did a good job - he convinced me that Raichle is a well-known and reliable manufacturer (Swiss office, factory in Romania) and now I’m already walking around the store in new boots, getting used to it. First impressions were very positive - I had never tried on such shoes before and was mentally preparing for a lower level of comfort. However, the boots turned out to be completely different from the hard shackles that I had imagined. Yes, there was more weight on my leg, but I walked easily and very confidently)) Of course, I bought them.

First operating experience

Naturally, I was eager to quickly test the new boots in action. Without hesitation, I took them on the next hike. Namely, on the classic route through the mountainous Crimea - Chatyrdag, Demerdzhi, Karabi, Rybachye. Thanks to the photo archive, I even “remember” the exact start date - July 22, 2007. Those. The height of summer, the heat, not a drop of rain during the entire hike, and suddenly I was wearing boots... For me, who was used to walking exclusively in sandals, this was a serious test. And I must say that somewhere on the third day I gave up - I hid my shoes in my backpack and ran the rest of the route in sandals. Everything was fine with the boots, I just realized that for such an easy route and warm climate they were clearly excessive. When I got home, I put the boots in a box and forgot about them for about a year.

Only in September 2008 did I for some reason come to my senses and start walking in big boots around Crimea again. Then I actively studied the eastern foothills (the area between Koktebel, Old Crimea and Sudak), and I did this in the format of very long radials (20 km per day). Now I would take sneakers for such an outing, but then for some reason I decided to wear boots (perhaps I was preparing for something). Then, at the beginning of October, my wife sewed short gaiters for me to protect my boots from leaves and other debris. I must say that these gaiters still serve me today.

But with winter shoe covers (with rubber galoshes) sewn back in 2005, my Raichle Mt. Crest did not "make friends". It’s incredible, but it turned out that they are even larger than my giant Sorel Conquest and simply do not fit into the galoshes in length. Therefore, by inertia, I continued to go to Sorely on winter hikes, although their shortcomings were through the roof.

In late November 2008, I finally found myself on a hike where Reichle's boots were completely appropriate. It was a reconnaissance mission to Marmaros. And the Carpathians, of course, did not disappoint - we had sufficient amounts of rain, snow and mud. The boots coped with all the tests perfectly - they didn’t get a bit wet inside. However, on the outside, on the fold, cracks appeared in the leather and in these places the surface very quickly became damp. This is where I first thought about treating boots with cream. Before this, for fear of damaging the membrane, I only sprayed my shoes with a water-repellent aerosol.

Another unpleasant discovery of the trip to Marmaros was the sudden rebellion of my legs. For some reason they no longer “fit” into the boots. There seemed to be no pressure anywhere, but in the evening, when I took off my shoes, I felt tingling and numbness in my fingers. Apparently, this meant that some vessels were being pinched and blood circulation was being disrupted. I tried changing the lacing style (tighter or, on the contrary, looser), but this did not change the situation. The shoes went back on the shelf.

In 2009, I wore Raichle only once - on a short hike in Crimea in May. The forecast promised heavy rains and I decided to play it safe. Of course, I later regretted it - the weather, of course, was wet, but not so wet that I had to torture myself with my boots.

In the fall of 2009, getting ready for my first trekking in Nepal, I doubted for a long time whether to take boots. Still, we had to climb to a decent height (about 5500 m) and walk on snow (albeit trampled) for several days. Shoes would definitely be helpful here. But I was traveling with my wife, and she didn’t have boots. She only took trekking shoes and sandals. It would not be entirely correct to let her go in light shoes, but to go in boots. And so it turned out that, out of a sense of solidarity, I went to the Annapurna trek in sneakers and did not regret it - that year everything happened without autumn snowfalls.

In the fall of 2010, I’m going to Nepal again (short trek to Annapurna Base Camp) and again my boots are left at home. This time we took even lighter sneakers (without a membrane, with regular mesh) and again everything went well. In October-November 2011, Nepal again (Everest Base Camp + Gokyo Lakes) and again without boots. It was also pointless to carry boots on the hikes along the Lycian Way (Türkiye) that appeared in my assortment. Everything indicated that I had made a mistake and bought something I didn’t need. On the routes I walked, heavy boots were unnecessary.

Return of the Jedi or Norwegian triumph

At the end of June 2012, my friends and I came to Norway for the first time. A year before, they were in Iceland, where, despite the harsh climate, lightweight trekking boots performed well. It is quite logical that they took easy “tracks” to Norway (a country of the same climate zone). I didn’t have any of these, I had to take my heavy Raichle Mt. Crest GT. The only alternative was the Hanwag low-tops, but the weather forecast convinced me to give Reichle another try. However, flying out of rainy Kyiv, I had my doubts. Upon arrival in equally rainy Oslo, I continued to doubt. Even on the first kilometers of the track, in the cloudy Ovre Ardal, I was not entirely sure of the correctness of my choice. And only on the second day of the trek I was convinced that I was not mistaken.

We had barely risen to a height of about 1000 meters when we found ourselves in a snow zone. Despite the positive temperatures, there was no smell of summer there. The snowdrifts were knee-deep, and the snow was most often thawed, i.e. wet. My friends’ shoes were soaked through after just a couple of hours of walking. And the Raichle Mt. boots. Crest held on stubbornly.

Of course, my socks were often wet, because... water seeped in along the trouser leg, and the short leggings sometimes let a little snow in. But compared to what my fellow travelers had, this is sheer nonsense. They wrung out their socks and insoles every hour, and I dried my socks only 2 times a day - at lunch and before dinner.

To be honest, I was sure that the membrane in my boots had long ago cracked from age. But it looked like Gore-Tex was still holding up. The old problem with numb fingers returned a couple of times, but to a much lesser extent than before. Probably my boots and I have gotten used to each other :)

So it only took me 6 years to find the true purpose of the Raichle Mt boots. Crest - they need real off-road conditions: ankle-deep mud, hard firn, various sizes of powder, etc. Not quickly of course. But then I quickly made up for lost time - I went 2 more times in these boats in Norway, took them to the Tien Shan, Svaneti, winter hikes in the Carpathians and on numerous “snow” treks in Nepal. They worked in this intense mode for another 4 years and “died” only in August 2016.

Death of a Hero

Back in June 2016, while cutting steps in the snowy Tatras, I noticed severe wear on the soles on the toes of my boots. At this point I should have come to my senses and quickly started looking for a way to increase the tread, but as always I got too carried away and now it’s already August, I’m in Norway, and my boots haven’t been repaired. Perhaps I subconsciously hoped that they would continue to wear out at the same speed and I had a couple more years left. But it turned out that the dependence there is not linear, but exponential, and each subsequent micron of the sole was erased much faster than the previous ones. Apparently, this is due to the different densities of the outer and inner layers of the sole - the former are harder and serve as protection for the soft shock-absorbing inner layers.

In short, I arrived at the end of the route with holes in both boots. No, snow and stones did not fall through them yet, they were held back by the membrane lining and insole, but the tightness was broken and water began to seep inside.

Upon returning home, I began to look for a way to revive the sole, but so far I have not been very successful in this. Shoemakers don't undertake this kind of work - they say that the glue will not hold a piece of rubber in such a "shock" place. It will be necessary to look for another method of fastening (vulcanization?). After all, apart from these holes, the boots are still in excellent shape.

Since the search for the right shoemaker dragged on, and I needed to get ready for another hike in the Tien Shan, in September 2016 I urgently bought new boots of the same class. This is the Bestard Breithorn Pro and I will definitely write about them too. In the meantime, let's take a closer look at some of the details of my Reichle boots.

Nubuck (leather)

As I already said, for the first couple of years, all boot care was limited to applying aerosol impregnation immediately before the hike. Later I realized that these measures are not enough - the skin still gets wet and then dries out and this is even more dangerous, because... The seams may tear. Therefore, I began to generously coat my boots with a special wax-based polish. I did this before every hike and immediately after returning home. The membrane was not damaged in any way by the wax!

Heel and toe

The rubber protection on the toe of the boot holds up well - there is not the slightest crack between it and the skin. In my opinion, it was safe to cut the rubber a centimeter lower. Perhaps in this case there would be fewer microcracks at the junction of rubber and leather (due to load)

The heel in this shoe is made of some kind of synthetic material - either rubber or plastic. On the one hand, this is good - the heel is rigid and stable. Going down the loose or firn, I boldly stuck my heel into the aggressive environment without worrying that this would damage the leather of the boot. But where the plastic meets the surrounding skin is a potential problem area. The seams at this dissimilar joint are subject to greater stress than conventional ones. And it’s also quite possible to wipe the threads on them.

But repairing such joints is more difficult, because The plastic is too hard and relatively fragile, making it difficult to sew with thread. Nevertheless, one shoemaker still managed to sew a patch onto the heel of my shoe. Of course, the Goretex lining was stitched through and lost its seal. Fortunately, this place is located quite high above the “ground” and there is rarely water there.

Sole

The Vibram outsole is traditionally considered the standard of reliability. But of course Vibram can be different. These Reichle-Mammut boots use a slightly strange sole. Apparently trying to give the shoes a more modern look, the manufacturer installed a composite sole rather than a solid one. It is somewhat reminiscent of the sole of a sneaker, welded from numerous pieces of rubber of different densities and colors. There is no riot of colors here, but excessive decorativeness is clearly present. It would be okay, but the mechanical strength of a complex system is always lower than that of a simple one. Already in the second year of operation, thin decorative elements in the middle of the tread began to “deteriorate” - crack and slightly delaminate. This did not affect performance, but it was still unpleasant.

Laces

I am very pleased with the laces on these boots. Firstly, in 10 years they have not worn out or torn. Secondly, they “held” the knot normally, i.e. did not try to untie spontaneously. Thirdly, the hooks and eyelets behaved well - nothing broke off or came off. The only loss was that the plastic tips on the laces fell apart at the end. Of course, I burned the frayed ends with a lighter, but due to the bulges that formed, it became difficult to push the laces through the eyelets.

Upper part of the boot

The tongue on these boots is leather, but not solid, but sewn in. Theoretically, this could be a disadvantage, because Each seam reduces strength and tightness. But during the hikes, the tongue and its seams behaved perfectly and did not cause any complaints. On the contrary, I was pleased with the wide-open “mouth” of the boot. This helps both in drying shoes in the sun and when putting a completely frozen shoe on a foot.

The inside of the upper part of the boot is lined with leather rather than felt lined with Gore-Tex. On the one hand, this is good - less debris clings to the skin, which penetrates into the boot despite the gaiters. On the other hand, the leather takes longer to dry - because in addition to debris, water inevitably gets into the boot (rain rolling down the trouser leg, dew collected on the grass).

Results

I've written quite a lot here about the shortcomings and problems of Mt boots. Crest. But if I sum up my entire experience, I am still very pleased with these shoes. She served me faithfully for about 10 years, which is quite a lot in today's world. I can confidently recommend this model to hikers and mountain tourists. The main thing is to use them for their intended purpose (go on difficult hikes), and not try to sunbathe in them on the beach, as I did for a long time :)

By the way, currently Mt. Crest GTX are more often found on sale under the Mammut brand. These two manufacturers (Raichle and Mammut) merged back in 2003.