Reviewer Information

• Name: Cora Hussey
• Age: 23
• Gender: Female
• Height: 5 ft 9 in (1.75 m)
• Weight: 150 lbs (70 kg)
• Email address: cahhmc "at" yahoo "dot" com
• Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
• Date: May 18, 2004

Basic Product Information

• Year of Manufacture: 2004
• URL: http://www.dunhambootmakers.com/
• Listed weight: 1 lb 10 oz (0.75 kg)
• Weight as delivered: 1 lb 12 oz (0.8 kg) per boot, with laces
• Size: 9.5 D US Mens (43 EU)

Field Testing

• Break-in Period
  • Dates: March - May, 2004
  • Location: The streets of Los Angeles
  • Weather: Varied, but mostly sunny
  • Elevation: Sea level

  Description:
  I wore the Paramounts every so often around the streets where I live. I estimate I walked about 25 mi (40 km) over this time, and although most of it was on dry pavement, I also encountered some wet conditions.

  Comments:
  When the Paramounts arrived, they felt just a little too big, but I was looking forward to getting back to wearing double pairs of socks. However, the slightly loose fit turned out to be perfect. The Paramounts just seem to be designed to have lots of toe and heel wiggle room. So, after wearing double socks for a few miles, I switched back to my normal thin single sock and was much more comfortable.

  That being decided, I had very few problems during the break in period. It took me a little while to get used to the double-layer tongue. The top tongue would sometimes slide off of the bottom tongue, and so I had to learn exactly how to tuck it in so that would not occur. On a few other occasions, the bottom tongue would fold over toward the inside of my ankle. This was perhaps the biggest problem, because it was not easily fixable (i.e. I had to unlace the boot and rearrange the tongues to fix it). Due to my obstinate nature, I suffered it out the first few times, and I had bruising on my ankle within the mile walk home (1.6 km). Not too bad, just annoying.

  Comfort was never an issue. The Paramounts are not springy boots, but neither are they hard and uncomfortable. They fit well, breathed well, and laced up well in all the right places. The main issue was always with the tongues. I did not get a single blister during the entirety of the break in period, but I only walked a maximum of 3 mi (4.8 km) at any given time.

  During these walks, I had a lot of opportunity to test the grippiness of the tread. At first, I worried a bit since they actually literally slid around on flat surfaces such as my kitchen floor and the sidewalk outside. Likewise, they would really slide around on wet floor or sidewalk. However, this seemed to be simply a coating on the sole, which wore off with about 4 mi (6.4 km) of use. After that, they gripped reasonably well on all surfaces, but better on surfaces which were more textured.

  Overall, the Paramounts went through an interesting progression while breaking in. When they arrived in the box, they were quite stiff, had extremely fiddly tongues, had very smooth and shiny leather, and also had no grip. As stated above, the grip came around soon enough after I wore them in a bit. The boots then stayed stiff for nearly 20 of the 25 mi (32 of the 40 km), but then began to soften up. They did not become extremely flexible at that point (rather, they just felt more comfortable as heavier boots go), but I simply remember that at the beginning of around mile 20 (32 km) I was clomping on home, and by mile 21 (34 km) they finally began to allow me to stride more naturally. This was the main reason I considered them broken in and stopped walking with them everywhere. The tongues issue resolved itself with some practice. On an aesthetic note, the leather scuffed rather easily. I am a toe basher by nature, and within three bashes of each toe on concrete stairs, the leather was quite scuffed. Not enough to affect functionality, by far, but little divots were left to remind me how much of a klutz I am.

• Field Testing: Backpacking on Mount Baldy
  • Dates: May 13-14, 2004
  • Location: Mt Baldy, Angeles National Forest, California
  • Weather: Beautiful, 75 to 35 F (24 to 2 C)
  • Elevation: 6000 to 10,000 ft (1800 to 3000 m)

  Description:
  This was a standard backpacking trip. It was only one night, and I did it with lighter gear (30 lb, 14 kg) on a dirt and rock trail. I encountered a few rivers, a lot of scree, and some scrambling. I also wore gaiters over the Paramounts to protect my socks from trail dust.

  Comments:
  This trip had three parts. The first part included basic hiking and backpacking. It was a steep trail, and the Paramounts flexed well and provided lots of grip in the dirt. On uneven sections, the ankle support was adequate and also comfortable. The sole turned out to be thick and stiff enough to protect my feet from pointy rocks, and the Paramounts generally behaved like good solid backpacking boots. They are not light feeling, nor are they super sensitive, but they clopped down on rocks edges and stuck pretty well. The 'stomper' portion of their name 'Waffle Stomper' seemed rather apt. By the end of the hike up, my feet were not hot or sore at all, and my socks (even though the tops of the boots were covered with gaiters) were still fairly dry. On the hike up, I developed one blister on each heel. However, this is to be expected with me as I tend to ignore their formation and don't mind them much, and is thus probably less the boots fault than my own.

  For the second part of the trip, we dropped our packs and hiked to the top of Baldy. Many switchbacks, scree, rock, and general foot abuse greeted the Paramounts, and this was actually my favorite part of the trip in terms of wearing them. They gave a lot more support than a sneaker would have, and their tread... wow! I've never seen tread stick so well in slippery dusty scree. And the rocks did not stick in the tread either -- the shoes would grip, then lift up rock free. I was impressed. This was also where the advantages of bringing mid-weight boots really shone. I hardly noticed all the foot and ankle bashing I was doing (I've done the trail many times, and in tennis shoes protecting my ankles and toes is a bear). The upper collar of the Paramounts was especially comfortable and well padded as I hopped from side to side.

  In the third part of the trip, we stopped by a waterfall, trod around in the wet rocks, and scrambled up the side. This allowed me to observe both wet and dry traction. Wet traction was not very impressive to me. When hopping around, I had to consciously wipe off the bottoms of the Paramounts on the rocks to get good grip on the next step. Similarly, on smooth slabs, the Paramounts just did not stick well. However, the tread gripped very well on anything more textured than slabby rock scrambling and smooth tree crossings. Also during this time, we crossed the river a great deal, and the whole boot up to my ankle got immersed. And... nothing! The water just beaded right off. I stood with my feet in the water for some seconds, and each time they came out looking great and feeling nice and dry. This was a great relief, as I did not know how much I could assume they would keep my feet dry.

Comments by Attribute

+ Support: Excellent
Comments: The Paramounts offer great support. I did not carry exceptionally heavy loads, and I certainly am not about to do anything extremely brutal to my ankles, but as we slipped, slid, and stepped down talus and uneven rocky ground I felt my ankles were supported, my toes were protected, and my underfoot was well cushioned.

+ Traction: Great
Comments: In short, traction is excellent on anything not smooth and not wet. And from my experience on small sliding rocks, the traction is probably the best I've seen in a boot so far. They talus hop well, scree ski well, and generally stick to anything pointy and rough. However, I certainly found myself surprised at the extreme difference in how much they do not stick to flat and wet surfaces. It is also hard to dry the soles off as water collects in between the waffle lugs and drips down even if the bases of the lugs themselves get wiped off.

+ Comfort: Great
Comments: I describe these as 'mid-weight' backpacking boots. This would be versus a light-weight boot (a thick sneaker with ankle support) and a heavy-weight boot (stiff enough to strap crampons to and edge on rock with). Naturally, mid-weight boots tend to be less comfortable than light-weight boots, and the Paramounts suffer from this problem. The inflexibility of the plastic insert in the heel was probably the source of my two blister souvenirs, and cranking down on the laces over cold leather on chilly mornings made it nearly impossible to get a good snug fit. However, the Paramounts are well padded and generally quite comfortable. Once I learned to position the tongues correctly, the upper ankle area is probably the most well padded area of the boot for me. Additionally, the excessive amounts of toe wiggle room had my toes breathing a sigh of relief on the steep downhills. They are still a little stiff, but use over more time will probably aid that as it has so far.

+ Weather Resistance: Excellent
Comments: No complaints here at all. Stream dunking and sweat -- the Paramounts ventilated well and repelled every stream I walked through. On Baldy it was rather warm, and the trail moved very steeply uphill, and my socks were dry at the end of the day. My wool socks, dry! I was very impressed with their breatheability. I did not even miss sandals for camp (which I had forgotten) since my feet did not feel clammy at all. As for the stream dunkings, all the water did was clean all the dirt off, and the Paramounts repelled the rest. At first, I dipped cautiously, then over the toe, then over the laces. The laces absorbed water, but what laces don't? I continued up to my ankle bone. Above that, my gaiters protected the boots, and I knew that the inner tongue ended just above that, which essentially entailed the top of the boot. But I saw enough -- next time, it is stream sloshing for me.

Summary

So far, the Paramounts have been decent all-around performers. They provided adequate comfort on trail, and adequate grippiness while scrambling. Their traction while wet could be improved, but their traction on scree was exceptional.

• Upsides for me so far:
  • Supportive
  • Great traction in scree
  • Very water-resistant
• Downsides for me so far:
  • Double tongue design is fiddly and difficult to use
  • Laces are long enough to touch the ground when tied
  • Traction is not great on smooth or wet surfaces

Read more reviews of Dunham gear
Read more gear reviews by Cora Hussey

Reviews > Footwear > Boots > Dunham Waffle Stomper Paramount Boots > Cora Hussey > Field Report