Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[EDIT] Repost: OR Nike Shoes - Rick

Expand Messages
  • jetriple@rockwellcollins.com
    Hey Rick! Very nice, well written owner review. Thank you for submitting it. You have done an excellent job, and made the editing easy. I do have a few
    Message 1 of 4 , Jun 30 6:23 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey Rick!

      Very nice, well written owner review. Thank you for submitting it. You
      have done an excellent job, and made the editing easy. I do have a few
      things for you to consider below. There are a few typos, and several
      edits which may impinge on your style, so feel free to oppose my
      suggestions. You may repost to the list (adding the word REPOST to the
      subject line) when you have made all the changes you deem appropriate.
      Your html in the test folder looks very pleasing, and I see that the Nike
      link works there.

      Thanks again for this excellent review.

      James T.
      BGT Edit Moderator.

      ++++++++++++++++++++

      Over the last 24 months, I have gone from being a heavy-weight (2 Duluth
      Pack) canoe camper to a three-season base pack weight of about 11 lb (5
      kg) and skin out weight of 20 lb (9 kg).
      [EDIT/COMMENT] As this is a "from / to" sentence I am having difficult
      finding the "to". You have gone from being a "canoe camper" to a what? I
      think it would read better you ended the sentence with "lightweight
      backpacker" or something similar.

      I have completed many section hikes on the AT in all four seasons...
      [EDIT] I generally ask people to spell out Appalachian Trail (and other
      abbreviated trail names).

      Manufacturer's Link: Nike (link)

      REVIEW
      Looking for a light waterproof shoe, practical for hiking I ran into this
      shoe at the local outfitter. These shoes are light, have good traction,
      and are reasonably waterproof/breathable with a GORE-TEX XCR membrane
      layer.
      [EDIT] The second sentence here sounds like a summary more than an intro.
      If you are talking about your selection process you might say "These
      shoes appeared to have good traction...", or "were advertised as
      having..."

      Lavishing nearly an hour on trying the shoes was the right thing to do.
      [EDIT] This may be a style issue, but this reads better to me if the 'on'
      is on the other side of 'trying': Lavishing nearly an hour trying on the
      shoes was the right thing to do.

      They seem do do well on wet stream rocks, green rock gardens on AT
      hillsides,
      [EDIT] Please, no "do do"... :-)

      The traction is very good on steep uphills, steep downhills, and on the
      transverse slopes found on hillside traverses.
      [EDIT] The second "traverses" seems redundant. Maybe: "...on the
      transverse slopes found on hillsides" or "...on the transverse slopes
      found on hillside switchbacks"

      The Achilles tendon cut-out allows me to keep my toes downhill on very
      steep descents.
      [EDIT] Consider adding the word 'pointing' as follows: The Achilles
      tendon cut-out allows me to keep my toes pointing downhill on very steep
      descents.

      Generally, a stop for 5 or 10 minutes allows the worst of a storm to pass
      over, leaving the path with less deep puddles, and with my feet
      considerably drier than on instances when I walked through the maelstrom.
      [EDIT] I would change 'for' to 'of'... "Generally, a stop of 5 or 10
      minutes..."

      When rain lasts this long, the stitching where the tongue is joined to the
      body of the shoe eventually leaks.
      [EDIT] Consider removing the comma.

      ++++end of edits++++


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • rick@backpackgeartest.org
      ... Thanks for the edit. All edits taken on board. Just one clarification: Is it acceptable to spell out Appalachian Trail (AT) with its abbreviation the
      Message 2 of 4 , Jun 30 7:45 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        >
        > Very nice, well written owner review. Thank you for submitting it. You
        >
        > have done an excellent job, and made the editing easy.

        Thanks for the edit. All edits taken on board. Just one clarification: Is it
        acceptable to spell out Appalachian Trail (AT) with its abbreviation the first
        time in the review, and then refer to the AT from there on? I must admit to
        borrowing this from technical writing, but it seems appropriate here too.

        Thanks for the comments on my Background. It need a bath anyway. I will be
        reposting the other OR in the queue that only changes the background.

        Rick


        Repost:

        ******************

        Nike ACG Yahats XCR Trail Shoes
        Owner Review by Rick Allnutt


        After a 185-mile Appalachian Trail Section Hike
        PERSONAL BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
        Rick Allnutt
        51 Year old male
        6' 0'' (183 cm) in height
        190 lbs (86 kg) in weight
        US shoe size: 11 1/2
        Email address: ra1 (at) imrisk (dot) com
        I live in Dayton, Ohio

        BACKPACKING BACKGROUND
        Over the last several years, I have become an ultralight camper with a
        three-season base pack weight of about 11 lb (5 kg) and skin out weight of 20
        lb (9 kg). I have completed many section hikes on the Appalachian Trail (AT) in
        all four seasons, with a total mileage of nearly 450 miles (725 km). I am a
        gearhead, a hammock camper, and make much of my own equipment.

        PRODUCT INFORMATION
        Manufacturer: Nike
        Year Manufactured: January 2003
        Manufacturer's Link: Nike
        Size: US11 1/2
        Listed Weight: n/a
        Measured Weight (pair): 32.7 oz (927 g)
        Review Date: 14 June 2004

        TEST CONDITIONS
        I have used these Nike trail shoes on several section hikes on the AT, for a
        total of about two full weeks of hikes; in rain, sun, heat, and cold. Actual
        backpacking trail mileage exceeds 250 mi (400 km). They continue to look great
        and work very well. Temperatures have ranged from below freezing to about 90 F
        (32 C). I have worn it them in snow, sun, in thunderstorms and in all day rain.
        I have used them to slog for hours through wet knee high grass. They have been
        used with and without gaiters.

        REVIEW
        Looking for a light waterproof shoe, practical for hiking I ran into this shoe
        at the local outfitter. These shoes appeared to be light, have good traction,
        and be reasonably waterproof/breathable with a GORE-TEX XCR membrane layer.

        The main reason I chose these shoes from the wall of lightweight hiking shoes
        was simple comfort. After trying on about 8 different shoe styles, these Nike
        shoes were far and away the most comfortable on my feet.

        The uppers of these shoes are mainly a medium gray color which stays scuff free
        and good looking. Some portions of the upper made of cloth, are black in color.
        Unlike many pairs of white running shoes the uppers do not show dirt.

        The sole has an aggressive pattern of medium soft lugs and a deep groove between
        the heel and forefoot. I have had no problem with slipping in these shoes. They
        seem to do well on wet stream rocks, green rock gardens on AT hillsides, and on
        root infested paths. The traction is very good on steep uphills, steep
        downhills, and on the side-ways slanted pathways found on hillside traverses.

        The support of the shoe allows me to walk up 45 degree slopes without rotating
        my toes out to a "pigeon-toed" position. The Achilles tendon cut-out allows me
        to keep my toes pointing downhill on very steep descents.

        The ankle is not well supported by the low-cut design, but this does allow my
        ankle to comfortably rotate so my foot can stay in contact with paths with
        slope from one side to the other. In a similar way, I can place each foot on
        the surface of individual rocks in the jumble of trail rock gardens.

        The interior of the shoe is lined with foam and cloth. This has lasted well
        during 6 months of hiking use. There is a removable/washable foam insert.

        I have used the shoes with and without gaiters. Without gaiters, the shoes are
        comfortable for street or camp use. However, on the trail I find the use of
        gaiters essential to keep sand, dirt, leaves, and sticks out of these low
        shoes. Also, the gaiters keep most rain and water out of the shoes. The shoes
        are very "gaiter friendly" with the deep groove between the heel and forefoot
        on the sole. This groove protects the string used to hold the two sides of a
        gaiter down. I have not needed to replace the gaiter lace under either shoe.

        The shoes do an excellent job of keeping shallow water from wetting the inside
        of the shoe when crossing small streams or getting water from springs.

        The GORE-TEX does a fantastic job of letting sweat evaporate and keeping
        moisture from building up. This is especially true when a portion of the front
        of the gaiter can be kept open to promote air movement in and out of the shoe.

        With the low sides of the shoes, I have found it important to not go splashing
        through deep puddles, even with the gaiters on. Stepping into deep puddles
        eventually leads to a shoe full of water as the water cascades over the top of
        the side of the shoe. For this reason, I have adopted a strategy of stopping
        for a few minutes during the heaviest portion of a thunderstorm cell passage.
        Generally, a stop of 5 or 10 minutes allows the worst of a storm to pass over,
        leaving the path with fewer deep puddles, and with my feet considerably drier
        than on instances when I walked through the maelstrom.

        Unfortunately, the shoes have failed to keep my feet dry in two circumstances.
        The first is during a moderate rain that lasts for more than an hour. When rain
        lasts this long the stitching where the tongue is joined to the body of the
        shoe eventually leaks. The same spot leaks when slogging through wet grass
        which overhangs the trail. This leak first feels like a slight wetness on the
        top of my foot, near my toes, but goes on to the uncomfortable feeling of
        sloshing inside the shoe before long.

        When the shoes do get wet, they dry in a couple hours of dry hiking, or sitting
        out in warm summer sun. They dry much faster when two pairs of socks can be
        alternated, one drying on the outside of the pack, while the other is worn
        inside the shoes.

        What I really like:
        -Lightweight
        -Very "water resistant"
        -Great traction

        What could be improved:
        -Fix the leaks at the tongue stitching
      • James
        ... it. You ... clarification: Is it ... abbreviation the first ... JET- As far as I m concerned this is the PERFECT way to do it. I ll re-proff your
        Message 3 of 4 , Jun 30 12:44 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com, rick@b... wrote:
          > >
          > > Very nice, well written owner review. Thank you for submitting
          it. You
          > >
          > > have done an excellent job, and made the editing easy.
          >
          > Thanks for the edit. All edits taken on board. Just one
          clarification: Is it
          > acceptable to spell out Appalachian Trail (AT) with its
          abbreviation the first
          > time in the review, and then refer to the AT from there on?

          JET-> As far as I'm concerned this is the PERFECT way to do it.
          I'll re-proff your review now. Expect a response shortly.

          Jet
        • Andrew Priest
          ... Hi Rick With well known abbreviations such as AT I wouldn t have a problem with this. Andrew [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Message 4 of 4 , Jul 1, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            At 10:45 PM 30/06/2004, you wrote:
            >Thanks for the edit. All edits taken on board. Just one
            >clarification: Is it
            >acceptable to spell out Appalachian Trail (AT) with its abbreviation the first
            >time in the review, and then refer to the AT from there on?

            Hi Rick

            With well known abbreviations such as AT I wouldn't have a problem with this.

            Andrew


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.