What Shoes is Best for the Undead Apocalypse?

Author: ZAC Admin
Submitted: 09 Jun 2011
Filed under: General &Home Defense &Mobile Defense &Research &Safety &Safety Council

56 Responses to “What Shoes is Best for the Undead Apocalypse?”

1. QAZZY 1-9th on 09 Jun 2011 at 3:18 pm #

   Merrell Sonic Glove (or any of their ‘barefoot’ shoes).
   -Comfortable
   -Flexible sole (great for moving silently)
   -Great for running
   -Merrells are durable, just in general

   I have Vibram FiveFingers, but they aren’t the most durable (thin soft rubber soles aren’t super durable).

   Combat boots are also great.

2. survivor811 on 09 Jun 2011 at 4:59 pm #

   also, dont forget, you can also be running over rough terrain make sure you take this into account when choosing footwere for the apocalypse. also make sure that they are broken in before the apocalypse happens. (if thats mentioned sorry, I didnt have time to read the whole article)

3. McLuvin on 09 Jun 2011 at 5:00 pm #

   The best shoes will be the ones you have with you. Shoe shopping is not a priority when zombies are eating everybody. Odds are you have a couple good pairs of shoes/boots, those will do.

4. CompShooter on 09 Jun 2011 at 8:19 pm #

   To Mcluvins point regarding a couple good pairs. Look for what they call “welt constructed” direct attach soles, not cemented on or plain direct attach poly urethane soles. Rubber shell outsoles with urethane midsoles is better especially for slip resistance and abrasion. How the tell by a glance if you have a poly urethane outsole? simple, look at the street surface and look amongst the tread design and logo area for tiny pinholes at the sharp edges of the lettering and or treads. That is a sign of poly urethane which foams after injection and fills the mold, rubber is harder/ more dense and the details are without any of the fore mentioned pin holes and the details of the tread design are crisp. PVC (poly vinyl choride) will give nice crisp details too but look for injection sprue points on the tread surface that have been cut off. Rubber outsole shells wont have them. Depending upon preference you should consider the amount of grams of thinsulate for the cold weather (more grams = more insulation). Steel toe?….well, I don’t care for them since the powers that be don’t like how they make the toe look like clowns feet so they design the steel toe slimmer to prevent it but it crams my toes.(yeah, I work as a machinist at a shoe company and I dont have to wear steel toes) Only the Hytest division doesn’t do that since they are a nitch safety boot found a lot in foundries and other rough service jobs and side with comfort more than looks IMHO. Personally I only like certain few mil spec boots because the DOD specs out the construction & often the materials. It tends to box in the manufactures abilities at times (I cannot get into those reasons other than to say it is normal for a soldier at boot camp to go through at LEAST a pair every six weeks on average from reports) Vibram is made by Quabaug corp. in MA. they supply all the US DOD boot manufacturers outsoles that require Vibram. Currently all materials for military footwear must be US as well as the raw materials. Merrell’s are made overseas but are supplied by Quabaug corp. China branch. I too love my Merrell running shoes but as far as rugged boot goes I stick with a welt constructed since there are a few redundant ways the soles are held on. One is the welt sewn around the perimeter of the leather upper. Then the sole is direct attached with a rubber outsole / poly foam combo making a chemical / mechanical bond and then safety stitched in the toe to ensure no de lamination. There is a welt construction out there that does everything I said but the outsole is cemented on, I don’t like those since they delaminate over time. its easy to tell when you work at a shoe company, the best way I can describe it is if you see a ultra fine line (aproximately the thickness of a couple sheets of paper) between the outsole and the midsole and the sides of the outsole looks like it has been sanded smooth (AKA scoured.They take a oversized out sole and stick it to the bottom of the boot and sand it down to fit) that is a cemented on sole. If the outsole has tread design wrapped up around the side then it is likely a direct attach because the outsole was placed into a mold and the boot mechanically lowered into the mold and poly urethane was injected to “direct attach” it to the leather upper forming a chemical / mechanical bond, better than a cemented on outsole. Look at the metal eyelets Some are plastic and under very cold conditions I have had these snap under stress especially the speed lace hooks at the top of the boot where they are supported only on one side. try to twist all the eyelets by hand, you shouldnt be able to do so. If you can the rivet is not seated very well and over time will lossen more and break. Now that I might have completely lost you there is a non welt constructed direct attach too and under proper procedures are fine too but if you want rugged redundancy welt direct attach gives you that. Now a few short comments about those snazzy multicolored treads on the bottom. They are thin and will peel off due to the fact that some are cemented on which comes off sooner rather than later especially when you walk through solvents like gasoline or other caustic solutions and heat from fire such as escaping a burning building. The heat re activates the cement and it loses bond causing them to peel right off. On more well made shoes or boots they are thin wafers of rubber that are inserted into the mold and vulcanized at the same time but the problem is that they are still THIN and wear through quickly. Often they are a lesser durometer (hardness) to improve slip resistance with a sticky feel but that is even worse for long term durability. It’s done more for looks more than anything else.

5. QAZZY 1-9th on 09 Jun 2011 at 9:41 pm #

   My plan at first involves a lot of travel to find a good place to bunker down, so at first running shoes make the most sense. But I think the best shoes boil down to combat boots or running shoes, dePending on whether your plan involves fighting or running. I feel that my Merrells will hold up to quite a couple battles. Plus, they’re light, so I can carry another pair. Comfort is a huge factor, discomfort or injures are huge impediments.

6. wheelgunner on 12 Jun 2011 at 4:49 pm #

   Leather boots and moccasins for me.

7. wheelgunner on 12 Jun 2011 at 11:53 pm #

   That’s why I have boots for support, and moccasins for sneaking.

   I beleive that now would be the appropriate time to start discussing socks as the other half of the equation?

8. QAZZY 1-9th on 13 Jun 2011 at 5:07 am #

   As for the concern out stepping on rocks with the barefoot shoe, the shoe itself can withstand it. I think sharp gravel feels pretty good, since I’ve gotten used to the pain of stepping on sharp things (sans spikes and glass).

9. wheelgunner on 13 Jun 2011 at 11:59 am #

   And to boot type of moccasins are intended purely to keep brush and burning sand from getting your legs.

10. QAZZY 1-9th on 13 Jun 2011 at 4:24 pm #

    Burning sand? I’m under the assumption you live in the Southwest? Doesn’t get much nicer than Northern VA, but I’d still need boots or long pants to get through the forests (have the childhood scars to prove that thorns live in abundance there).

11. wheelgunner on 13 Jun 2011 at 6:38 pm #

    The boot moccasin is an Apache desert design. Burning sand and nothing growing that doesn’t stab you.

12. QAZZY 1-9th on 13 Jun 2011 at 9:45 pm #

    Would it be practical in a temperate forest AND urban area?

13. wheelgunner on 13 Jun 2011 at 10:14 pm #

    No, not really. Well, it depends on how often you want to replace your shoe. They can last a good number of months in natural terrain, but asfault and the like eat the leather real hard.

14. QAZZY 1-9th on 14 Jun 2011 at 5:12 am #

    So I’m best off sticking with my Merrells, until I move to a less urban area.

15. wheelgunner on 14 Jun 2011 at 11:28 am #

    Probably. THey are, however, perfect for my area.

16. QAZZY 1-9th on 15 Jun 2011 at 5:09 am #

    I wonder if you stomp hard enough with normal shoes to crack a zombie skull. I think the ability to do so is more reliant on the user’s strength, not footwear.

17. QAZZY 1-9th on 15 Jun 2011 at 3:25 pm #

    In a zombie apocalypse, what is your plan, staying, and defending, or leaving?

18. wheelgunner on 15 Jun 2011 at 11:23 pm #

    My plan is staying/leaving/defending as required.

19. QAZZY 1-9th on 16 Jun 2011 at 5:05 am #

    I am most definitely leaving, preferably to a more isolated Army base (MWTC is the long-term goal, I’ll go to Quantico, Lejuene, Fort Hood, Pendleton then MWTC).

    Urban warfare against zeds is not preferable without a good team, and I’m a city dweller. House to house is hard enough without a non-pain-feeling opponent, with a possible requirement for headshots.

20. wheelgunner on 16 Jun 2011 at 12:31 pm #

    At least he won’t be shooting back. And don’t be thinking that it will be a cake walk in the country. Do you know how many people die each year in some of the best scavenging lands around? It’s ridiculous.

21. QAZZY 1-9th on 16 Jun 2011 at 2:41 pm #

    In several texts, it has been mentioned, with enough skill, pulling off a long range shot (my specialty) would be easier than going toe to toe with a zed. Plus, with rougher terrain, a significantly less coordinated enemy would be at a great mobility advantage.

    Agh…. Fatal error, those are Marine bases with the exception of Fort Hood.

22. wheelgunner on 17 Jun 2011 at 12:25 pm #

    They will also have more cover, you lose those long range shots to the cover, and I was talking about how difficult it can get to feed and resupply.

23. QAZZY 1-9th on 17 Jun 2011 at 2:40 pm #

    Not necessarily. A lot of rural Virginia and West Virginia is empty grassland, and shooting in the woods wouldn’t be much of a challenge. Shooting with minimal cover like that would be easier than fighting in a urban area, with corners and darkness where a pack of zeds can overwhelm you without you knowing, until it’s too late? My Remington 700 would be a huge asset in this situation.

    Granted, this can happen in the woods, but it’s easier in a city, where sounds can bounce off multiple surfaces, confusing you as to where the target is, if you can’t see it?

24. wheelgunner on 18 Jun 2011 at 12:21 am #

    That grass is going to be overgrown in a month. Zero visibility.

25. QAZZY 1-9th on 18 Jun 2011 at 6:37 pm #

    If you have higher ground, you can see their heads over the grass (my theory is that the body will still function, but I can hit a head-sized target at 1000 yards.

    Even if the grass is taller than the average zed, you would still be able to find out their position. Looking for a spotter just in case I can’t find mine (we’re pretty far away). Anyone can run 3 miles in at least 18 minutes, go quick on-the-fly trigonometry, and willing to run around with a pretty big rifle?

26. wheelgunner on 18 Jun 2011 at 10:34 pm #

    I can do Kentucky Windage and got a shotgun.

27. QAZZY 1-9th on 19 Jun 2011 at 6:25 am #

    Kentucky Windage with a shotgun? That’s pretty nice, do it with deer slugs and I’ll be impressed.

    If it’s not with a shotgun, but with a rifle, at which range is it? How accurately did you hit your target, and what kind of rifle did you use?

    For Kentucky Windage, I’ve used it to curve around a tree trunk (not much of a curve, but the wind still curved it marginally) to hit a deer (still moved a bit before it bled out). Overall, not too good at it. I want to hunt with my new M14 (M1A) though. I can’t go as far with it as I do with my Remington, but it’s still pretty sweet. I’ll probably get some match grade rounds when I get a better (than stock) barrel.

28. wheelgunner on 20 Jun 2011 at 11:52 am #

    Shoot coke cans at hundred plus yards with a reproduction 1873 Winchester Repeater free standing. Don’t have much shooting range beyond that around here, or if we do, all I have to do is manuveur a little bit to be in range. 13+1 rounds, capable of of pumping them out 1 a second, 3-5 if you want aimed fire, and in four years of packing it through a swamp I haven’t had any trouble beyond a fair bit of rust on the frame, which, saddly, is almost unavoidable.

    My shotgun is my “modern” combat gun. 870 Remington Marine Magnum. My taste mostly ended at WW1. Thing will pump out 7 aimed rounds in 4 seconds, and has a weather proof coating. I prefer a rifle though, but have shot armadillo an squirrels with a Colt Peacemaker back when I could afford to practice.

29. QAZZY 1-9th on 20 Jun 2011 at 2:37 pm #

    My guns are mostly modern, nothing got handed down other than a matte-black KA-BAR (a family relic, and it’s old, so I won’t use it).
    -Remington 700, left-hand (all rifles are left-hand) synthetic stock, .300 Win Mag
    -Bushmaster XM-15, also have receivers for 7.62mm and .22
    -M1A, synthetic stock
    -FN Five-Seven, an expensive gift, but a sweet gun
    -Glock 34
    -Ruger 22/45, bull barrel
    -Some old double-barrel over/under 12 gauge. It’s reliable and banged up as hell, so can’t tell the make
    -Service weapons aren’t kept at home
    -Of course, a small cannon (steel pipe, I wrap black powder into small cartridges and fire pretty much anything) from my pre-gun license days

    These will serve me well, with the exception of the Five-Seven when it breaks or runs out of ammo.

30. wheelgunner on 20 Jun 2011 at 4:16 pm #

    Been thinking about an M1A. Are they worth the money?

31. Angryvikingman on 20 Jun 2011 at 4:35 pm #

    They’re freaking sweet, but the ammo isn’t cheap at all.

32. QAZZY 1-9th on 20 Jun 2011 at 4:53 pm #

    In my opinion, it’s the best semi-auto 7.62mm rifle. It’s reliability is great, parts are more common than .308 ARs (as far as I’ve seen), FALs or G3s here, and equipped properly, it can make a mid-range sniper rifle (deer hunting is the forte here). If you buy 7.62mm in bulk, price isn’t too bad, but I buy more 5.56, 9mm and .22 for training (getting a Lakeside belt-fed as a neat toy).

33. Angryvikingman on 20 Jun 2011 at 8:11 pm #

    Yeah, the surplus 200 rnd battle packs were running $30 when I first got my FN FAL and HK SR9TC, but it soon went up to $150 per 200, which is insane. IT almost got to the point that buying remington hunting ammo was cheaper, which is sad. Last I saw, the 200 rnd packs were going for $85 on CTD. If it gets back down to around $400 per 1k, then I’ll definately think about buying another .308.

34. Angryvikingman on 20 Jun 2011 at 8:12 pm #

    BTW, I love those SOCOM style rifles that Springfield is making. DROOL!

35. QAZZY 1-9th on 20 Jun 2011 at 9:25 pm #

    I don’t know about the SOCOM, I considered it, but in a larger caliber, I want the full size barrel for accuracy. The H&K SR9 is a pretty sweet rifle. Haven’t had the chance to shoot one yet. Any words on reliability?

36. ArchAngel on 23 Jun 2011 at 3:07 pm #

    I will be wearing my boots issued to me by the army hot weather bellevilles .They have been to Iraq and back and are plenty good for killing hodge’s so Nuff said

37. wheelgunner on 23 Jun 2011 at 3:35 pm #

    How about the AR 10? At least in my area they are a little cheaper.

38. QAZZY 1-9th on 25 Jun 2011 at 5:00 pm #

    I like the AR, but with .308 Win, there are more accurate and reliable platforms.

39. Reaver on 27 Jun 2011 at 2:09 pm #

    Rocky Sv2′s. nuff said.

40. QAZZY 1-9th on 27 Jun 2011 at 4:21 pm #

    Just to bring this back to topic, and to restart this post, I think a UK Special Forces-type hike (the one in selection) with 40 miles in one day is good practice. Endurance and upper-body strength (for swinging weapons) are key physical attributes in a zombies apocalypse.

41. wheelgunner on 27 Jun 2011 at 8:21 pm #

    40 miles in a day is rough. And in equiptment? Uh.

42. QAZZY 1-9th on 27 Jun 2011 at 8:51 pm #

    Aw, just gotta man up, I’ve covered close to that in 8 hours with a rifle, 4 mags (20 rounds each, 7.62mm), a machete, a knife or two, and some PowerBars in 8 hours. Something that would help in lugging all that gear would be a solid wagon. No joke. Carrying a couple guns, supples and ammo through a relatively smooth path would be greatly aided with a Red Rider wagon.

43. Angryvikingman on 27 Jun 2011 at 9:28 pm #

    Except all the racket it would make even on pavement. It’d be like a dinner bell. You want something with larger wheels anyway. Like those large rear wheels on a push mower. Like a foot in diameter, and get some camp foam, a blanket, or something to lay everything on to keep the vibration to a minimum and lessening the vibration noises.

    BTW, 40 miles in a day? Not me! You can cover as much ground as you want, but I won’t do over 25 in a day. 30 max if I’m really trying to get somewhere. You can really cause a lot of damage to your feet if you’re not used to doing that every day, and walking on stress fractures isn’t fun at all, trust me, I know.

44. wheelgunner on 27 Jun 2011 at 10:06 pm #

    You will also get run down extremely fast, and you have no safety net in place if you need one.

45. McLuvin on 28 Jun 2011 at 12:39 am #

    To hump supplies during scavenging or traveling I’d look at a stroller.
    The type that are built for joggers. They are solidly made and have big bike style wheels. Many 3-gun competitors have modified them to carry all their gear between stages. They can handle a decent load and are easily pushed over most terrain. With gun brackets they keep everything close at hand.

46. QAZZY 1-9th on 28 Jun 2011 at 10:14 pm #

    My roommates would question the purchase of a jogging stroller, so I’ll make one. But point is, dragging supplies on wheels is the best solution if you’re on foot.

47. wheelgunner on 29 Jun 2011 at 12:27 am #

    Only on settled terrain in good condition.

48. QAZZY 1-9th on 29 Jun 2011 at 1:08 pm #

    A decent jogging stroller can go through dirt paths. I’d strap my pack in the stroller, in case I need to quickly ditch the stroller. I’d rather make my own rugged version, since rugged strollers are a b**** to find. :)

49. CompShooter on 30 Jun 2011 at 7:29 pm #

    LOL, good job at posting the Wolverine World Wide boots and shoes. (Rockford Mi. grew up there) My department (3 people) were the ones that came up with the compressor and the multishock comfort functions / light weight system.

50. the j on 23 Jul 2011 at 5:29 pm #

    combat boots. mostly because you could stomp on zombie faces and there pretty easy to run in

51. chronic stoner on 31 Jul 2011 at 3:29 am #

    just use some pair of sneakers.
    as long as it is comfortable for your feet.

52. Turbo on 13 Aug 2011 at 12:33 pm #

    IMO running shoes are useless because for one the soles are too thin and soft to provide guaranteed protection against glass shards. You don’t want yourself handicapped by a cut in your foot. Another drawback is that the upper material is very light and breathy as well and a zombie who took good care of his teeth before turning into a zombie might even be able to bite through it. My personal bet are, especially since sweaty and smelly feet should be one of your least problems in case of emergency, proper combat boots.

53. Off Grid Survival on 17 Aug 2011 at 5:12 pm #

    My pick would be any Merrel Hiking shoe or low boot. They last forever and are a perfect choice for a longterm survival situation.

Trackback URL | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply