Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Lowa Hunter GTX Extreme vs Lowa Tibet GTX

  1. #1

    Question Lowa Hunter GTX Extreme vs Lowa Tibet GTX

    Have read the opinions of many on this forum regarding the Lowa boots so I purchased both the Lowa Hunters and the Lowa Tibets from Shoebuy.com.

    I am trying them out right now to see which works better for me. Many have praised the Hunters on this forum but not too much has been said about the Tibet GTX--even though the only difference is that they are supposedly the "shorter version" of the well-respected Lowa Hunters.

    From just walking around the house in both models, the Tibets appear more comfortable on my feet as well as in the shin area. My analysis of the pros and cons of each is as follows--interested in other opinions on which I should choose--especially from those who have worn the Tibets before.

    Hunter:
    Pro:
    More high-ankle protection from shale/rocks than Tibet
    Can walk thru deeper water without getting feet wet

    Con:
    More expensive
    Heavier

    Tibet GTX:
    Pro:
    Lighter
    Cheaper

    Con:
    Less high ankle protection from shale/rocks, etc
    Cannot walk thru as deep of water as Hunters and stay dry.

    Any other pros/cons I haven't thought about on either model?

    I guess since at this point the Tibets feel better as I walk around the house I want to go with them--but am I overlooking a feature that the Hunter has that I will regret later?

  2. #2
    Member FALCON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Enumclaw, Wa
    Posts
    179

    Default Tibet

    I bought the Tibet for my sheep hunt last August.

    I replaced the insoles with Superfeet, wore a Smartwool sock with a silk liner.

    At 8", that is all the ankle support I needed even with a heavy pack. I wore River's West gaters when I hiked up creek beds to keep my feet dry.

    You can't go wrong with either, but the Tibet did everything I needed in a boot.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    47

    Default

    One comment I would offer regarding the Tibets: they didn't have much support while side-hilling. I don't know if this is true of the Hunters. Or if this is more of a training issue. Anyway, this is the only area these boots disappointed, especially compared to my buddy's Koflachs. He could keep an edge and keep his foot perpendicular to vertical, while my boots would roll. After 3-4 miles of side-hilling, my ankles were toast. Regardless of what you buy, go find a 55 degree slope and train on it, with a pack.
    Jim Creek - Home of the burning car hook cast!

  4. #4
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,417

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akfangler View Post
    One comment I would offer regarding the Tibets: they didn't have much support while side-hilling. I don't know if this is true of the Hunters. Or if this is more of a training issue. Anyway, this is the only area these boots disappointed, especially compared to my buddy's Koflachs. He could keep an edge and keep his foot perpendicular to vertical, while my boots would roll. After 3-4 miles of side-hilling, my ankles were toast. Regardless of what you buy, go find a 55 degree slope and train on it, with a pack.
    Boy ain't that the truth. Last year I bought some Lowa Civetta plastic boots from shoebuy and man what a difference in steep terrain with a heavy pack. I like my leather boots but in sheep country I'm now sold on the plastics.
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and donít have one, youíll probably never need one again

  5. #5

    Default

    majorbam

    You have analyzed all the factors yourself already.I believe its person specific as to what works. I tried the lower version of the Meindl Alaska Hunters (the Hiker) and found that it didn't provide enough ankle support for me personally. I have since switched to the taller Meindl Alaska Hunter and I also have the Lowa Sheephunter GTX (the same one you have) in the taller version and they just plain work for me. Sidehilling with a 70-100 lb pack will require you to have some serious ankle support and for gusy like me with kind of weak ankles I need all the support I can get.

  6. #6
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    48

    Default Lowa boots

    majorbam
    I was going through the same thing about 3wks ago.I ended up ordering the taller version and could not be happier. I have worn them on a couple of trips up Baldy and back to the blacktail rocks.I did only have 30lbs in my pack but sidehillin, coming downhill and flatout walking the support is very nice.All of my older hunting are in the 8in range,for Hunting I can't see ever going back to that size.

  7. #7
    Member TWB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    3,573

    Thumbs up

    So I just strapped on my Lowa Hunters fresh off the UPS truck. I wear size 13's regularly but 14's in most work stlyle boot so thats what I ordered. Now like everything else I have to shop around for the right fit sicne i'm 6'4 and skinny, but these boots..wow...its like walking on clouds. Can't wait to stomp around the woods in them.
    We do not go to the green woods and crystal waters to rough it, we go to smooth it. We get it rough enough at home; in towns and cities; in shops, offices, stores, banks anywhere that we may be placed

  8. #8
    Member byrd_hntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Squarebanks
    Posts
    661

    Default Good deals on Lowas

    I found this site the other day while looking for some boots. They don't have all the Lowa boots but the ones they do have are nicely priced. Im leaning towards a pair of Task Force Mega Camps to replace my aging upland bird hunting boots.

    http://www.botachtactical.com/lowa.html

  9. #9

    Default

    I wonder what the difference is between the Combat GTX, Task Force Mega Camps, and the Hunter GTX Extreme?
    The Combat in particular looks like it has very similar features as the Hunter, it is supposed to be a light mountaineering boot which would hopefully make it acceptable for mountain hunting. But less expensive.
    Anybody know the real difference? WW

  10. #10
    Member Robertesq1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    N East
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by byrd_hntr View Post
    I found this site the other day while looking for some boots. They don't have all the Lowa boots but the ones they do have are nicely priced. Im leaning towards a pair of Task Force Mega Camps to replace my aging upland bird hunting boots.

    http://www.botachtactical.com/lowa.html
    I order from botach - great prices but just be aware they can sometimes be a headache or not have stock

  11. #11

    Default

    does botach have lowa tibets for sale ever? i didn't see them with your link.

  12. #12
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    wallburg, nc
    Posts
    5

    Default

    I recieved my Hunter GTX pair about 1 1/2 months ago. Here in NC we do not get much snow, until this yeaar. I have sat in tree stands and stump shot through the woods several times over the last 1 1/2 months even in the last two snow events we have gotten. Also this past Sunday I did a 7 1/2 mile hike at a local state park. I am not the type of person to sprulge on such a price, but I am glad I did. these boots are in a league of their own.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by majorbam View Post
    Have read the opinions of many on this forum regarding the Lowa boots so I purchased both the Lowa Hunters and the Lowa Tibets from Shoebuy.com.

    I am trying them out right now to see which works better for me. Many have praised the Hunters on this forum but not too much has been said about the Tibet GTX--even though the only difference is that they are supposedly the "shorter version" of the well-respected Lowa Hunters.

    From just walking around the house in both models, the Tibets appear more comfortable on my feet as well as in the shin area. My analysis of the pros and cons of each is as follows--interested in other opinions on which I should choose--especially from those who have worn the Tibets before.

    Hunter:
    Pro:
    More high-ankle protection from shale/rocks than Tibet
    Can walk thru deeper water without getting feet wet

    Con:
    More expensive
    Heavier

    Tibet GTX:
    Pro:
    Lighter
    Cheaper

    Con:
    Less high ankle protection from shale/rocks, etc
    Cannot walk thru as deep of water as Hunters and stay dry.

    Any other pros/cons I haven't thought about on either model?

    I guess since at this point the Tibets feel better as I walk around the house I want to go with them--but am I overlooking a feature that the Hunter has that I will regret later?
    I'm in the same boat. I have gone to Beaver sports and tried on both, just wondering if I will really "need" the 400 grams of insulation. Which did you keep?

    Kevin

  14. #14
    Member CtP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sitka
    Posts
    261

    Default

    I'll put a plug in for the Hunter Ext. Gtx. These are my primary boots for the mountains. I have a pair of La Sportiva Nepals and Lhoste's and I prefer the Lowas overall. They have great protection around the lower half, I've walked through knee deep rivers and muck ( with gaiters) and my feet are happy and dry everytime. I actually prefer the minimal forefoot flex they offer as opposed to the full shank mntneering boots. As long as you take care of the leather and the laces they'll last you a decade and keep you smilin'. Best pair of boots I've owned yet, hands down.

  15. #15
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    11

    Default

    I haven't seen many people commenting that the tibets are not insulated. I really want the taller hunters but my feet sweat too much as is with just a goretex liner.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •