Going to start a new thread - these were mentioned in the Crispi vs Schnees thread. @Schnee's tagging you in and as a sponsor I would encourage you to tell the story on these here; the more detail the better. Product page w/details: https://schnees.com/mission-mens/
A few background things from the start just because boots and fit are a personal thing, and I haven’t tried everything out there. I have preferred the more technical, synthetic boots since 2014 or so, mostly ankle height. Narrow heel, so La Sportiva is my jam. For extended backpack hunts over the years I’ve ran the LS Omega GTX, LS Boulder X Mid, LS Trango TRK, LS Trango Tech, Scarpa Charmoz, Schnees Timberline, and Schnees Beartooth 200g. I’ve used them all above tree line on steep rock/scree ridges, flats/trail, and more rolling terrain. For trail runners and day hikes, I greatly prefer Topo shoes and the wider toe boxes.
Schnees boots surprised me, in a good way. I tried them since from MT, but ironically never when I lived in Bozeman. What I gained (besides leather, weight and height) over the more technical mountain boots was better feeling feet at the end of a day, especially when packed in for the week. Instead of the front of my foot hurting a bit on day 3 and getting worse for the rest of the hunt, I found the mid sole, support and toe box with Schnees really helpful. And with 200g beartooths, my cold feet during late archery and rifle season was solved until pack boot weather. Scarpa Charmoz worked, but do not fit me as well in the heel - cold when there’s snow, but awesome moving uphill, too stiff otherwise (for me).
I ran my Trango techs until the mid sole cracked. The synthetic they use is not durable enough for mountain hunting, but they faired better than the Trango TRK boots, and didn’t hold moisture nearly as badly. The Trango Techs lasted 2x as long as the TRKs. I could use a bit more stiffness but they do straddle hiker/mountaineering well as a ‘trekker’ to me. Going to the Schnees timberlines for archery season has been more comfortable except during higher temps.
Comparison photos - Schnees Timberline, Schnees Mission, Scarpa Charmoz, and La Sportiva Trango Tech.
Things to note, especially with listed height specs - some measure to the tallest part of the boot, and some to the lowest. For the Missions, 7” is to the lowest back portion, but the front is a bit over 8 inches. Timberlines/Beartooths are 9 inch. Scarpas a bit lower than Missions, with LS Trango Tech’s a touch even lower. The rear stretch “gaiter” LS uses to cover that back area is nice.
The Mission: the first version I tried on was too much of a different fit from what I was used to, and the synthetic parts were too stiff to me. The revisions with this version are markedly better. The new midsole package feels nice. The new synthetic material is nice, and the blending with the leather lowers is a nice balance. They look a lot like the Lathrop and Sons boots to me. The fit is very similar to my other Schnees if not exactly the same, but obviously they feel a touch different. They are not “wide” in the toe, but the difference from LS and Scarpa is noticeable for the forward half of your foot. On the foot, the flex is about the ball of my foot forward (like the Beartooth), and the toe rocker helps the step off in an otherwise flat sole feel. The Charmoz has a similar toe rocker but flexes just under the toe section really. On the foot the Mission is a bit “more” boot in every dimension with a more padded ankle area, and tongue. The rand application closely matches a mountaineering boot. Compared to current mountaineering offerings, these flex a bit more, and are a bit heavier. I can only assume that after multiple days of all day movement hunting, the extra boot will offer a similar comfort boost as I’ve seen with the timberline and beartooths.
If considering the Schnees Mission hopefully this brief in-hand description and comparison with other boots helps.
A few background things from the start just because boots and fit are a personal thing, and I haven’t tried everything out there. I have preferred the more technical, synthetic boots since 2014 or so, mostly ankle height. Narrow heel, so La Sportiva is my jam. For extended backpack hunts over the years I’ve ran the LS Omega GTX, LS Boulder X Mid, LS Trango TRK, LS Trango Tech, Scarpa Charmoz, Schnees Timberline, and Schnees Beartooth 200g. I’ve used them all above tree line on steep rock/scree ridges, flats/trail, and more rolling terrain. For trail runners and day hikes, I greatly prefer Topo shoes and the wider toe boxes.
Schnees boots surprised me, in a good way. I tried them since from MT, but ironically never when I lived in Bozeman. What I gained (besides leather, weight and height) over the more technical mountain boots was better feeling feet at the end of a day, especially when packed in for the week. Instead of the front of my foot hurting a bit on day 3 and getting worse for the rest of the hunt, I found the mid sole, support and toe box with Schnees really helpful. And with 200g beartooths, my cold feet during late archery and rifle season was solved until pack boot weather. Scarpa Charmoz worked, but do not fit me as well in the heel - cold when there’s snow, but awesome moving uphill, too stiff otherwise (for me).
I ran my Trango techs until the mid sole cracked. The synthetic they use is not durable enough for mountain hunting, but they faired better than the Trango TRK boots, and didn’t hold moisture nearly as badly. The Trango Techs lasted 2x as long as the TRKs. I could use a bit more stiffness but they do straddle hiker/mountaineering well as a ‘trekker’ to me. Going to the Schnees timberlines for archery season has been more comfortable except during higher temps.
Comparison photos - Schnees Timberline, Schnees Mission, Scarpa Charmoz, and La Sportiva Trango Tech.
Things to note, especially with listed height specs - some measure to the tallest part of the boot, and some to the lowest. For the Missions, 7” is to the lowest back portion, but the front is a bit over 8 inches. Timberlines/Beartooths are 9 inch. Scarpas a bit lower than Missions, with LS Trango Tech’s a touch even lower. The rear stretch “gaiter” LS uses to cover that back area is nice.
The Mission: the first version I tried on was too much of a different fit from what I was used to, and the synthetic parts were too stiff to me. The revisions with this version are markedly better. The new midsole package feels nice. The new synthetic material is nice, and the blending with the leather lowers is a nice balance. They look a lot like the Lathrop and Sons boots to me. The fit is very similar to my other Schnees if not exactly the same, but obviously they feel a touch different. They are not “wide” in the toe, but the difference from LS and Scarpa is noticeable for the forward half of your foot. On the foot, the flex is about the ball of my foot forward (like the Beartooth), and the toe rocker helps the step off in an otherwise flat sole feel. The Charmoz has a similar toe rocker but flexes just under the toe section really. On the foot the Mission is a bit “more” boot in every dimension with a more padded ankle area, and tongue. The rand application closely matches a mountaineering boot. Compared to current mountaineering offerings, these flex a bit more, and are a bit heavier. I can only assume that after multiple days of all day movement hunting, the extra boot will offer a similar comfort boost as I’ve seen with the timberline and beartooths.
If considering the Schnees Mission hopefully this brief in-hand description and comparison with other boots helps.
