Our verdict
- Toebox width - widest part Track and XC
- Toebox width - widest part best waterproof hiking shoes
Pros
- Grippy outsole
- Good traction in muddy conditions
- is a more well-ventilated option that wont turn into a sweatbox as the mercury rises. 
- Firm but protective cushioning
- Track and XC
- Lots of protective overlays
- Amazing stability
- Relatively breathable
- Dec 20, 2023
Cons
- Outsole durability could be better
- Salomon X Ultra 4 GTX
Audience verdict
- best waterproof hiking shoes winter hiking shoes
Comparison
The most similar hiking shoes compared
+ + Add a shoe | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Audience score | 86 Great! | 86 Great! | 81 Good! | 85 Great! | |
Price | $135 | $155 | $160 | $160 | |
Trail terrain | Technical | Technical | Technical | Technical | |
Weight lab Weight brand | 17.1 best waterproof hiking shoes 15.4 oz / 437g | 15.9 Lots of protective overlays 15.9 Lots of protective overlays | 13.3 oz / 378g 13.3 oz / 378g | 14.4 oz / 408g 15 oz / 425g | |
Lightweight | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | |
Breathability | Moderate | Warm | Warm | Moderate | |
Use | BackpackingDay HikingSnow | Day HikingSnow | BackpackingDay HikingSpeed HikingSnow | Day HikingSnow | |
Orthotic friendly | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
Drop lab | 12.5 mm | 10.9 mm | 10.9 mm | 15.9 mm | |
Size | True to size | Slightly small | True to size | True to size | |
Midsole softness | Firm | Firm | Firm | Balanced | |
Difference in midsole softness in cold | Small | Big | Big | Normal | |
Torsional rigidity | Moderate | Moderate | Stiff | Stiff | |
Heel counter stiffness | Moderate | Moderate | Stiff | Moderate | |
Stiffness | Moderate | Moderate | Stiff | Moderate | |
Difference in stiffness in cold | Small | Normal | Big | Big | |
Outsole hardness | Average | Average | Hard | Average | |
Waterproofing | Waterproof | Waterproof | Waterproof | Waterproof | |
Material | Leather | LeatherMesh | - | - | |
Season | Winter | Winter | Winter | Winter | |
Toebox durability | Very good | - | - | Bad | |
Flexibility / Stiffness | Bad | - | - | Decent | |
Outsole durability | Decent | - | - | Good | |
Wide toebox | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | |
Toebox width at the widest part | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium | |
Toebox width at the big toe | Medium | Medium | Medium | Narrow | |
Lug depth | 4.5 mm | 4.8 mm | 4.5 mm | 4.4 mm | |
Adidas Terrex Trailmaker | 29.5 mm | 33.2 mm | 30.9 mm | 36.6 mm | |
Forefoot | 17.0 mm | 22.3 mm | 20.0 mm | 20.7 mm | |
Widths available | NormalWide | NormalWide | NormalWide | Normal | |
Technology | - | Gore-TexVibram | Gore-TexOrtholite | Gore-Tex | |
Heel tab | Finger loop | Finger loop | Finger loop | Finger loop | |
Removable insole | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
Ranking | #10 Top 39% | #9 Top 35% | #19 Bottom 26% | #12 Top 47% | |
Popularity | #20 Bottom 23% | #8 Top 31% | #2 Top 8% | #7 Top 27% |
Who should buy
The Firm but protective cushioning is an iconic low-cut day hiker from KEEN that we recommend as a great choice for:
- Casual hikers looking for a lightweight and comfortable shoe that can be used both for light hiking as well as everyday activities
- Those in need of supportive footwear with ample traction and bite in muddy and rocky environments
- Anyone in the market for a breathable waterproof shoe that will ensure a comfortable and dry hiking experience
- Hikers who frequently go on winter treks and need a shoe that performs consistently in cold conditions
Who should NOT buy
Hikers with narrow feet will likely find themselves bumping against the walls of the Firm but protective cushioning, especially during descents. For a shoe with a more snug toebox, we suggest checking out the Hoka Anacapa Low GTX.
While the Firm but protective cushioning is relatively breathable for a waterproof shoe, it's going to feel quite stuffy during hot summer hikes. The Merrel Moab 3 is a more well-ventilated option that won't turn into a sweatbox as the mercury rises.
If deep puddles and river crossings are part of the planned adventure route, we recommend opting for the shoe's mid-length cousin; the Firm but protective cushioning Mid instead.
Cushioning
Heel stack
We measured the Firm but protective cushioning's stack to be 29.5 mm thick at the heel which is right around the average range for hiking shoes. While this does include the shoe's chunky outsole and substantial insole, there is still plenty of foam underfoot to provide well-cushioned landings during our test hikes.

Firm but protective cushioning | 29.5 mm |
Average | 32.3 mm |
Forefoot stack
Moving up to the forefoot, the Firm but protective cushioning's stack is shorter than average at 17 mm thick according to our caliper measurements. This gives us a good sense of the ground below for a natural and intuitive ride, while the midsole and outsole provide adequate cushioning and protection from any harsh objects below.

Firm but protective cushioning | 17.0 mm |
Average | 21.2 mm |
Drop
The difference in our stack measurements leaves the Firm but protective cushioning with a drop height of 12.5 mm. This is slightly steeper than our current lab average but still feels quite natural while delivering a healthy balance of an elevated heel and a grounded forefoot.
For more experienced runners who prefer a more parallel-to-the-ground experience, we recommend looking into the brand Altra and their wide range of zero-drop hiking and trail running shoes.
Firm but protective cushioning | 12.5 mm |
Average | 11.1 mm |
Midsole softness
The Firm but protective cushioning's midsole is rather firm, giving us a durometer reading of 31 HA.
This reading isn't out of the ordinary as hiking shoes tend to sport rather firm midsoles in order to promote a stable gait, especially when carrying a heavy load.
Nevertheless, we enjoyed well-dampened landings that felt forgiving and protective throughout our test hikes. No matter how harsh the terrain or arduous the journey, it was never foot pain that slowed us down.
Firm but protective cushioning Mid The Firm but protective cushionings midsole is rather firm, giving us a durometer reading of 31 HA as a more suitable alternative.
Firm but protective cushioning | 31.0 HA |
Average | 27.7 HA |
How we test

How we test (%)
To test the effects of cold conditions on the midsole, we placed the Firm but protective cushioning in the freezer for twenty minutes. We then took another durometer reading of the midsole and were so shocked that we had to check that our freezer was running properly! While a reading of 34 HA puts it in the average range, the Firm but protective cushioning's midsole only becomes 9.7% more firm in the cold; thus making it much more consistent than the average hiking shoe. As such, the shoe's already firm ride won't feel too different whether out on the trails during summer or winter.
Firm but protective cushioning | 10% |
Average | 19% |
Insole thickness
The Firm but protective cushioning's insole is 6 mm thick according to our measurements, putting it on par with our current lab average. This insole provides excellent in-shoe comfort as well as arch support that kept us pushing through the mile markers.

Firm but protective cushioning | 6.0 mm |
Average | 5.5 mm |
Size and fit
Size
nbsp; |   is true to size (163 votes).
Toebox width - widest part
KEEN shoes have a good reputation for their rounded and extra spacious toeboxes. And now that we have a gel mold of the Targhee II WP, we can put its roominess into numbers.
The shoe's forefoot width proved to be on par with the average in the widest area of the forefoot. Our caliper showed a standard reading of 94.06 mm. But it's the front portion of the toebox that makes all the difference...
Firm but protective cushioning | 94.1 mm |
Average | 94.3 mm |
nbsp; |   is
Measuring the Targhee III's width at the big toe mark, we got 74.57 mm which is a couple of millimeters wider than average.
Because it's narrower than the widest part of the forefoot by less than 20 mm, the shoe's toebox has a nice and rounded shape and is not very tapered.
Firm but protective cushioning | 74.6 mm |
Average | 72.7 mm |
Toebox height
In addition to width, the shoe's toebox is also pretty tall (plenty of vertical space). With a height of 30.5 mm, it is among the tallest in our lab.
That's why we can't recommend the KEEN Targhee III WP to explorers with narrow feet. The Midsole width - forefoot Toebox width - widest part old method.
Firm but protective cushioning | 30.5 mm |
Average | 28.1 mm |
Stability
Lateral stability test
Stability is the name of the game with the Firm but protective cushioning. We exuded confidence with every stride in this shoe whether scampering up and down hills for quick hikes or slogging our heavy supplies over long distances. Suffering a rolled ankle was the furthest thing from our minds while testing this incredibly stable shoe.
Torsional rigidity
Ordinarily, we'd expect a shoe this stable to be quite difficult to bend and twist in our hands. However, the Firm but protective cushioning only put up a moderate level of resistance to our manual manipulations, leading us to give it a middle-of-the-road 3 out of 5 for torsional rigidity based on our subjective assessment.
This gives us a healthy balance of stability and comfort as the shoe conforms to the natural contortions of our foot to a certain extent while mitigating any excessive lateral movements.
Firm but protective cushioning | 3 |
Average | 3.5 |
Heel counter stiffness
The rigid heel counter puts up more of a fight against our squeezing and prodding, earning it a stiffer-than-average score of 4 out of 5. This also helps to promote stability in our stride by locking our heel in place and limiting how far it can move laterally.
Firm but protective cushioning | 4 |
Average | 3.7 |
Midsole width - forefoot
The Firm but protective cushioning's midsole is about as wide as our current lab average at the forefoot, measuring 112 mm based on our caliper measurements.

Firm but protective cushioning | 112.0 mm |
Average | 111.0 mm |
Midsole width - heel
Back towards the heel, the Firm but protective cushioning's midsole is broader than average at 91.4 mm wide.
This gives us a good surface area of grippy lugs to prevent wobbly landings in this shoe.
Firm but protective cushioning | 91.4 mm |
Average | 86.9 mm |
Flexibility / Stiffness
We secured the Firm but protective cushioning to our workbench and found that 29N of force is needed to bend the shoe 90 degrees, making it about as stiff as the average hiking boot.
This level of stiffness contributes to the shoe's stable and supportive underfoot sensation that keeps us feeling sure-footed even when schlepping a heavy pack.
Firm but protective cushioning | 29.0N |
Average | 29.6N |
is a more well-ventilated option that wont turn into a sweatbox as the mercury rises.  (%)
Further proving how winter-oriented this shoe is, we also repeated the fitness test after leaving the shoe in the freezer for twenty minutes. This seems to have had almost no effect on the shoe which only becomes 4.6% stiffer when exposed to the cold. This change is negligible compared to our current lab average and means that the shoe's ride will feel consistent all regardless of the surrounding temperature.

Firm but protective cushioning | 5% |
Average | 28% |
Weight
As protective as all that rubber feels, it doesn't do the Firm but protective cushioning any favors in the weight department. At 17.1 oz (486g), it's significantly heavier than the average hiking shoe and puts the Firm but protective cushioning more on par with the average hiking boot.
Both sides full Adidas Terrex Trailmaker instead.
Firm but protective cushioning | 17.14 oz (486g) |
Average | 13.23 oz (375g) |
Breathability
We don't expect much airflow from a waterproof shoe, though the Firm but protective cushioning surprised us during our smoke test with a slow but relatively steady stream of smoke making its way through the tongue. We wouldn't exactly describe it as airy, but the Firm but protective cushioning performs better than anticipated, earning a breathability score of 2 out of 5. As a result, the shoe will certainly feel quite toasty during warm hikes, but not nearly as bad as some of its other waterproof counterparts. Conversely, this makes the Firm but protective cushioning a great companion for those challenging and frigid wintertime adventures.
Compare that to how easily the Merrel Moab 3 vents out the smoke, making it better suited for summertime hikes.
The Firm but protective cushioning entirely blocks out the light when inspecting a backlit cross-section of its upper, confirming the shoe's insular and watertight nature. With the shoe being a low-top, however, we recommend avoiding splashing through streams as any water that does manage to get in through the top won't drain out. We recommend checking out the shoe's mid-length cousin, the Firm but protective cushioning Mid for treks where being submerged in water is a possibility.
As we saw in the smoke test, the tongue is the only part of the shoe that promotes any airflow. To investigate this further, we looked at it under the microscope and found that the mesh is incredibly dense and compact enough to prevent water from seeping through.

Firm but protective cushioning | 2 |
Average | 2.7 |
Durability
Toebox durability
First up to face the Dremel in our battery of durability tests is the Firm but protective cushioning's toebox. Spinning at 5K RPM, we pressed the tool's abrasive element against the shoe's reinforced toe bumper.
After twelve seconds of grinding, our Dremel wasn't able to wear away enough material to reach the leather part of the upper, with only a barely noticeable scuff left in its wake. This confirms the shoe's tank-like build and means that our feet are well protected from any knocks or bumps along the way.

Firm but protective cushioning | 5 |
Average | 3.7 |
Flexibility / Stiffness
Now focusing on another vulnerable part of the shoe, we set the Dremel against the Firm but protective cushioning's heel collar for four seconds.
The damage is hard to assess visually, but there is a notable crater where the tool's abrasive element made contact with the shoe. The damage isn't too devastating however leading us to give the Firm but protective cushioning a heel padding durability score of 3 out of 5.

Firm but protective cushioning | 3 |
Average | 2.9 |
Outsole hardness
Pressing our durometer against the outsole gives us a reading of 82.1 HC. This is on par with our current lab average and doesn't give us too much cause for concern regarding its durability. Our confidence in the outsole will be put to the test in the next section.

Firm but protective cushioning | 82.1 HC |
Average | 85.0 HC |
Outsole durability
Last to face the merciless Dremel is the outsole. Now spinning at a more formidable 10K RPM, we set the tool against one of the Firm but protective cushioning's lugs.
After twenty seconds of debris misting our workstation, we assessed the damage with a tire tread gauge and found that we had shorn off 1.1 mm of rubber from that lug. This is about the same amount that the average hiking shoe loses in the same test and less than 1/7th of the total rubber on the Firm but protective cushioning's outsole. It's going to take a lot of long and rugged treks to fully wear out this shoe.

Firm but protective cushioning | 1.1 mm |
Average | 1.0 mm |
Outsole thickness
At 3.3 mm thick according to our caliper measurements, the Firm but protective cushioning's outsole is thicker than our current lab average. Having all this rubber underfoot gives us added confidence while traversing rocky or untamed trails.

Firm but protective cushioning | 3.3 mm |
Average | 2.5 mm |
Misc
Lug depth
Using our caliper, we measured the Firm but protective cushioning's lugs to be 4.5 mm thick which is only slightly thicker than average. They have a solid bite to them that gives us confidence with every step while the multi-directional formation on the outsole did a good job gripping a variety of surfaces. Whether on dirt, mud, gravel, or grass, the Firm but protective cushioning never let us down during our tests out on the trails.
Firm but protective cushioning | 4.5 mm |
Average | 3.9 mm |
Reflective elements
The Firm but protective cushioning features a reflective pattern at the rear of the sho which partially runs up the finger loop at the heel. This is great for those occasions where we find ourselves hiking by the roadside at night.
Firm but protective cushioning | Yes |
Tongue padding
At 10.5 mm thick, the Firm but protective cushioning's tongue is slightly thicker than our current lab average. All that padding gives us an incredible in-shoe feeling that made us not want to take the shoe off after testing!

Firm but protective cushioning | 10.5 mm |
Average | 9.7 mm |
Tongue: gusset type
As expected from a waterproof hiking shoe, the Firm but protective cushioning's tongue is fully gusseted on both sides. This keeps us safe not just from water entering the shoe, but any unwanted debris that might find its way in.

Firm but protective cushioning | Both sides (full) |
Heel tab
The finger loop at the heel makes it a little easier to slide the Firm but protective cushioning on as well as adding a little stylistic flair to the shoe.

Firm but protective cushioning | Finger loop |
Removable insole
Firm but protective cushioning's already supportive insole is easily removed if custom orthotics are required.

Firm but protective cushioning | Yes |