Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hey All,

So here is the first new topic from me since i came back.


Ive been wondering for quite a while how much time in heels is actually spent walking rather than sitting down so crazy as i am i have setup a small challenge/experiment.

Naturally in order to be as precise as i could i had to organize this whole thing a bit. Logging distance while working, shopping, etc i found to be 
rather impossible so ive found a route that i will do this on. It's 10km long and more or less flat. Ive purchased new boots just for doing this so they will not be 
worn for anything else until i dont want to do this anymore.

These are the boots.
https://imgur.com/a/FROK66Z
https://imgur.com/a/60LSifi

So the way i will do this is the route 5km and another 5km back, so i will walk on this route as often as i can with no other purpose than this test. 
Ofc who dosent like to take their heels out for a spin anyway:P
I have not broken these shoes in either this will be done during the test so the distance in the beginning prob wont be too long but should improve over time. I will walk for as long 
as i can in these and then change to my reserve boots which is a pair of 11cm wedges with no platform and also upon changing to reserve i will walk straight back so only when i can make it 
to that 5km mark in the primary boots will they start getting more distance than the reserve boots. Also no breaks or sitting is allowed.

All data will be posted in this spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10Cb1iOsagHK6AeepSpDdcUIpZI_Ha8xOZh7q9LjAUF0/edit#gid=0 and some will be posted here as well.

I think on the next walk il try and do video too. My plan is to walk as often as work and life permits but at least once per week until i hit 250km. I have no intention at this point 
to stop at 250 but to have a goal is important and can always be increased. I didnt want to make it to easy or to hard so i went with boots that has a 13,5 cm heel and no platform.


So current data is :

Last 3 walks:

Primary Boots: 1,1km - Reserve Boots: 1,1km - Total: 2,2km.

Total Goals:

Of Primary Goal: 1,1/250km
Of Total Goal: 2,2/300km

Let me know what you guys think and also any suggestions are welcome.

Br. Sim.

Edited by Simcity3
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll get there.  Before this pandemic I would wear my Jessica Simpson Rollin Boots for 12-15 hours, most of the time standing and walking.

Edited by Cali
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s an interesting experiment 

i personally never walked such a distance with no stop or break. Maximum 7 km in 14 cm block heels. 

The only think I would be scared is your heels are thin and the tip may not bear the distance. Of course it depends on the surface 

I also would have wear a pair I am sure I am confortable in.Not brand new ones  

Nevertheless I wish you succeeded and would have like to come along.

And keep us updated please  

Pierre 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I might not understand the specifics of your experiment, I am surely interested in the outcome.  Can't wait to see pictures and videos, especially interactions with others while out walking....  Good for you buddy, wish I could accompany you....  Stuck at home, boots aren't seeing any use...

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exciting! I have actually done a similar thing in the past, only a little bit differently. My goal was to walk 1,000 miles (1,609 km) in heels. I finally did it, but it took me a couple of years, due to time constraints, weather constraints, and due to the fact that back then, I sometimes had to work up the courage to go on my walks. I also did this in conjunction with my 2 mile (3.2 km) rule, which is when I get a new pair of shoes, I must be able to walk at least 2 miles in them in reasonable comfort, or at least have some hope of doing so in the future, or I get rid of them. The most I have ever walked at one time continuously was 5.3 miles (8.5 km). I did this twice during my "experiment." Once was in a pair of ankle boots (thin heels, but thicker than stiletto), and once was in a pair of block heel sandals. I think this is a great way to actually improve your endurance in heels to the point where you actually enjoy wearing them for long periods of time, and people will be amazed! People ask me a lot how I can do it, and I tell them that this is how. I don't see any other way around it.

Now, for my opinion on your choice of footwear. I have to agree with @Pierre1961 that the choice of stiletto heels may be problematic. In my experience, you will get about one of your 10 km walks in, and have to replace the heel tips. If you're very lucky, you'll get 15 km out of them. I assume you're walking on concrete. That is the reason why I stopped doing any walking like you plan to do in stilettos. I usually walk in slightly thicker heels--not super big or clunky, but something slightly thicker, because the tips last many, many times longer than stilettos. I get excellent wear out of heels that are about 16 mm across, and that is not really approaching a block-style heel--it's just a "thick stiletto."

Good luck with reaching your goal, and keep us informed!

 

Edited by mlroseplant
Clarity
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I admire the effort but am struggling to understand the data. We all rest after walking no matter what type of shoe we're wearing. I would think the easiest way to measure time and distance spent in heels is to measure it via steps recorded on an iPhone. Mine is my wife's old iPhone5 and I check it everyday. Simply note the number of steps when changing into heels and then check back before changing into non high heels. Or just wear a pair of high heels all day and look at the number of steps taken which is also expressed in miles or kilometres. The only problem with this method is when the iPhone is charging. Either watch tv whilst it is charging or wear a FitBit watch which will capture every step. After a while of doing this one will have a very good idea of just how far one has walked not only in heels but throughout the day generally. HinH

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting. Because walking at home all day and reaching, let say,15000 steps is something which isn’t so difficult 

But just walking 5000 steps without any stop could be more difficult and even more in the street with uneven sidewalks. 

So,taking it as a challenge or a training makes sense,despite the fact not sure fun is granted .

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you @Pierre1961, walking 5,000 steps outside in the real world all at once is more difficult than walking 15,000 steps intermittently all day long, until you get used to it. On the other hand, depending on how high the heel, I'd rather walk a long distance than stand in one spot for an extended period of time. Also, I suppose I could easily rack up several hundred steps walking between my stove and kitchen sink when I am cooking, but should this really count the same as several hundred steps taken on a purposeful walk outside?

@HappyinHeels, the iphone idea sounds intriguing, but I can see one problem with it. I am not really sure how accurate the pedometer on it is. I say this because I must carry two phones now at work. One personal and one company. I know, sounds ridiculous. It IS ridiculous. But at any rate, both of them are iphones with the same "health" application, and they never agree with each other about how many steps I actually took on any given day, varying by 10% or more. People who actually care about such things tell me that the fitbit or some other such purpose-built device is the way to go if you are truly concerned about accuracy.

I agree that the terms and purpose of this experiment are a little vague, and perhaps even contradictory, but who cares? Let's just wait for the data and reports and see what happens!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The iphone technology only works if you have signal, We would walk along the beach at the base of the cliffs (outside coverage) for miles and it would say that we had very few steps.

But I'm old school and use a flip phone that I can be rough with. Besides it slips into the front pockets of my (super) skinny jeans, even my 311's.

Edited by Cali
Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the number of steps measured can vary but this is a function of the error range of consumer-grade electronics. I live about 3 miles/5 km west of the 88th meridian which crosses our road. I sometimes slow down and look at the GPS coordinate data on my car's display screen and can see a variance of up to 100 feet from other readings. Although the satellites themselves are accurate our consumer-grade devices have a built-in error rate. It is only when one gets to military-grade, and scientific-grade devices where absolute accuracy is required. I'm talking about going to six or seven decimal places in locator data instead of three or four. The health data is based upon the satellite function found on our phones. My point was to use something which so many people already have. As to having more than one phone I'd mention a method  I use in my weather observations and my work as a COOP observer with the National Weather Service (NWS).  I have three thermometres and take observations from all three. I add the results and take the average of all three which is an accepted practice within NWS. I suggest the same for anyone wanting to replicate our esteemed Danish member's experiment to get a more accurate result. HappyinHeels

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, HappyinHeels said:

I know the number of steps measured can vary but this is a function of the error range of consumer-grade electronics. I live about 3 miles/5 km west of the 88th meridian which crosses our road. I sometimes slow down and look at the GPS coordinate data on my car's display screen and can see a variance of up to 100 feet from other readings. Although the satellites themselves are accurate our consumer-grade devices have a built-in error rate. It is only when one gets to military-grade, and scientific-grade devices where absolute accuracy is required. I'm talking about going to six or seven decimal places in locator data instead of three or four. The health data is based upon the satellite function found on our phones. My point was to use something which so many people already have. As to having more than one phone I'd mention a method  I use in my weather observations and my work as a COOP observer with the National Weather Service (NWS).  I have three thermometres and take observations from all three. I add the results and take the average of all three which is an accepted practice within NWS. I suggest the same for anyone wanting to replicate our esteemed Danish member's experiment to get a more accurate result. HappyinHeels

The GPS based equipment that we use on construction sites these days is supposedly accurate to 1/8". I would believe that, when used correctly. We are able to do a lot of stuff that we couldn't before, like install underground conduit and stub it out of the ground before there's anything else there for reference. Yes, it's possible to screw it up, but usually they're pretty spot on, amazingly enough. However, these units cost thousands and thousands of dollars, and are not really suitable for carrying in your pocket.:cheeky:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seven decimal places is the practical working limit for most commercial surveying and the seventh decimal place of longitude at the equator is around 11.1 mm but at 45 degrees north latitude this becomes 7.87 mm or 0.3". That is about three credit cards thick. So the 1/8" accuracy they're telling you appears to be check out. They're doing some berm work across the road from our house and the fellow running the bulldozer said his machine had GPS equipment on it so that they don't need to stake out construction sites the way they used to. He said theirs is accurate to within an inch or 25 mm. How things have advanced! HinH

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the walking distance and the stiletto tips. I’ve just got a pair of seduce 2000 boots. They fit me so well and are so comfortable that I’ve been going for long walks, by the time I’d finished a 2 mile walk last night after doing the same the night before the tips were on the metal nails 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mitsysun1400 said:

I agree with the walking distance and the stiletto tips. I’ve just got a pair of seduce 2000 boots. They fit me so well and are so comfortable that I’ve been going for long walks, by the time I’d finished a 2 mile walk last night after doing the same the night before the tips were on the metal nails 

If you go to something just a little thicker, like the boots pictured, which have a 16 mm thick heel instead of 8 or 9 mm, you'll easily get 6-8x the wear out of them. I'm talking hard rubber replacements, who knows what you get from the factory? Sometimes they're great, sometimes they're awful.

VWVelma.png

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

One more thing to consider is stride length.  I suspect the distance covered with each step is less with heels and the higher the heel, the shorter the stride.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely right!

2 weeks ago I walked in the streets of Cologne,Germany,for approximately 2 hours and 10 kilometers 

my Iphone indicated 14000 stides. So an average stride of 0,70 m. Instead of 0,85 which is my normal stride in flat shoes 

A remark: the heel tips of my 14 cm thick block heels haven’t suffered at all. Wouldn’t have been the case with stilettos. I may not have been able to walk so long either? 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using High Heel Place, you agree to our Terms of Use.