Dr marten 1460 MIE VS Alden Indy

[Lucasnicholson]

I can't decide between a pair of oxblood dr marten made in England boots or a a pair of alden indys. I appreciate they are quite different boots but I have borrowed it down to that. My main concerns with the aldens are the leather sole durability and if they will be as comfortable as dr martens. Any previous experience would be appreciated.
The boots will mainly be worn for light hiking walking in the city a good 5/6 miles a day through all weathers. Worn with a selection of jeans and heavy cotton trousers.

Many thanks for all your help

 

[death shot]

Solovair hawkins.

Done.

 

[Michigan Planner]

I have had both Dr. Marten's 1460 (albeit over a decade ago) and Alden Indy boots. The Dr. Marten's were what turned me off to boots as a casual footwear choice for years. I found them to be incredibly heavy and uncomfortable. Even after months of steady wear they never seemed to break in at all. The Indy boots on the other hand were very comfortable right from the start and felt noticeably lighter than what I remember my Doc Martens being.

I agree that the leather sole on the Alden's probably isn't ideal for your use but if you look around, you can find plenty of options for the Indy boot on a commando sole or you could have them resoled onto a commando sole or something else you find more comfortable.

 

[ElDave]

The standard Indy is not a leather sole. It's rubber, although smooth.

I've owned both boots - can't stand Docs anymore. They feel and wear clunky. Even though the Indy is a substantial boot, it doesn't wear clunky unless you're shifting a car with a small cockpit (Lotus or similar). I think the Alden Indy is a far better boot. You could get the 405c (Indy with small tooth sole) from Leffot, or the 404 Kudu (heavily oiled leather with a large tooth sole) from a number of retailers, such as The Shoe Mart.