I’ve got 2.5 years of hard abuse in my Lowa Tibets and they are still going really strong. I’d never paid that much for a pair of shoes but with my line of work I knew I’d end up paying more over the course of a few years in cheaper boots that wouldn’t make it more than a year. They are great for saddle hunting too with the stiff “platform” sole.
Positives:
1. Freakin rugged as all heck
2. Goretex liner, so much more breathable than my rubber muck boots
3. Outsole consist of high quality rubber, heavy lug soles that haven’t broke down over miles of use on concrete/asphalt
4. Rubber rim protects toes and feet from kicking stumps and rocks
5. Completely waterproof
6. Lots of ankle support for hill country/hiking
7. More versatile than rubber hunting boots
8. Pretty handsome boots
Negatives
1. Shoe lace stud popped off one of my boots about 1 month in, but never noticed any performance issues without it for my use
2. Not as “scent-free” as rubber hunting boots
3. Not insulated, although with heavy merino socks and a liner, every bit as warm as any insulated boots I’ve tried, perhaps because of the breathability
4. Heavier than something like a lightweight hiker, but the trade off is much more support/durability
I’ve never tried Crispi’s, but I’ve had a pair of Kenetrek rancher duck boots that broke down faster than many cheap boots I’ve owned. Perhaps the Kenetrek mountaineering boots are different. For me the Lowa Tibet’s are absolutely worth the $$, with the only real set back being the initial cost. As I said earlier, with their durability, the upfront cost ends up being cheaper than the 4-5 pairs of cheaper boots that you’d run through in the time it takes for your lowas to tank out. Plus, you’d have the comfort, protection, and support for all of the years of use that you wouldn’t get from cheaper boots.
Hope this helps.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk