BORELLI CONSULTING: Tactical Equipment Reviews

Corcoran Matterhorn: A Trio of Excellent Boots
19 December 2005

A few months ago I met the Vice President of Corcoran / Matterhorn, Cove Shoe Company. Cove Shoe Company actually owns Corcoran / Matterhorn. Now, I imagine like most of us, I'd never heard of Cove Shoe Company. In 1982 I become familiar with Corcoran boots because of their famous "Jump Boots". Like most soldiers in boot camp, I would dearly have loved to get my issued combat boots to shine and look as good as those Jump Boots did (little did I know the work that would go into that shine). As a police officer in the late '80s and into the '90s, I envied those who could afford to purchase boots like the now famous Matterhorns. Their rugged sole and distinctive style was easily recognized anytime it was seen.

After I met with the VP of Corcoran / Matterhorn - and discussed with her the possibility of evaluating some of their footwear - I received three pairs of boots. I'm a few years older now than I was in the late '80s, and perhaps slightly jaded when it comes to critiquing equipment, uniforms, and boots. Suffice to say I wasn't as excited as I thought I would be when I received three pair of Matterhorns: the Style Numbers are: 1640 (7" waterproof leather Mach), 1940 (9" waterproof leather tactical boot), and the 1998 (8" waterproof leather and cordura combat boot). I can happily say that I've worn each pair a fair amount of time under various conditions and can report on their performance.

I'm going to review these boots in the order of their Sytle number. Starting off with the 1640 we find a 7" waterproof leather boot. In some ways it reminds me of some competitors boots that are popular with overseas special military and counter-terrorism units. The all leather upper provides good support for your ankle (at least it did for mine), and the 1200 Denier Cordura tongue pads the instep of your foot and front of your ankle from being cut into if you tend to lace your boots tight. The boot features a waterproof but breathable GorTex inner layer in addition to a moisture wicking lining. I wore these boots quite a bit in warm conditions and never felt my feet sweat at all. When I took them off at the end of a twelve hour duty day my feet were still comfortable; not sweaty; and not over heated at all. On a couple of the colder nights (down into the low forties when I wore them) my feet never got cold either. For safety, the boots have built-in lateral composite support and shank. I would like to see a protective toe cap of some sort, but I'm sure that would affect the comfort of the boot (and probably not in a positive manner). The lacing system is nylon loop that frustrated me with being slow. Yeah, I'm spoiled for speed laces or small D-rings, but I'm spoiled just the same. The lacing system is quite secure and, since it's soft nylon, very comfortable. Just the same, I'm a lazy kind of guy and I'd prefer something easier to lace. Then again, I learned that the laces are long enough that I don't have to UNlace the boots as far as I do some others. So I was lazy and frustrated... and it was my fault!

I don't care for "chukka" boots at all. Anything under 7" just doesn't feel right for me. So, I considered the 1640 a rather minimalist boot for duty use. It performs well in that. Off-duty? I've worn these boots for some walks (five miles or so), but have not tried running / jogging in them. They are exceptionally comfortable for walking and not heavy at all (22 ounces each as I weigh them). Another pair of boots I'm quite happy to have.

Moving on we get to the 1940s. No, not the year: the style number. Once again, if you're not careful, you'll think these are made by a competitor. Closer inspection shows that they are distinctly Matterhorns. These nine-inchers are also all leather, waterproof, and include the composite lateral support and shank. The 1940 also incorporates "high abrasion rubber tip and counters". Although there is no toe cap, the "high abrasion rubber tip" forms an extra supported side section that fully encompasses the toe, adding to the amount of crush protection provided without seriously impacting comfort. The ankle is treated in the same way, and I think this is the "counters" refered to in the Matterhorn materials. The rubber add-on certainly increases the level of support that is provided in the heel cup and angle area. To maintain comfort in movement, Matterhorn put horizontal ridges in the leather at the back of the achilles tendon. This adds a measure of flexibility without compromising support on the heel or sides of the ankle. As we saw with the 1640, the tongue is 1200 Deniere Cordura and provides a level of padding that protects your instep and shin from being bit by tight laces. The 1940s incorporate the same nylon lacing system that the 1640s do and I have all the same comments about it. If I wasn't so lazy, it'd be a joy. Learning to overcome my laziness was an interesting lesson. These boots also proved quite comfortable and warm without overheating my feet. There was a short break-in time. It took me a couple hours on the range before I could comfortably (read easily) assume a kneeling position (toes out, instep down) without effort to push the boot down flat. After about a dozen repetitions or so, the boots conformed to my efforts and positioning. To do something different, I wore these boots to take my son out on a five mile hike through the local state park. The hike took us along a dirt trail, up a rocky path, through some muddy sections, along wet and dry sand and more. I never had any traction issues and the boot's lug soles shed mud / sand with normal walking action (which is good because I didn't like walking with the extra weight on the bottom of my boots). I don't have a huge preference for boots that are nine-inches tall, but the extra protection is certainly a necessity at times. If you like that height, or need the extra protection, these are the boots for you.

Last, but far from least, is the Style 1998. These are the boots that automatically pop into my mind when I think, "Matterhorns". Of course, certain mountain units of our military services have made the 10" version of these boots quite popular, but as I said above, I prefer a boot seven to eight inches high. These are 8" and I found them to be quite enjoyable to wear. Thanks to the GoreTex lining they are also waterproof with a tastefully styled leather / cordura upper. These boots are not insulated, but I still found them to be adequately warm in the previously mentioned low-forties temperatures. Built to really support and protect a soldier's foot, the 1998s have a Cambrella Breathable moisture wicking lining; a shock absorbing polyurethane midsole (those with high arches will really appreciate that); a removable shock absorbing cushion insert (in other models as well); a fiberglass shank and an unspecified type of toe cap (but it's hard and protective). For all that, I found these boots to be quite comfortable after a short break-in period. Bearing in mind that I'm a firm believer that military issue combat boots tend to break in the foot, rather than the foot breaking in the boots, I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it was to get these boots conformed to my foot and ankle shape. The heel cup was sufficiently deep without leaving me feel trapped in it, and the support provided to the ankle was good. Because of the stiff leather back and achilles support, these weren't quite as comfortable to kneel it, but it could still be done. On the other hand, I'd feel much more confident wearing these through a building that had construction materials, broken glass, or combat debris on the floor. The lacing system (nice metal hoops that I could quickly feed laces through) was to my liking. However, the tongue is leather and doesn't have that nice padding to protect against lace bite. On one or two occassions I tied them a bit snug and ended up with those nice red grooves in the top of my foot when I took the boots off fourteen hours later.

Of the three boots reviewed here I would prefer them for the following duties as specified:

1640: Administrative / Training duties. Amazingly comfortable - like wearing protective high-top hiking shoes or tennis shoes.

1940: Tactical Police Work. Lots of freedom of movement with an acceptable level of comfort and protection in equal parts.

1998: Combat use. While they may not be great for work in cold weather (below freezing), they certainly offer the highest level of protection and durability for the soldier's foot.

I should mention that all three styles took a shine easily, and held it within reason. They are all a long way from the Corcoran "Jump Boots" I once so envied, but they are certainly a better match for today's operational environments.

Be safe!

I have a comment on this article.

Also, don't forget to read the Recreational Equipment Evaluations:

5.11 5-In-1 Jacket-----19 December 2005
Plus others!!!

Check out this week's Highlighted Training Article about how "Active Shooter" response training needs to evolve to answer today's terrorist threats.

For a listing of reviews in chronological order, GO HERE.

New American Truth eMagazine
Dedicated to ALL citizens who oppose terrorism and injustice.
Subscribe Today!

Subscribe To New American Truth