The LSA ( Land Sea Air) Terrain and Water boots have been out for about a year but they’ve been updated from earlier models. The uppers are the same for both models.
The Terrain boot features a Lenzi puncture resistant sole and incorporates drainage holes like found on he old Jungle Boot. Currently, these are a 6″ boot but Oakley is working on an 8″ version. Available in MultiCam, Black, Desert and Coyote sizes 6-13, 14.
The LSA Boot Water uses ribbon laces as well as Scothguard treatment to lower water absorption. The quick drain sole relies on steel mesh to protect the foot and stippling for a sure grip on wet surfaces.
Tags: Oakley
The water boots are great, for swimming with fins…
But day long walk about comfort in these Chinese manufactured boots leaves a lot to be desired.
The USA manufactured Oakley boots are quite comfortable for the long haul!
They’re water boots. They could be built in NASA’s secret lab in zero gravity on he international space station, but if they don’t have much of a midsole in order to keep from absorbing water they aren’t going to be that comfortable after an all day hike.
As for wear they are made, foreign made footwear actually have the potential of being more comfortable than domestic manufactured because we don’t have access to EVA foam for mid soles here in the US.
SSD
No to get into a pi$$ing contest with Mods….
But, I’m not sure where you get this info…
“As for wear they are made, foreign made footwear actually have the potential of being more comfortable than domestic manufactured because we don’t have access to EVA foam for mid soles here in the US.”
EVA is most certainly available in many USA component markets.
I have personally procured EVA foam from this company for prototype products.
http://www.foamcraftusa.net/index.htm
Further, several USA companies will cut EVA foram for mid-soles. Perhaps you meant, EVA foam midsoles can not be sourced in USA market for pennies as in the Chinese market.
I have worn the LSA Water Boots with fins since we were offered prototypes for evaluation. They are great at what they do, shed water from the internal cavity. But, as far as being a great or even decent “walk about” boot once ashore, they are not. And we provided this info and Oakley understood our comments.
Last year, we also contacted this Berry Compliant company for EVA molding and fabrication…
http://www.remprod.com/moldedevafoam.html
Also, Thermoforming Fabric & Foam is Berry compliant provided of EVA foam products.
The EVA material is of US origin?
Absolutely!
Thermoforming offers Berry Compliant components.
As you may well know USC, Title 10, Section 2533a applies to DoD/DFARS procurement of textile components (metals were excluded some time ago). The textile component includes both natural and synthetic. The primary exclusion under the Code is to demonstrate that a specific textile/component or a suitable alternative is not available domestically.
Of course, buried in the code are numerous other exclusions and waiver to the Amendment.
But, specifically, EVA foam is most certainly available through domestic manufacturers. The reason there are so few EVA foam manufacturers in the US is due to cost of manufacturing setup and compliance with EPA regulations. Extremely toxic gases are emitted in the manufacturing of EVA foam and these gases must be trapped and contained.
I do agree EVA is predominantly manufactured in foreign locales where no such regulations are imposed and the gases are likely transferred directly into the atmosphere.
As far as I know there is no Berry waiver for EVA.
Wavers and exclusions are granted on a transaction/per contract basis, not necessarily by specific product.
And as we have seen with DHS uniforms, the waiver can be granted for “International good will” by permitting a foreign ally/neighbor to manufacture textile products that are readily available domestically.
The Kissell Amendement included DHS procurement under the Berry Amendment and specifies such exceptions under International Agreements in the 2009 law.
Actually, they are granted by specific product and industry has to demonstrate to Congress that they can’t fulfill DoD’s requirements with domestic materials. One example of this is FR rayon. It is produced by Lenzig in Austria and brought to the US to be spun into thread and is used by TenCate to produce Defender M fabric for FR garments for the Army and Marine Corps.
These days, Berry waivers per transaction are rarely granted.
The Kissell amendment’s unfortunate wording does not alter DoD’s requirement to follow Berry for sourcing. It was just used as a loophole by DHS to allow them to induct business as usual. Border Patrol Agents wearing foreign made garments; utterly despicable.
So far your comments regarding EVA and Berry have been all over the boards with no straight answer on whether there is actually any Berry compliant EVA. If there was, Soldiers would be wearing it, as it is lighter than the polyurethane materials currently used in issue footwear.