Should boots like Nike and Rocky C4T be authorized?

Its up to your commander. I have been wearing Nike boots for 3 units now. Once you try them you will never go back to basic issue.

This site has all authorized equipment http://www.peosoldier.army.mil/equipment/

The nike boot is too versatile and lightweight. It prevents injuries and makes serving more comfortable. Of course it must be against regulation. We need heavy crap that weighs us down and makes it near impossible to rush for cover or actually chase down an insurgent. We need to be wearing 80 lbs of bullshit so when they shoot at us they can ditch their gun, flip us off, jump a small fence and run down a narrow alley laughing their asses off at how stupid we are (sarcasm). This call pisses me off. If I were Sergeant major of the army I would be unauthorizing any equipment that slows my army down, causes injuries, or gives an advantage to the enemy.

I was researching for new boots and what are authorized and came across this discussion. I was close to buying the Rocky C4T until I stumbled across their new boot, the C5C. Rocky specifically states the C4T isn't authorized but the newer C5C is. It also looks like a better boot anyway. I didn't realize the C4T's or Nike's were unauthorized as I see so many people wearing them.

It is annoying to me that troops wear all kind of different boots. I look down the ranks and I see at least five or more different types of boots. 

Reading through this forum I see a lot of folks defending the Nike boots. I know many Soldiers wear them, but they are still unauthorized. The current DA Pam 670-1 states:

(3) Optional boots.
(a) As an option, Soldiers may wear commercial boots of a design similar to that of the Army combat boot (tan), as
authorized by the commander. The boots must be between 8 to 10 inches in height and made of tan flesh-side out
cattlehide leather, with a plain toe and a soling system matching the color of the tan upper materials. Rubber and
polyether polyurethane are the only outsole materials that are authorized. The soling materials will not exceed 2 inches
in height, when measured from the bottom of the outsole, and will not extend up the back of the heel or boot or over
the top of the toe. The exterior of the boot upper will not contain mesh but will be constructed of either all leather or a
combination of leather and nonmesh fabric. Soldiers may wear optional boots in lieu of the Army combat boot (tan), as
authorized by the commander; however, they do not replace issue boots as a mandatory possession item.

Nikes are made of synthetic leather and feature EVA foam in portions of the outsole. Therefore they do not meet authorized standards. I know that folks love them, but just because a person likes a thing doesn't mean it is authorized. If that were the case, then we would see all kinds of craziness in our formations.

In my book a standard is a standard and should be upheld. Just because something is nice or someone else is doing it doesn't make it right. There are plenty of other good options out there other than Nike.

Put them on and walk in front of your CSM...

I have the UA boots, never had an issue.

I agree with 2LT Anisimov on this one.  According to the reg, these are authorized.  Another litmus test that I use is when I see CSMs wearing them, you know it is authorized because I haven't met a CSM yet that doesn't uphold and enforce the standards!  I personally like the Nike boots and have been wearing them for the past ~4 years, and they are awesome.  They are lightweight, durable, and they require almost no time to break them in.  I haven't had a single blister from wearing them either, and they sure took a beating in Afghanistan!  The other thing I really like about them is that they fit the same as the Nike shoe sized for the Nike free.  It takes the guess work out of ordering online, where you can sometimes find them at decent discounts.

I know i'm a little late to this thread, but in the ALARACT, it states that boots must be made of genuine cattle hide leather. The Nikes, Rocky C4Ts, and several other popular boots do not fall within this guidance. Do I like it, no. I loved my Nikes, especially to run in, until I found out. I work at the NCO Academy and it's an issue we make corrections on all the time. My biggest issue is those who are corrected and make no change. Most of these offenders are officers. Once we show NCO's in writing where it says you can't do it, they adapt. Officers on the other hand tend to take an "I'm above the regulation" attitude which gets handed down to the lower enlisted, which obviously is not the right example to set. Think about it this way, if a 1LT wore Nike boots to formation and one of his subordinates wore flip-flops to the formation, does the 1LT have the right to correct the Soldier? Although it's an extreme example, it's the same. Unauthorized is unauthorized, is unauthorized regardless of the extremity to which it is taken.