Salomon Men's Quest 4D GTX Forces 2 EN Review: solid tactical boot with a few annoying surprises

I’ve been using Salomon boots for a while, mostly for hiking and a bit of light work stuff, so I was curious about this Quest 4D GTX Forces 2 EN version. On paper, it’s supposed to be the tougher, more tactical version of their hiking boot, aimed at military, law enforcement, and people carrying heavy loads over rough ground. Basically, if a normal hiking boot is a family car, this is supposed to be the 4x4. At this price, I expected something that really holds up under abuse.

I used them mainly for mixed stuff: long walks with a heavy backpack, wet forest trails, gravel, and some urban use (commuting on foot, standing around at work, that kind of thing). I’m not deployed in a desert somewhere, but I do give my boots a hard time. I wore them most days for a few weeks, in typical European weather: rain, mud, wet grass, cold mornings. So I got a decent feel for comfort, grip, and how they behave when they’re wet and dirty.

What stood out right away: they feel like a proper tactical boot, not a fashion item. The sole is stiff, the upper is supportive, and you can tell they’re built for load-bearing and stability more than for feeling light and bouncy. At the same time, they’re not bricks on your feet either. The weight is noticeable but reasonable for this category. If you’re used to running shoes, you’ll find them heavy; if you’re used to old-school leather combat boots, these will feel pretty light.

The big question is whether they justify the price compared to the standard Salomon Quest hiking version or other tactical boots. Short answer: they’re pretty solid on comfort and grip, but there are two key issues that bug me: the whole water resistance / GTX confusion, and the fact that for this money, the quality control and clarity around materials should be better. If you need a hard-use boot and like Salomon’s fit, they’re worth considering, but they’re not perfect and definitely not cheap.

Price-wise, these sit in the higher range for tactical/hiking boots. You’re definitely not in budget territory. For that money, I expect a few things: clear information about materials, solid build, and performance that matches the marketing. On comfort, grip, and general build quality, they mostly deliver. Where the value drops a bit is the unclear waterproof / GTX situation and the fact that some users clearly had issues with water getting in, especially compared to the standard Quest version.

If you compare them to cheaper tactical boots, you’re paying for the Salomon fit and midsole/sole design. The underfoot feel is better than many cheaper brands I’ve tried, and for long days with a heavy load, that matters. If you spend hours on your feet, the extra support and reduced fatigue can be worth the extra cash. On the other hand, if you only use them occasionally for light hikes or casual wear, you’re overbuying. There are plenty of mid-range hiking boots that will be more than enough for that.

Compared to other Salomon boots, the Forces line adds some work/tactical features like anti-static and puncture resistance, but you lose a bit on the clear waterproof guarantee (at least on this specific model listing). So if waterproofing is important, you might be better off with a confirmed Gore-Tex hiking version instead of this Forces EN variant. That’s where the value feels a bit off: the name suggests one thing, the specs and reviews suggest another.

In short, the value is decent but not outstanding. If you really need a tactical-style boot with good support and you like how Salomon fits your foot, you’ll probably be happy enough with the purchase. If you’re on the fence and mainly want a reliable waterproof hiking boot, I’d say look carefully at the exact model and maybe compare with the non-Forces Quest 4D or even other brands before dropping this kind of money.

Design-wise, this boot is very much “function first, looks second”. The pair I used is all black, round toe, ankle height, with a fairly chunky sole. No bright logos, no flashy accents, just a small Salomon branding that blends in. If you work in security, law enforcement, or just want something low profile, that’s a plus. Compared to more colorful Salomon hiking boots, these look more like work gear than hiking holiday shoes, which is probably the point.

The lacing system is what you’d expect from Salomon: a mix of regular eyelets lower down and open hooks higher up. That makes it easy to crank the ankle area tight or loosen it quickly. I liked that I could fine-tune the tension around the forefoot and then lock the ankle separately. The tongue is gusseted high enough to keep out small stones and splashes. The shaft height hits just above the ankle bone, so you get support without a full calf-high military boot feeling. For driving or kneeling, that height is actually quite practical.

One thing I noticed: the boot has quite a lot of panels and stitching, with mesh and synthetic overlays. That’s good for flexibility and reducing weight, but it also means more seams that can potentially be stress points over time. It doesn’t have that one-piece leather tank feel. If you like very simple, all-leather boots that you can abuse for years, this is a different philosophy. Here, the design is closer to a robust hiking boot, just blacked out and reinforced in key places.

From a pure style perspective, it’s decent but nothing more. You’re not buying this to show off. It looks professional, discreet, and purposeful. On the plus side, the shape of the toe box is fairly neutral – not clownishly wide, not narrow and pointy. Under jeans or cargo pants, it just looks like a serious boot. If you want a tactical boot that doesn’t scream “military cosplay” but still looks like proper gear, the design hits that balance pretty well.

Comfort is probably the strongest point of this boot. If you’ve worn Salomon hiking boots before, this will feel familiar. The 4D chassis gives a firm, supportive feel under the foot, but there’s still enough cushioning that you don’t feel like you’re walking on wood. I wore them for full days with a heavy backpack, and my feet felt supported, especially around the arch and ankle. Compared to basic army boots, these are way nicer out of the box. Break-in was minimal for me – a day or two of getting used to the stiffness, but no serious hotspots or blisters.

The fit is on the slightly snug side, especially in the midfoot, which is typical for Salomon. If you have wide feet, you might want to size up half a size or at least expect a bit of pressure at the start. The toe box isn’t super wide, but it wasn’t crushing my toes either. The heel hold is good; my heel didn’t slip, even going downhill with a load. That’s important if you’re on uneven terrain or doing a lot of stop-and-go movement. The lacing system lets you adjust things pretty well – you can keep the lower part snug and leave the top a bit looser if you need more ankle mobility.

One thing to note: the inner polar fiber and textile lining make the boot feel quite warm. For cold mornings and wet, windy days, that’s nice. For hot summer use or in very warm climates, your feet will probably sweat a fair bit. Breathability is okay but not great, especially compared to lighter trail shoes. If you’re mostly indoors or in mild weather, that’s not a big issue, but I wouldn’t pick these as my main boot for 30°C+ days unless I had to.

Overall, if your priority is support and all-day wear with weight on your back, comfort is a strong point. If you’re more into light, airy footwear and you hate feeling any stiffness, you’ll probably find them a bit overbuilt. For what they’re designed for – long days, heavy loads, rough ground – they feel pretty good on the feet. Just keep in mind the warmth and the slightly narrow midfoot when picking your size and socks.

On paper, the materials sound modern: mesh outer with synthetic overlays, textile lining with polar fiber, rubber outsole, and a composite insole. Salomon also mentions a puncture-resistant sole and anti-static properties, which you don’t usually get on standard hiking boots. So the base materials are clearly chosen with work/tactical standards in mind, not just weekend hikes. The outsole has a decent lug pattern and feels like a medium compound – grippy but not so soft that it melts away in a month.

The problem is the whole GTX / water resistance situation. The product name includes “GTX”, which normally screams “Gore-Tex” to everyone. Yet the Amazon data lists water resistance level as “water resistant”, not waterproof, and one reviewer straight up says, in Japanese, that this is not Gore-Tex and they wondered if it was fake. Another reviewer complains about water leaking in on first use, especially compared to the non-Forces version they had before, which apparently was fully waterproof. From my use, I’d say it handles light rain, wet grass, and splashes fine for a while, but if you stay in soaking conditions or walk through deep wet grass for a long time, moisture creeps in.

So either there are different variants under very similar names (some with Gore-Tex, some with just a membrane or coating), or the marketing is just not clear. In practice, I’d treat these as good water-resistant boots, not true waterproof boots. Fine for most day-to-day bad weather, but not something I’d trust for standing in streams or marching all day through heavy, wet terrain. For the price and the GTX label, that feels a bit disappointing. If waterproofing is critical for you, I’d double-check the exact model number (L40682500 vs L40723200) and look for a clearly marked Gore-Tex version.

Aside from that, the materials feel sturdy enough for their weight. The mesh isn’t flimsy, and the rubber rand and overlays protect the toe and sides decently against rocks and debris. It’s not bombproof like full-grain leather, but it’s a good compromise between toughness and flexibility. Just be aware: this is a technical, composite-style boot, not an old-school leather boot you can re-sole easily and beat up for ten years. If you accept that, the materials are pretty solid, but the unclear waterproof story is the main downside here.

Durability is always hard to judge in a short period, but I can at least talk about build quality and how they’ve handled initial abuse. Out of the box, the stitching and glue lines looked clean. No obvious loose threads, no gaps between the sole and upper. After a few weeks of use in mud, gravel, and wet conditions, the structure still feels tight and there’s no early delamination. The toe area takes scuffs reasonably well; the rubber and overlays protect the mesh from tearing on the first contact with rocks or debris.

That said, this is still a mesh + synthetic boot, not a full leather tank. If you’re really brutal with your footwear – crawling on sharp rubble, constant contact with metal edges, or dragging your toes on concrete – you’ll eventually chew through the overlays and mesh faster than you would with heavy-duty leather. The puncture-resistant sole is a plus if you step on nails or sharp objects, but that doesn’t make the upper indestructible. For most hiking, patrol, and normal tactical use, it should be fine, but I wouldn’t expect it to last as long as a top-end full leather boot under extreme abuse.

The outsole wear after my use is minimal, which is a good sign. The rubber compound seems to balance grip and longevity decently. If you mostly walk on asphalt, any boot will wear faster, but this one doesn’t feel like it’s going to melt away instantly. The inner lining also held up fine – no pilling or tearing yet, and the heel area didn’t show those early signs of wear you sometimes see when the lining is cheap.

Overall, I’d rate durability as pretty solid for a technical boot, but not bulletproof. If you’re a soldier on deployment or a cop on daily street duty, expect to eventually replace them like any other work boot. If you’re a weekend warrior and occasional heavy user, they’ll probably last you a good while. Just don’t buy them expecting a decade of abuse; they’re built more for performance and comfort than for being totally indestructible.

In real use, the boot performs like a serious hiking/tactical hybrid. The grip on mixed terrain is solid: wet forest trails, gravel, mud, and wet grass were all handled without drama. The lugs aren’t as aggressive as some pure mountain boots, but they’re deep enough to bite into soft ground and still feel stable on rock or tarmac. On oily or smooth surfaces, the slip-resistant outsole helps, though you still need to be careful on really polished floors – it’s not magic, but better than many standard hiking soles I’ve used.

Stability with a heavy backpack is where these boots shine. The sole is stiff torsionally, so your foot doesn’t twist easily on uneven ground. The ankle support is enough to keep you confident stepping on rocks or side slopes, but not so high that it locks your ankle completely. I could kneel, squat, and drive in them without feeling like I was fighting the boot. If your work or hobby involves a lot of up-and-down movement, that flexibility is a plus.

Where performance drops a bit is in sustained wet conditions. As mentioned earlier, these are more water resistant than waterproof in practice. They can handle rain, puddles, and short wet grass, but if you’re out for hours in soaking conditions, water can creep in, especially around flex points. One Amazon user mentioned leaks on first use compared to the non-Forces version, and I can believe that. For a boot with “GTX” in the name and a tactical positioning, I expected better in this area. If your job involves standing in wet fields all day, I’d be cautious.

In terms of all-day fatigue, they do a good job. The 650 g per boot (approx) isn’t featherweight, but for a protective, puncture-resistant tactical boot, it’s reasonable. After long walks, my legs felt less tired than with older, heavier leather boots. If you’re used to trail runners, you’ll notice the extra weight, but you also get more protection and stability in return. Overall, performance is strong in grip and support, decent in comfort, and average in waterproofing. For mixed outdoor and duty use, they get the job done; just don’t treat them like full-on rain boots.

The Salomon Quest 4D GTX Forces 2 EN is sold as a “military and tactical boot” based on their popular Quest hiking boot. The idea is simple: take the comfort and sole design from their trekking line, then beef it up with features for people who spend days on their feet in rough places. So you get ankle-high support, a fairly aggressive rubber outsole, and a mix of mesh and synthetic materials on top. It’s aimed at guys carrying weight, moving over bad ground, and needing something more serious than a casual hiking shoe.

On the spec sheet, they highlight things like oil and slip-resistant outsole, puncture-resistant sole, and anti-static properties. That’s more in line with work/tactical boots than pure hiking boots. The boot is also labelled as water resistant, not fully waterproof, which is where the confusion starts. The name says “GTX” and a lot of people associate that with Gore-Tex, but at least one reviewer clearly says their pair is not Gore-Tex, and mine doesn’t behave like a classic Gore-Tex boot either. So if you’re expecting a proper waterproof membrane, you need to double-check the exact model code you’re buying.

In terms of use cases, I’d say this boot is clearly built for:

• Long days on foot with a backpack or tactical gear
• Rugged terrain: rocks, trails, uneven ground
• People who need more stability than a trail runner but don’t want a full leather brick

Overall, in presentation and concept, it’s a fairly straightforward product: a tactical twist on a proven hiking platform. The problem is that the marketing blur (GTX in the name, mixed info about waterproofing) doesn’t fully match what you get on your feet. As long as you treat it as a tough, water-resistant boot rather than a fully waterproof Gore-Tex fortress, expectations line up better with reality.