We earn from sales through Amazon affiliate links on this page. Read the Full Disclaimer here
The Hunter and Dr. Martens boots are old boys in the business of producing good, comfortable, and convenient boots. They have been around for quite a long time and are still doing their bidding in footwear production.
They are common sights in the British States, having had a deep root in the British cultural development. Nonetheless, I will let you peek into the uniqueness of these boots and the story behind their success.
Keep scrolling down as I compare these iconic items for foot coverage, and also deliver a verdict on them.
Major difference between Hunter Boots and Dr. Martens Boots
The major difference between Hunter boots and Dr. Martens is the variety of materials used in their production. While Hunter boots are made from rubber whether synthetic or naturally sourced; Dr. Martens is more of leather.
The upper material used on Dr. Martens is leather, although its sole is made of rubber. Also, the Hunter boots were first made in the late 1800s, before Dr. Martens came around in 1947.
Furthermore, another difference exists between these boots and it is related to the price and purpose of these boots.
The market value placed on most of Dr. Martens’s boots is way above that of Hunter’s boots. The reason for this is understandable as the Dr. Martens boots are made of leather, which is expensive.
In like manner, the Hunter boots are specially made to combat inconvenience posed by elements, especially from water and muck.
On the other hand, the Doc Martens boots are made for working both for men and women alike and are also worn by most people to send a fashion statement.
The structure of the Hunter boots is also different from that of Doc Martens, in the sense that the latter allows for a lace-up closure structure while the former goes with an all-enclosed structure with only a foot opening for wearing.
It is very clear to say that Hunter boots and Dr. Martens boots have left their mark in the industry of footwear manufacturing.
And they are equally relative to each other, as both of them have a strong presence in Britain.
It is equally an obvious fact that both of these boots have striking differences that distinguishes them from each other.
Brief History of Hunter Boots
The establishment that eventually gave rise to the production of Hunter boots was founded in January 1856 under the moniker of North British Rubber Company, a footwear company which is known for rubber Wellington Boots.
The enterprise was founded by Henry Lee Noris, an American entrepreneur from Jersey City, New Jersey, and his partner Spencer Thomas Parmelee from Connecticut.
The duo came to Scotland to work on a patent of Charles Goodyear to produce India rubber over shoes/boots. The company currently has its headquarters in Edinburgh, Scotland.
The brand started gaining ground but didn’t get much recognition, until the outbreak of World War 1, which issued the mass production of the boots.
The authorities saw the boots as better military footwear for the soldiers that were working in the muck tunnels and trenches all over the world.
After the success of World War 1which favored the English, the boots got credit for their impact in winning and secured by the Allied forces.
Similarly, the company was once again called upon to make the now-popularized boots during the advent of World War 11, and the company was plunged into work once again has delivered over a million pairs for World War 1.
All these furthered the public acceptance of these boots as they were now common among farmers and other workers who held to deal with muck all day long.
The most famous boot from Hunter the Original Green Wellington was made in 1955 just about the same time the Royal Hunter boot was launched.
However, the Hunter boots brand was not built that easy as it also passed through a similar ownership transition like most companies, but remained committed to the quality standard.
The Hunter boots are two times the recipient of the British Royal Warrants, first from the Duke of Edinburgh in 1976 and then from the Queen in 1986.
These boots are still currently made the same way it was made back then, making them true to their origin. The Hunter boots vary from the high-calf to the ankle-length boots, with different styles like the Hunter Chelsea boots.
They are still made from naturally occurring rubber and are available in both men’s and women’s styles. These boots make an obvious entrance in the world of boots with their iconic red Hunter Logo.
Pros:
- Quality natural rubber.
- Sturdy and Waterproof.
- Anti-skid.
- Smooth and fitting silhouette.
- Timeless designs.
Cons:
- The glossy color fades out quickly.
- Limited color variants.
- Not breathable.
Brief History of Doc Martens
Klaus Martens is a German doctor who needed softer boots after he broke his ankle at war. His little inventory back then started what we know today as Doc Martens.
Doc Martens also known as Dr. Martens, DMs, or simply Docs was founded in 1947. The Nazi doctor was injured and he wanted boots that exceeded the comfort offered by the regular standard issue World War 11 army boots.
So, he configured his boots and added a soft leather on top and an air-padded sole which aided traction.
However, his inventory started selling big after he met his old-time friend Herbert Funck, who took delight in the boots and decided to go into business with him.
Their first factory opened in 1959, in Munich. Nevertheless, the production was moved to Britain after the company was sold to a British Shoe making company known as Griggs Company shortly after.
The new company had its production spot in the Cobbs Lane Factory in Woldston, Northamptonshire, where it continued operating until 2018.
Dr. Martens 1460 boots which were the first to be made under Griggs company in 1960, with its iconic eight-hole eyelets.
The company brought the boots into the market with the unique Yellow stitching, the ‘AirWair’ trademark, and equally branded the boots as Dr. Martens boots.
The boots were popular with factory workers, postmen, and security operatives, but made it into the fashion scene when Pete Townshend, a member of the famous British band The Who wore them on stage.
It gained further recognition as it became a footwear code for the skin-head culture.
Dr. Martens’s boots are currently sold in most department stores as high-end boots and are available in both ankle-high styles and other styles shorter than that.
Pros:
- Air-cushioned soles.
- Oil and acid resistant.
- Quality upper leather.
- Anti-skid.
- Sturdy but fashionable.
Cons:
- Rubber soles wear out easily.
- Rubber heels get borrowed with holes.
- Hard to break in.
Head-to-Head Comparison of Hunter Boots and Doc Martens Boots
This is the part where I get to place these two boots on the scale of comparison and weigh their efficacy, quality, and then their purpose. The two boots reflect their ideologies and the purpose which they stand for.
However, my view about these boots is in no-bid discrediting any previously held notions, they are just observatory. I will base my comparison on the following basis:
Material
The material used for the production of the Hunter boots is rubber. Initially, the type of rubber used by the company in the production of these boots is naturally sourced.
This is the type of rubber gotten from plants and not synthetic. The overall make-up of these boots is rubber, from the soles to the upper body; the type of rubber which is made into a strong and sturdy form.
This type of rubber is used because of its quality, strong form, and texture which is not permeable by water.
On the other hand, Doc Martens are made from mostly soft leather and rubber. The leather goes to the upper body, while the rubber (mostly synthetic) is used for the sole. I also think that the use of leather is the reason why most of the boots are expensive.
Price
Just like I said earlier on, the Doc Marten boots are costly as compared to the Hunter boots. Although the Hunter boots pass off as a high-end boots brand, it is not as expensive as the Doc Marten boots.
The natural rubber used in the production of the Hunter might be costly, but it is not as expensive as the leather used on the Doc Martens.
The Doc Martens boots like the Dr. Martens 1460s go for a starting price of around $150 for men, while that for women starts at around $135.
Similarly, the Hunter boots come up in price by passing the $100 threshold. It also reinstates its position as high-end boots with price, which seems expensive compared to other rubber boots of the same standard and quality.
Build Quality
The quality of the production process which is used for these boots is high and standard. Just like the Hunter boots which use the vulcanizing method for their sole, the Doc Martens boots have their soles made with PVC sole units which are both oil resistant and acid resistant.
The Yellow stitching used in the outer sole detailing of most Dr. Martens boots does not only perform the function of design but also fortifies the strong status of the soles.
This makes it more formidable, and hard to split from the main body of the boots. Also, the anti-skid features done over the back of the soles of these boots protect slip adding to its quality.
Style and Design
The design of the Hunter boots is nothing different from most of the boots which you see around, although it is one of the earliest to come up with such a design.
The boots are made in such a way that it covers the foot totally, and go up to the ankle and even further high to the calf as is the case with the Original Green Welly boots.
The boots are styled with a low rise heel and the brand logo on the front side of the boots which rests on the calf. In some recent designs, the boots come with a metal buckle, which doesn’t do much work other than a mere design.
If you have seen any of the regular boots worn by soldiers during the Second World War, then you know where the design of the Dr. Martens boot comes from.
These boots are made to be a lighter version of the war boots, with an air-padded sole and softer upper leather.
The boots add to its feature metal eyelets which make it look profound and then the label strap which hangs at the back of the leg opening.
Most of the Dr. Martens boots which I have worn and seen all have a rounded toe structure, with an exception of a metal rounded structure in some.
Purpose
I heard about people wearing Hunter boots as usual boots, with casual clothes, and to more formal events and I marvel at how much these boots have evolved.
The ideology behind these boots which births its purpose is to achieve more comfort and protection against elements.
I won’t say that this practice of wearing them normally is absurd, because even a known actress styled these boots with a custom-made wedding dress.
On the contrary, Dr. Martens’s boots are created with the working class people in mind. For both factory workers, event caterers, and policemen, these boots prove effective.
They also have a fashion statement to make in their form.
Durability
The durability of these boots has sparked a series of dialogues, and most of the comments which I gathered show that people are displeased with the recent quality of these boots.
If you are to get any of them made recently, especially Dr. Martens boot which now outsources its products to China; just bear in mind you won’t get the same quality as those made in England. Aside from that, both the Hunter and DOCs boots last longer.
Final Verdict
My verdict on these jeans is based on their purpose and design. With that said, if you are looking at getting a pair of boots which you can wear to work without having to draw askance looks from people, then Doc Martens is the deal for you.
But if you spend more time on your farm, probably tending to seedlings or weeding, Hunter boots will be the right choice for you. However, I fall in the first category so Doc Martens is my right pick.
Conclusion
This is where I wrap up this article, which has taken you through the story of two of the best boot-producing companies.
You can check out these boots the next time you schedule shopping add them to your shopping list because you won’t be spending your dollars in vain.
Related:
