For casual winter use, this old style pac boot design is hard to beat. It's easy to see why they're a popular seller. They feel like a pair of waterproof, insulated snow slippers--they don't provide much cushioning or support, but give your feet the freedom they crave--especially if you have wide feet like mine.

A potentially misleading description in the "Product Features" is that they're described as having "full grain embossed" leather uppers. According to the International Union of Leather Technologists and Chemists Societies web site, full grain leather means "Leather bearing the original grain surface as exposed by removal of the epidermis and with none of the surface removed by buffing, snuffing or splitting."

They don't mean full grain, embossed leather. It would be more accurately described as light weight leather that has been embossed to simulate the appearance of full grain leather.

Pros:

1. Light weight, warm, waterproof
2. Amost as comfortable as a pair of slippers
3. The wide toebox accomodates wide feet
3. Low profile "herringbone" tread is great for snowshoeing and doesn't accumulate snow
4. Well stitched (at least my pair was)

Cons:

1. Compared to my old Sorels, the toe box has a slightly lower "ceiling," which results in a more snug fit and makes it difficult to reinsert the felt liner--at least when the boots are new. This is probably a minor point.
2. The boots don't provide much cushioning or foot support, and so may not be suitable for extended use for people who need extra support.
3. The flap/loop that holds the bottom of the bootlace will trap snow and moisture, providing an entry point for moisture once the waterproofing breaks down. This is a design flaw.
4. The rubber bottoms are susceptible to punctures and will not be as durable as some winter boots. This is the tradeoff you get for comfort and flexibility.

Overall, this is a good light use snow boot (although some people wear them all day long). They work well with snowshoes and are suitable for light winter hiking, running errands, working in the yard, etc. Due to their lack of support and cushioning and low breathability, they are less suitable for extended use or hiking on bare ground.

Notes:

My pair was true to size. I wear a 10 1/2 EE but the 11D's fit well.
The -40F rating is optimistic for long term exposure. These aren't expedition boots.

****11.19.14 Update:
I've downgraded my rating to 3 stars because after 5 years of light, winter-only wear, both boots have developed large cracks in the rubber on both sides in the front area of the boots. Other than that, the boots still look fine; but with the cracks, they're not very useful to me. I haven't seen this happen in other Sorel boots that I've owned. I have to conclude that these boots were made using an inferior rubber compound. Maybe it's a problem that has since been corrected--let's hope so.