My wife and I have some similarly purposed GT socks. All five pair continue to have their changing yet acceptable merits after a dozen+ or so years. My go-to pair is a Cabela's brand but I also have rain pants with velcro/neoprene seals. I consider myself to be dry - enough - until mired in unforeseen circumstances....

I stubbornly used my SealSkinz WaterBucket socks for six years so as to force down the cost per year. For the first two years I was convinced it was user error, so I tried shaving my ankles and duct tape. The third year I avoided submersion, but that didn't work either. The waterproof film layer had become brittle and broke. After three more years, the average cost was down and I had past the test of endurance. So long WaterBucket socks!

That's how I use them. No biting flies can penetrate them!

I lost one of my sealskinz socks and that is a bummer at the price..

I like them on summer trips with my keen sandals, no biting bug can get through a sealskinz.  I will probably get another pair as bug armour.

Waterproof ?  

I only have the cheapass SealSkinz version, something like $20 from Sportsmans guide (I know, these aren't as good) and I also have Chota Brookies. As for the "aromatic" aspect, I think for that reason I wear good wool socks underneath either. More comfortable than a thin liner sock too.

One of my "Top 10 Truths" of wilderness camping.

Waterproof isn't.

I debated about getting these before I settled on the Brookie Knee Highs.
Obviously from the warranty, it's a common problem.
Still as long as they back them in full, sooner or later, maybe they'll find a fix for the "brittle" problem?

I tried them too, but never had dry feet at the end of the day. I was very carefull rolling the top blocker layer back each time I put them on. Maybe the waterproof layer laminated in the sock failed??? I was doing the Cashe Lake portages, so maybe I hiked in them more than they were built for. Regardless not a bombproof design IMHO.

SealSkinz makes a number of kinds of waterproof socks.  This is a review of the WaterBlocker sock.  The socks are described as follows.

Quote:


I used these socks on an 8-day trip through the Allagash Wilderness Waterway.  Under them I wore a thin liner sock.  I thought the liner sock would increase comfort but as it turned out it probably was not necessary.  The inner layer of the three layers built into the Waterblocker is itself a liner sock.  So I was essentially wearing two liner socks.  Over the socks I wore my self-draining wading boots

For the first 7 days, I was thrilled with the socks performance.  I "wet footed" throughout the trip, I even went swimming in my boots and socks.  However my feet stayed drive, no matter how I immersed my legs in the water.  When I removed the boots and Waterblockers, the liner sock and my feet were just minimally damp from perspiration.  The system worked great giving me the convenience of wet-footing but the dryness of dry-footing.  The only negative was after three days, my liner socks were rather aromatic.  A quick wash dealt with that issue.  I did not wash the WaterBockers themselves, except for a quick rinsing in the lake.

On the last day, however, there was a problem.  The Waterblocker sock comes to mid calf.  The built-in liner sock only comes to the top of the ankle.  So the upper portion of the sock only has two layers.  The water proof "inner" layer is exposed for a few inches above the built-in liner sock.  By the 8'th day, that waterproof layer had become as brittle as tissue paper.  So when I put the socks on, the layer ripped and the socks were no longer waterproof.

I wrote the company when I returned home.  They replied "It is a common defect and is covered under our warranty."  They are sending a replacement pair of socks.