End of the first day at the Fat Dog 120 mile. Enjoying a high alpine section on a perfect evening before what would be my biggest struggle of the year through the night resulting in my only DNF for the year.

Yes, unfortunately it is now February and a best of 2016 post is old news, but better late than never. While things were a little lighter on the blogging front for me, I still had a full year of running, racing, and got to try out tons of new shoes and gear in the process.  I ran the Carlsbad Road Marathon in January, Gorge Waterfalls 100k in April, Quad Rock 50 mile in May, Bighorn 100 mile in June, Fat Dog 120 (DNF at mile 80, 25 hrs in) in August, and the North Face 50 mile in San Francisco in December.  All in all, it was a good year of improvement and continuing to learn more about my self as a person and runner. Some big goals on tap for this year and hoping to start things off well at the LA Marathon in March (despite a recent injury setback last week, my first in 3 years).

I’ve done a “Best of the Year” post every year and thought I’d put together another one with the addition of some great gear that I’ve used a ton as well.  Hopefully this won’t be too long and some will find it useful!

Best Shoes of 2016

-Road Shoes

From Bottom to Top: Skechers GORun Forza, adidas adizero Boston 6, and Salming Miles.

1. Skechers GORun Forza – The Forza didn’t blow me away when I first tried it in February last year, but it has really hung on in my line-up and is on the short list of road shoes I turn to for most road runs other than really fast days.  The shoe holds up super well, fits and feels like a lighter shoe and offers great structure without ever getting in the way.  Such a great shoe from Skechers and foreshadowing of some big improvements that are just now coming with their 2017 lineup (See GORun 5, GOMeb Razor and GOMeb Speed 4 all of which are fantastic!).
2. adidas adizero Boston 6 – It took me a long time to get around to trying the Boston 6 despite my affinity for v5 on dry trails.  While the Boston 6 is still great on trails, adidas really improved it’s feel on the road with a softer feeling forefoot due to a new outsole which is softer and yet still very durable; great stuff from Continental.  The new seam-free toebox is a great change as well.  The Boston 6 is one of the best all around shoes out there that will literally almost do anything well.
3. Salming Miles – Salming was a big surprise for me last year and ended up with my road shoe of the year in the Distance 3.  They didn’t really revamp their mainline models much in 2016 other than some new midsole material on them, but did launch a new road shoe in the Miles.  All of my complaints about durability in the Distance and Speed have been completely abolished with the Miles.  It is probably one of the more durable shoes I’ve ever used and feels completely natural riding in Salming’s usual style and feel.  Great high mileage (likely a 750+ Mile shoe) trainer particularly if you don’t want a higher drop training shoe.

Honorable mentions: adidas adios 1 Haile (great re-issue of the adios 1 and super versatile shoe…can’t find it anymore so hopefully they re-issue the re-issue :) ), adidas adios 3 (incremental update, but still a great shoe) and Nike Pegasus 33 (light and versatile; great on trails),

-Trail Shoes

From Bottom to Top: My modified Nike Zoom Wildhorse 3, Skechers GOTrail Ultra 3, and New Balance Fresh Foam Gobi.

1. Nike Zoom Wildhorse 3 – Yes, I know this shoe was out in 2015 even (hard to believe) but I really didn’t begin to use it till this last year and actually ended up using it in most of my races this year at some point or another.  The biggest reason it took me so long was that it took modifying the midsole profile to narrow the shoe up, which transformed the shoe and quickly made it much more nimble and it made a world of difference in the overall feel.  The upper on the Wildhorse 3 is also second to none on the market it my view.  It is light, breathes well and dries out quickly while allowing me to run very long in them sock less with zero issues.  One of the best, well rounded trails shoes ever made.  Version 4 is on the way in April and very much looking forward to that update as well as the Kiger 4.  Take a look here from a preview pic of both of them from Kaci Lickteig’s twitter.
   

   Unmodified Wildhorse 3 on top, modified on bottom. Basically I’ve shaved the midsole down to a narrower more nimble profile and really like the results.

   

   Doesn’t affect the shoe in any negative way and really tightens up the ride while being an ounce lighter. Win, win.

2. Skechers GOTrail Ultra 3 – The Ultra 3 was a real surprise for me and after logging quite a few miles in it (in a couple different versions: standard, Climate All-Weather and a custom version with the GOTrail rock plate in it which is amazing).  It has become a very nice tool to reach for in my rotation and the just released GOTrail Ultra 4 is even better with an improved upper in nearly every aspect as well as a bit firmer midsole which is also nice.  If you haven’t tried the Ultra 3 or 4 grab a pair, I don’t think you’ll be disappointed and it offers a very unique ride that isn’t really similar to much else in the market.
3. New Balance Fresh Foam Gobi – I waited till November to try the Gobi and that was too bad.  After feeling that the Zante was loosing some of its initial luster for me due to some subpar (in my view) foam that breaks down way too early.  The Zante also had an upper that isn’t quite as supportive as I’d like to see.  Well the good news for me was the Gobi has a great upper with much more support in addition to the added lugs to the outsole which really improve the feel of the ride in my view.  The foam still breaks down too soon, but really at the price they go for (under $100) there isn’t much to fault in them.

Honorable Mentions: Hoka One One Speed Instinct (best Hoka to date for me; well cushioned yet still enough pop to run fast and the best fit by far in any Hoka for my foot…like a Nike Kiger with more plush feel), Topo MT-2/Hyrdroventure (great light minimal-esque shoes and fantastic update to original MT…there is a new version of the MT-2 with an updated upper material that just came out) , Skechers GOTrail (good new entry for Skechers that runs well in a variety of conditions with a faster/lighter feel than the Ultra 3, but similar fit and finish), Montrail Caldorado (solid all-around new shoe from Montrail…really looking forward to the Caldorado 2 upper update which could address biggest issues with first version), Montrail Trans Alps (super burly, durable and surprisingly runnable beast of a shoe; also looking forward to upper update)

-Mountain Shoes

From Bottom to Top: Scarp Atom, Scarpa Neutron, and Salming Elements.

1. Scarpa Atom – Scarpa really nailed their 2016 launches and overall came out with the best technical mountain footwear of the year in my view.  Other than some overly wide heel profiles which, while not a deal breaker, could be narrower in my view, the shoes are remarkably well made with sticky Vibram Megagrip, low drops and secure uppers.  The Atom, being the most minimal of the lineup fits snug but comfortable and creates a mountain slipper like feel in both the upper and ride.  Such a fun shoe to run technical terrain in.  I do think it could be improved with a forefoot rock plate to help with the occasional sharp rock and extend the length of outings it could handle, but even so it is still very good and one of my top 3 mountain shoes of all time….I rarely buy 2nd pairs of shoes these days and I’ll be buying another pair of Atoms.
2. Scarpa Neutron – The Neutron is a burlier and more luggy option from Scarpa and despite needing just a bit narrower midsole profile in the heel, it is a really sweet mountain option with tons of protection, a decent ride, secure upper and great traction.  Check Scarpa out if you frequent some technical or mountain terrain and keep a look out for the forthcoming Scarpa Spin that aims to strike a balance between the Atom and the Neutron and has tons of potential.
3. Salming Elements – Salming’s first entry into the mountain running scene and they got a lot of things right.  The upper needs just a bit of work in cleaning it up from stitchingand making it a touch more secure and the shoe could use a forefoot rockplate with its relatively low forefoot stack height, but the grip is quite nice in mud and loose terrain and it is one of the best non-UK designed (i.e. inov-8 or Walsh) fell running shoes I’ve come across.  Hopefully, Salming doesn’t give up on the shoe and makes a few tweaks in the direction they appear to be going with their forthcoming Trail 5 and Snowrace with improved uppers and Vibram outsoles.

Descending near of the top of Mt. Olympus outside of Salt Lake City in August.

Best Gear of 2016

-Hydration Gear

From Top to Bottom: Ultimate Direction Mono and Stereo (Hi-Fi fronts on both), Salomon Sense Set and Sense Ultra Set and Ultimate Direction AK Mountain Vest 3.0.

1. Ultimate Direction Mono and Stereo waistbelts – I would have never thought waist belts would make a post of any sorts let alone top my list of hydration products but UD blew me away and totally revived the waist belt as a useful running tool.  I used the Stereo which holds two 500 ml soft flasks (the Mono holds 1 500 ml flask) at the Bighorn 100 in the heat and it was incredible to have my torso clear to vent heat and yet still carry enough water comfortably.  The Mono is something I use multiple times a week in training and literally you can’t even feel it on. I can carry a phone and multiple gels (with Hi-Fi front pouch, which comes with Stereo…they are interchangeable) in the front and 500 ml of fluid in the back without even noticing (used this setup at the North Face 50 and it was flawless).
2. Salomon Sense Set and Ultra Set – What UD did for waist belts Salomon did for hydration vests…I’d almost not call these vests but hydration shirts or apparel they fit so close to the body.  Great versatility and can carry a fair bit without any encumbrance.  When I needed more gear than the UD belts could carry I used one of the Sense vests (i.e. nighttime at Bighorn or other races or training outings where jackets and lights were necessary).  Salomon is revamping the line this year with new bottles with wider caps/opening (yes!) that should go back into the vest easier and upping the capacity from 1 and 3 to 2 and 5 for these vests in addition to adding a new 8 L model (see new line here).
3. Ultimate Direction AK Mountain Vest 3.0 – The AK vest moved from the most minimal of UD’s vests to a more robust 10L capacity and includes extra pockets and features like ice axe loops for more ambitious outings.  I used the vest at the Fat Dog 120 mile in Canada which had a pretty large mandatory gear list and it was great for that heavier load which would have been too much for the Sense Ultra.  Great for adventures and more involved races and offers a nice blend of capacity and streamlined design.

-Other things I Liked this last Year

Altra Casual shoes, Buff and Dynafit running hats and GU Hydration and Nutrition products.

1. Altra Casual Shoes – Altra released the Tokala and Desert boot and they really hit a nice balance of lightweight design and comfort, while still looking like a normal shoe and feeling like a running shoe.  They’ve been great especially going to work after runs where they have plenty of room for feet to spread, relax and recover.
2. Light running caps from Buff and Dynafit – the Buff Cap Pro and Dynafit React Cap have been awesome this last year.  They are super light, very packable and both allow the bill to be flipped up when you are climbing steeper trails or otherwise want more visibility.  Great design, particularly in more mountain environments.
3. GU Energy  – I used to not be that picky about energy and hydration products in the past and felt that sugar was sugar, but after making some effort to dial in my nutrition for 100 milers (after some issues with hydration at Western States in 2015), I needed to deal with sodium levels better as well as have a wide variety of gels and chews to keep things interesting for calories.  The GU Hydration (formerly GU Brew) product had become a go to for electrolyte replacement for long outings and it also contains 70 cals per serving so there is some added sugar there too.  The big difference for me is that the GU Hydration doesn’t have a super sweet taste or aftertaste that many others do for me and this is huge when going through lots of volume of liquid.  GU Roctane drinks are also great for workouts in training where I want to simplify my calories and hydration into one drink.  GU gels, which are now offered in bulk with a GU designed soft flask (yes!) have a wide variety of flavors with many being very palatable for me (some favorited are Salted Chocolate Roctane, Cucumber Mint, Root Beer, Salted Watermelon and Salted Caramel but many other good flavors). I still will use Clif Shot Bloks, Clif gels and Honey Stinger Gels to mix up the type of sugars here and there, but I’ll use GU the most and their drink is by far the best in my view (Clif’s Hydration drink mix is also decent).

Another shot near the bottom of the Mt. Olympus trail.

Hope you all found something of interest with this post and hang in there with the site as we try to figure out how to balance everything out with our busy family lives and careers.  Doesn’t mean we aren’t getting out running and trying new things still!  I’d love to read any comments you may have on any of the shoes or gear I mentioned and always on the lookout for new things that work well for folks.  I like good design of all sorts and always curious for new innovations and ideas that work well.  Happy running in 2017!

Good luck in 2017 everyone! Pic of some of my recent single digit F marathon training conditions….not exactly ideal for a SoCal marathon, but that’s part of the challenge!

The original Zante was one of my favorite shoes – soft sole, comfortable fit, and a smooth ride that offered plenty of cushion for longer runs. To be honest, not much has changed in v2 – the Zante remains a personal favorite, and it’s a shoe that I highly recommend. It retains a soft, 6mm drop sole (though lately as it has broken in I’m almost feeling it’s too soft), and the bump I felt under the midfoot of v1 seems toned down a bit in v2. New Balance did change the pattern on the sidewalls of the midsole, but I can detect no noticeable effect of this.

The upper of the Zante 2 is minimalistic – it’s composed of a stretchy, double-layered mesh with welded overlays, and the heel counter is very flexible. Fit is reasonably roomy on my foot (though not overly spacious – I did go up a half size). Put simply, it’s a no frills upper that just works.

The outsole of the Zante 2 is also relatively unchanged. It is a smoothish, full length outsole composed of flat rubber hexagons (see picture down below). Great for the road, but not great on trails, and very little traction (would not use it in winter!). Durability for me has been excellent.

To be honest, my only real complaint about the Zante 2 is the fact that it can at times feel overly soft. It almost feels like the sole may bottom out. I’ve only noticed this recently, so it could either be an effect of running on hot summer asphalt, or breakdown of the midsole cushion with use. In either case, I would not recommend the Zante 2 if you like a firmer shoe.

All in all, the New Balance Zante 2 is a great shoe for those who like a smooth, soft ride. It offers a lot of cushion in a lightweight package (8.7 oz in men’s size 9), and could easily serve as a marathon shoe for me. And an even bigger plus is the price – at $100 MSRP it’s quite affordable in the current market. I highly recommend giving the Zante 2 a try!

The New Balance Zante 2 is available for purchase at Running Warehouse and Amazon.com.

Though I didn’t review as many shoes in 2015 as I have in previous years, mainly due to reduced running mileage associated with my return to school, there were still a few standouts that are worth mentioning. I’m going to keep my list short and sweet, and simply go with my top 3 picks from last year.

1. New Balance 1400v3

Specs per Running Warehouse: 6.3 oz (men’s 9), 23mm heel, 13mm forefoot.

Though the top two were close, I’m going to give the NB 1400v3 my award for top shoe of 2015. The 1400 v2 was one of my favorites of all time, and v3 saw some minor tweaks that made for an even better shoe. Gone was the somewhat scratchy upper, and in its place a softer upper that could handle sockless running. v3 retained the sole that I loved in v2 – soft under the heel, firm under the forefoot, and perfect for both speed and long runs. Fit is snug, but just right for my foot. Really couldn’t ask for much more in a running shoe!

Read my full New Balance 1400 v3 review here.

2. New Balance Zante

Specs per Running Warehouse: 8.1 oz (men’s 9), 23mm heel, 17mm forefoot.

Coming in at #2 is another standout from New Balance. Though I did most of my running in the Zante in 2014, they were officially released last year, and it’s a shoe that I pulled out more than a few times during 2015 for longer distance runs.

The Zante is a shoe that just works for me – the fit is near perfect, the sole is pretty soft and cushy (my preference), and the upper is minimally structured. It’s a shoe that I can use for uptempo runs as well as longer distances, and they’d be on my short list as a marathon racer. Great shoe all-around, and I’m looking forward to the Zante 2 which should be coming out soon (see Thomas Neuberger’s review here)

Read my full review of the New Balance Zante here.

3. Asics Lyteracer RS 4

Specs per Running Warehouse: 7.3 oz (men’s 9), 25mm heel, 16mm forefoot.

Running Warehouse decided to try something new and different last year – they brought in a collection of Japanese racing flats that are not typically available in the US market. They sent me a couple pairs to try out, and one of them wound up being one of my favorite shoes of the year.

Like the NB 1400 v3 and Zante, the Asics Lyteracer RS 4 has a softish feel under the heel and a firm forefoot, and is suitable for both speed and distance (most of my favorite shoes fit in this category). The Lyteracer differs in having something of a throwback-style upper with suede-like overlays and a more traditional-style mesh. I like the look, and the ride was great – I even opted to use them for a ten mile road race back in October. If you like shoes like the NB 1400 or adidas Adios Boost, these are definitely worth a look.

Read my full review of the Asics Lyteracer RS 4 here.

Also of note, I choose to segment the trail market into what I call, for simplicity’s sake, “trail” shoes and “mountain” shoes.  Trail shoes are those designed for smoother, well marked trails, dirt roads, and tend to have less lug depth.  Mountain shoes are designed for the more technical terrain that is usually, though not always, found in the mountains, though any very technical or steep trail can demand similar requirements from a shoe.  What I list below are those shoes that I (not necessarily the manufacturers) deem as the mountain offerings I saw at this years Outdoor Retailer, and is the last in my series of preview posts.  You can see my other posts here for: road racing, road training, and trail shoes.

adidas

adidas terrex Agravic – weight 11 oz men (311 g), 9.4 women, drop: 6mm, available: February 2016, Price $135.

 Such a big improvement in the upper from the Terrex Boost. No speedlaces, seamless, simple.

The terrex Agravic is probably the shoe I’m most excited to try for Spring 2016.  It’s built on a similar platform to the terrex Boost that is currently out, but with a thinner rock plate/shank, seamless and stripped back upper, along with an aggressive Continental rubber outsole. The terrex Boost surprised me with how precise and nimble it was for such a protective platform.  Other than the fact that it was just a tad heavy, and the upper a little stiff, it is one of the best riding mountain shoes I’ve ever tried.  If the Agravic runs similar, but with the lower weight and more comfortable upper, it is going to be nothing short of amazing for long, technical outings in the mountains.

Fantastic outsole that is pretty aggressive, but should run ok on the occasional harder trail.

adidas terrex X-King – weight 10.5 oz (305 g) men, drop: 6mm, available: Spring 2016, Price $150.

Such a slick shoe all the way around, and kudos for adidas (again) putting out some unique designs. Between this, the XT Boost, and Riot Boost, they have some of the more interesting new designs out there.

The terrex X-King is another unique design from adidas.  The upper is entirely vulcanized to the outsole (no glue or stitching), and the midsole is added through a footbed. adidas is only offering the one footbed for now, but is considering multiple options in the future if the X-King design proves successful.  I was too busy geeking over the shoe that I forgot to take pictures of it, but it is super flexible and has a fantastic Continental outsole on it.  It is by far the most aggressive of adidas’ offerings and looks to be a fell running type option similar to an inov-8 Mudclaw or X-Talon.  I am expecting a pair to test out fairly soon and will get a review posted sometime late winter.

terrex Skychaser – Slight update to terrex Boost with only a name change and minor change to the overlay in the toebox  Everything else is the same as the current terrex Boost.

The terrex Boost gets a name change to the terrex Skychaser and a slight upper modification to make the toebox a bit more comfortable.

Dynafit

Dynafit Feline Vertical and Vertical Pro – weight 8.8 oz (250 g) men, 7.4 oz women, drop: 4mm, available: Early Spring 2016, Price $129.95 for Vertical, $149.95 for Vertical Pro

Great looking upper and design all around. Minimalist at its core, but enough shoe to consider for full on racing and training. Feline Vertical in pic.

The Dynafit Feline Vertical and Vertical Pro are a pair of shoes that are right up there for ones that I’m most excited about.  The only reason they don’t top the Agravic for me is that the midsole material is an unknown in the Dynafit, whereas I know I like the Boost and design of the Agravic.  Regardless, Dynafit’s last is spot on, with a meduim width forefoot, and snug low volume fit elsewhere. The shoe also has a Vibram Megagrip outsole and rock plate on a 4m drop platform.  Check, check and check.  It has all of the things I ask for in a technical/mountain shoe, and all that is left is to run in them and see how it all turns out.

The Vertical Pro will come only in this colorway with one shoe pink and the other green. It offers a carbon fiber rockplate where as the regular Vertical is TPU.

Fantasic Vibram Megagrip outsole that should be pretty versatile and sticky.

New Balance

New Balance Vazee Summit – weight 9.3 oz (263 g) men, 7.5 women, drop: 10mm, available: April 2016, Price $99.95.

The Vazee Summit. Pretty nice looking shoe all the way around, and great upper.

The Vazee Summit is a successor of sorts to the MT110v2, but also blends that shoe with the RC1400 with a racing flat geometry and last (NBJ).  The result is a stripped back mountain shoe that should run well on trails with its marathon shoe geometry, but also handle rockier terrain with its fairly deep lugs and rock plate.  It has an Acteva midsole (think MT110v1/101) that offers a little more durability and protection than REVlite, a welcome change to me (not big on REVlite).  While I have some concerns that the shoe is trying to blend too many categories (marathon shoe with mountain shoe outsole setup), having seen the shoe in person it is quite nice with a fantastic upper that should hold the foot super well (if you’ve run in the 1400v3 you know what to expect).  I’d love to see a version of this shoe with everything the same except a lower profile lug design, but also looking forward to testing this one out soon.  Also of note is the $99.95 price tag which is pretty rare in a full featured shoe these days.

Nice overall outsole design for rough terrain; maybe a tad much for the type of platform it is on though.

Salewa

Salewa Lite Train – weight 8.6 oz (245 g) men, 6.5 oz women, drop: 6mm, available: Early Spring 2016, Price $129.00.

Salewa Lite Train. A fantastic looking light and fast shoe with minimalistic design features.

Up to now, Salewa has focused more on alpine hiking and approach shoes, but they are branching out into what they are calling a Mountain Training category with the Lite Train and Ultra Train (see below).  The results are some very technically focused mountain running shoes with great design features.  The Lite train is the more minimal of the two with a 6mm drop and very stripped back, seamless upper.  Both are on great lasts similar to Dynafit, and both have rock plates and sticky rubber from Michelin (which I have yet to try on any shoe).  Pretty excited to try these out.

Nice outsole design that might be a tad busy visually, but should perform well on a variety of surfaces.

Salewa Ultra Train – weight 10.2 oz (290 g) men, 8.11 women, drop: 8mm, available: Early Spring 2016, Price $139.00.

A more robust upper that looks like it would take some abuse, but wasn’t stiff or uncomfortable feeling in hand.

The Ultra Train is a companion shoe the Lite Train and offers a little more cushioning and durability in all aspects of the shoe with still featuring a similar straightforward design focus.  The shoe felt more flexible and nimble than the specs would suggest and I think will run very nicely, especially, as its name would suggest, for longer technical ultra races.  Salewa definitely wins the prize for best debut trail offering at Outdoor Retailer.  Great overall shoes from a new player in the trail/mountain shoe scene.

Again, nice looking outsole that has more rubber and probably more versatility than the Lite Train, but still slim in shape.

Scarpa

Scarpa Atom – weight 8.8 oz (249 g) men, 7.5 oz women, drop: 4mm, available: Late Winter 2016

Very nice upper design and I know the last is good based on running in the Scarpa TRU recently (a short review for that one coming soon).

The Scarpa Atom is another exciting shoe from yet another smaller, mountain focused company.  This was the story of OR for me with the smaller mountain companies really nailing the technical trail shoes much better as a whole than the bigger running brands.  I like nearly everything about this shoe, though I’ll admit to being a little leery of the compressed EVA in the midsole.  Given that it is a pretty low stack height and meant for steeper terrain, this will be less of an issue, but I still would prefer injected EVA.  Regardless, fantastic design all the way around and Vibram outsole to round out the package.  Exciting line refresh from Scarpa.

Racy and minimal lug design that will grip well, but feel fast.

Scarpa Neutron – weight 9.7 oz (275 g) men, 8.2 oz women, drop: 6mm, available: Late Winter 2016

Great looking upper – a touch more durability than the Atom, while still being super comfortable looking.

The Neutron could be a really nice long run shoe that runs more like a racing shoe.  It has a full feature set with rock plate, all around mountain outsole, and medium 6mm drop on a more durable upper design.  Again, a little concerned about the compressed EVA making the ride harsh, but the Vibram outsole may smooth that out a bit.  Like the Atom, the Neutron has a fantastic overall design, and is another shoe I’m anxious to try this Spring.

A little more meat to the lug while not being overkill. Still streamlines though with a narrow midfoot and heel just like it should be.

Well, that’s it for now. Lot’s of exciting shoes on the way, would love to hear of any that might have caught your eye that aren’t mentioned here!

Below is a selection of mostly neutral, training/performance road shoes that I feel didn’t fall into my previously published road racing shoe preview.  I have one more forthcoming shoe preview from this years’ Outdoor Retail that will cover new mountain running shoes I saw.  Enjoy and feel free to ask questions below!

Altra IQ – weight 8.6 oz men, 7.1 oz women, drop: 0mm, available Spring 2016, price: $199.99

Very smooth and “hi-tech” looking upper with a view of the sensor embedded in the midsole.

Altra is really pushing hard recently with new models, recent sponsoring of big races in the trail world (Hardrock 100 and Western States 100), and signing more and more athletes each year.  The IQ looks to be an industry leader in the “smart shoe” category which will provide feedback to the runner via smart phone or iFit watch.  For more info on the IQ check out Sam’s great write-up here and a video of Altra Founder, Golden Harper explaining more about the shoe courtesy of Competitor here.  Other than that, it looks very similar to the current Altra Impulse.

Brooks Launch 3 – weight 9.8 oz men, 7.9 oz women, drop: 10mm, available 1/1/16, price: $100

New 3D Fit Print upper on the Launch 2 platform.

I’ve never run in the Launch, but given its popularity it might be worth a look.  The Launch hits right in the middle of the road for weight, protection, and cushion, and should work for a wide variety of runners.  The Launch 3 gets a new 3D printed upper on the Launch 2 platform.  See Pete’s review of the Launch 2 here.

Brooks PureFlow 5 – weight 9.2 oz men, 7.8 oz women, drop: 4mm, available 1/1/16, price: $110

Very nice upper design with more structure in heel and more open forefoot.

I’ve not run extensively in the Pure line mainly as I can’t quite seem to get along with their last shape.  The PureFlow 5 has a great looking upper and a new, very flexible looking midsole and outsole while not giving up the cushion it has been known for.

A little podular for my tastes, but decent coverage and should be flexible.

Brooks Transcend 3 – weight 10.9 oz men, 9.5 oz women, drop: 8mm, available 1/1/16, price: $170

Not sure I’m digging the upper on these, but the extra structure might be necessary for a shoe with its stack height.

I don’t have any experience in the Transcend, and as far as I can tell they ride the line between maximalist and premium cushion.  They are labeled as mild support shoes without using traditional posting.  Not a shoe I’d likely run in, but there are lots of runners out there that might.  Price seems a bit high, but in line with other max cushion models from Hoka, etc.

Lots of rubber and flex grooves.

Hoka One One Clayton – weight 7.3 oz men, 6.3 oz women, Stack Height:24mm H/20mm FF, available Spring 2016, price: $150

Nice looking upper and midsole follows suit with the Tracer with firmer foam in the forefoot and softer in the heel. Supposedly a wider forefoot in these too.

I’ve not yet found a Hoka shoe that I’ve enjoyed running in.  The Clifton came the closest for me, but the super soft ride combined with the rocker sole made it feel like it robbed a bit of energy from my stride. However, I could start to see why some folks enjoy them, and the Clifton got the weight much lower than the more traditional Hokas.  The Clayton is over an ounce lighter, and at 7.3 oz is quite light compared to most shoes on the market.  When you consider that it delivers trainer level cushion (20mm FF/24mm Heel) at this weight, it is even more impressive.  The biggest issue remaining with Hoka for me is the fit, which I’ve never found great.  If they can improve that with the Clayton and Tracer, they could be nice options.  Hoka was definitely one of the brands at OR most willing to try some new things, and while I haven’t loved their shoes, I can commend them for being willing to go outside the box to try to arrive at unique products.

RMat serves as outsole. Midfoot looks more typical of Hoka, which I’m not as excited about.

New Balance Fresh Foam Zante v2 – weight 8.6 oz men, 7.2 oz women, drop: 6mm, available April 2016, price: $99.95

Great new upper design that gets rid of the overlay in the middle of the lateral side that put too much pressure there for me (and others according to NB). NB’s uppers are some of the best on the market IMO and the Zante has the best NB ride as well.

The Fresh Foam Zante was a big hit for New Balance this year and I was among the many who enjoyed its cushioned yet speedy ride on a mid level drop. I also liked the fit with a wide forefoot, but snugger midfoot and heel.  The v2 fixes the main issue I had with the original in removing the midfoot overlay that gave me a sense of restriction around my 5th metatarsal. Zante 2 also looks to improve the fit of the shoe overall as well, while not messing with what was already a good ride.  The Zante v2 is definitely one of the road shoes I’m most looking looking forward to running in next year.

Redesigned outsole based on runner feedback. Mainly they elongated the shapes over the forefoot, but added topo-like grooves to make it more flexible .

Salomon Sonic Pro – weight 8.5 oz men, stack height: 24mm H/16mm FF, available Spring 2016, price: $140.00

Probably a closer replacement to the X-Series than the S-Lab Sonic is. Filling in the Pro spot in the Sonic lineup.

The Salomon S-Lab X-Series is a shoe I’ve wanted to try, but never got around to this season.  The S-Lab model will now be call the S-Lab Sonic (see racing shoe preview).  The Sonic Pro gives a similar treatment to the S-Lab Sonic as the Sense Pro does to the S-Lab Sense.  It provides a similar high quality product at a slightly lower price point. It also has a little less pure performance focus, instead adding slightly more comfort and durability.  Out of the two, I think I’d be most interested in the S-Lab version, but at $30 less the Pro version might appeal to more runners.

Very similar outsole to S-Lab Sonic with the black rubber adding just a bit more durability.

Saucony Breakthru 2 – weight 8.5 oz men, 7.4 oz women, stack height: 23mm H/15mm FF, available 1/1/2016, price: $100.00

New upper on the same platform. Very nice looking and they said they opened up the toebox on it compared to v1.

The Breakthru 2 is one of the road shoes I’m most excited about this year.  I haven’t run in the Breakthru, but it looks like a great all-around platform with very good outsole coverage, and v2 puts a new more streamlined upper on it that I was told would have a roomier forefoot.  It will still be a a performance oriented trainer, and one with a lot of versatility and plenty of trail worthiness as well (something I’m always looking for in road shoes :) ).

Skechers GOrun 4 2016 – weight 7.8 oz men, 6.0 oz women, midsole height: 18mm H/14mm FF, available January 2016, price: $105.00

Circular knit upper that has a little stretch (where as the Speed 3 2016 and Ultra Road are much more static).

The GOrun 4 2016 gets a knit upper that has a bit more stretch than the Speed 3 2016, and also gets the upgrade to the new 5-Gen midsole material.  I’ve since run in a sample pair of these and the 5-Gen is much more of an upgrade than one would think.  The shoe runs more responsively, while retaining the cushioning and flexibility of the GOrun 4.  The upper is super soft and comfortable, and the shoe could easily serve as a long run shoe for many.  Also of note, the toebox has more volume and the shoe fits more true to the rest of the Skechers lineup, where as the original GOrun 4 seemed to run short due to a shallow toebox.

Skechers GOrun Ride 5 – weight 8.4 oz men, 6.7 oz women, midsole height: 20mm H/16mm FF, available January 2016, price: $100.00

Very smooth and comfortable, seamless upper and slightly thicker midsole than previous version.

The GOrun Ride 5 gets a full update with a new thinner, seamless upper along with 2mm more stack height than its predecessor.  I’ve also run in a sample pair of these, and they definitely offer more support than the GOrun 4 2016 and Speed 3 2016. They also still have some responsiveness with the 5-Gen midsole that doesn’t completely relegate them to easy, slow miles.  A great update, and a great overall value as well.  Skechers is really moving their product forward quickly, and with the new 5-Gen midsole material and fantastic new uppers, I think they are going to be making some waves with these new Spring 2016 offerings.  A company to keep an eye on for sure!

Also of note, I choose to segment the trail market into what I call, for simplicity’s sake, “trail” shoes and “mountain” shoes.  Trail shoes are those designed for smoother, well marked trails, dirt roads and tend to have less lug depth.  Mountain shoes are designed for the more technical terrain that is usually, though not always, found in the mountains, though any very technical or steep trail can demand similar requirements from a shoe.  What I list below are those shoes that I (not necessarily the manufactures) deem as the trail offerings I saw at this years Outdoor Retailer.  A subsequent post will preview the mountain shoes.

adidas

Very unique upper design that could be too much or could be a highlight. I’ve liked the XT’s unconventional upper so will hold judgement on these till I try them.

adidas Supernova Riot Boost – weight 12.6 oz men, 10.2 women, drop: 10mm, available: February 2016, Price $130.

Given the quality of adidas’ newly Boosted trail lineup launched this summer, I’m pretty excited about the potential this shoe has as a unique all around trail option.  The lugs are shallower (5mm) than both the Raven (6.5 mm) and Response Trail (8mm), and it has a very unique upper design that is similar to the XT Boost, but looks a little thicker and more protective.  Not sure this will be that great in the summer, but could be very nice in poor conditions.  The outsole is also notable in that it uses what Continental calls their Gator Skin process which allows them to mold the outsole at a minimum thickness of 1 mm instead of 3 mm so they can reduce weight.  A puncture resistant layer between the outsole and Boost midsole is added to protect the foot and midsole.

Laces then hook and loop enclosure to wrap over the laces.

Great outsole design as usual with adidas/Continental. Notice how thin it is in the center.

Altra

The Olympus is every bit as substantial as any Hoka.

Altra Olympus 2.0 – weight 10.8 oz men, zero drop, price $149

I haven’t run in any of the Olympus models to date, but I know many runners (especially in the ultra scene) that love them for long races.  They’re zero drop, wide and cushy.  The 2.0 gets the welcome addition of Vibram MegaGrip rubber and a complete overhaul on the midsole and upper as well.  I was told the toe spring/taper was tweaked a bit to be more gradual.  Interested to see how it runs compared to the Skechers GOtrail Ultra 3, which is probably its closet competitor.

Nice looking outsole on them. I personally can’t see using them on anything but flatter outings, but you never know!

Altra Superior 2.0

The Superior 2.0 gets an upper update and a pretty minimal one at that.  The biggest change is that Altra fixed the sizing issue from the original 2.0 where they ran 1/2 to a full size small. Other than that, it’s the Superior 2.0.  I’ve recently run in a pair of 2.0s and liked them overall.  As with most Altras, they run a tad heavy to me, but the Superior is one of the first Altra shoes to be secure enough for me in the upper, and I’m interested in having some zero drop options in the rotation.

Slightly new upper and sizing issue corrected.

Brooks

Brooks Cascadia 11 – weight: 11.8 oz men; 10.1 oz women, drop: 10mm, available 01/01/16, price: $120

The Cascadia is one of those classic models that’s been around quite some time, relatively unchanged and….I’ve never run in a pair.  I do have a pair of Cascadia 10s that I just need to get out on a run with.  Updates are subtle in the upper and that’s a good thing if you like the Cascadia series.  A very popular shoe on the trails that should handle the gamut.

Fairly unchanged from v10, but still an all-around solid looking option with more traditional protection and geometry.

Dynafit

Dynafit Feline Ultra – weight 12 oz men, 10.2 women, drop: 8mm, available March 2016 , price $139.95

New upper on the Feline Ultra that is simplified and refined from the Panterra that it replaces.

The Feline Ultra is an update to the Panterra and looks to mainly update the rubber to Vibram MegaGrip and streamline the upper design, which will be a good thing.  I’ve run in the Panterra a bit and while it isn’t a horrible shoe by any means, the upper was pretty stiff and the shoe overall is quite stiff.  Some improvements in those categories could help with what is otherwise a shoe that is designed with great materials.

Black rubber section is now MegaGrip where it was Vibram Mapping Compound before.

Hoka One One

Hoka Challenger ATR 2 – weight 9.5 oz men, drop: 5mm, available 1/1/2016, price $130.00

I’ve run just a few times in the Challenger ATR, and while it is still a bit soft for my tastes, I can see the appeal and I know many runners that love them.  The ATR 2 is an upper update that adds more security and durability in the overlays, and might help with what is generally a somewhat sloppy fit in my opinion for a shoe with that much stack/cushion.  The Challenger was definitely a hit this year for Hoka, and some refinement will only help.

Nice update to the overlays and I’m liking this colorway.

La Sportiva

La Sportiva Helios 2.0 – weight 8.35 oz men, 6.45 oz women, stack: 19mm heel/15mm toe, available 4/1/16 price $125.00

New upper that might modernize the fit a little.

The Helios series, which birthed out of the midsole/outsole platform of the Vertical K, is one that I’ve not had much luck with from both a fit and function standpoint.  From the fit side of things, the Helios and Helios SR just fit small all the way around.  Normally not a huge issue for most folks as you can size up, but I’m a 47.5 in La Sportiva and that is the largest they make.  The thing is all the other models of Sportivas fit just fine.  I was told that the Helios 2.0 fits a little more true to size which would be great if true.

From the function standpoint, I’m just not sold on the Morpho Dynamic midsole/outsole design (the “waves”), especially for technical trail.  The midsole ride quality is not good enough to justify the shoes as a trail racer, yet the protection is lacking for true technical terrain, mostly due to the fact that there is just too much exposed EVA on them. Well the Helios 2.0 doesn’t change the platform, but adds endurance (AT) rubber and their “cushion platform” insert.  A new upper gives me hope that the fit might be a bit better.  All in all, if you like the Helios or Helios SR (which stays in the line), the Helios 2.0 is a little more differentiated from the SR while still retaining the qualities the platform is known for.

AT rubber throughout (blue FriXion “x”)

La Sportiva Akasha – weight 11.35 oz men, 9.80 oz women, stack: 26mm heel/20mm toe, available 4/1/2016, price $140.00

Nice and clean upper with an open toebox and good overlays. Short of trying it on, it looks pretty good.

The Akasha is an interesting entry from La Sportiva.  Mainly being that it is a much more cushioned option than they typically offer, and yet it tries to retain the technical profile of most of Sportiva’s offerings.  Cushioning and technical performance are usually not things that go hand in hand, but having seen the Akasha in person, I’m definitely holding out hope that they can pull it off.  It looks like a nice and comfortable upper and quality injected EVA.  The outsole looks great, which Sportiva usually excels at (their rubber compounds are fantastic), so overall a shoe to watch this next season.

Solid outsole design with Sportivas XT rubber which is a mix of XF (sticky) black rubber and AT (durable) red rubber in certain areas.

Montrail

Montrail Fluid Flex FKT – weight 9.2 oz men, 7.7 oz women, drop: 4mm, available 2/1/2016 , price $110.00

Great new upper with refined overlays and seamless design.

I tried a few runs in the original Fluid Flex, and tried on the Fluid Flex 2 – I really was not into either.  The foam was too soft and unstable to me, and the uppers didn’t hold the foot well.  I recently received a pair of the Fluid Flex ST from Montrail for review (coming soon), and have been pleasantly surprised with the changes they’ve made.  First, they added a co-molded EVA rock plate in the forefoot and completely changed the ride for the better with their Fluid Guide midsole. This allows them to put denser foam in the midfoot (on both medial and lateral sides) in a gradual way, and it works great with the ST providing more structure, sharper edging and stability to the platform while still allowing for a cushioned experience.  The FKT retains the rock plate and fluid guide of the ST, but gets a slick new seamless upper that may just perfect the shoe into one of the best lightweight trail offerings around.  Excited to give this one a try come February!

Co-molded EVA rock plate in the forefoot (white color) and harder midsole in the midfoot that you can’t see visually but can feel when you hold the shoe.

Montrail Caldorado – weight 11.0 oz men, 9.1 oz women, drop: 8mm, available 2/1/2016, price $120.00

Caldorado upper and profile is nice and clean and should be a nice all around platform. Excited to give them a try.

The Caldorado is a new entry for Montrail in addition to the Trans Alps (more on that one below).  Montrail is attempting to get back to its roots with a full featured and functionally focused trail lineup.  The Caldorado is on a completely new platform, but if it runs like a more robust Fluid Flex ST then I’m definitely interested.  I like the look of the full coverage outsole and seamless upper, but the drop and weight might be just a bit higher than my personal preference (especially considering the Trans Alps is the same drop and not that much heavier).  A 10 oz, 6mm drop Caldorado would have really been the sweet spot I think, but regardless it looks like a solid entry that should compete well with the likes of the Pearl Izumi trail lineup and shoes like the Nike Wildhorse 3, but potentially with a little more precision via a narrower midsole profile (which I like).

Good looking full coverage outsole design with rockplate in the forefoot. Check and check.

Montrail Trans Alps – weight 12.5 oz men, 10.9 oz women, drop: 8mm , available 2/1/2016, price $130.00

The Trans Alps has a more traditional upper with more support, low rand, and a little more supportive midsole design.

The Trans Alps is another new offering for Montrail, and it looks to aim at rough trail and mountain conditions.  My one concern with this is that the profile may be a bit too wide and high for this application, but you can’t always tell just looking at a shoe.  Midsole densities and geometry can play a role, as can the fit, so I’ll reserve judgement on it.  Otherwise, it looks like a nice, no frills offering that should give it some versatility.  It will be interesting to see how it stacks up against some other similar shoes like the La Sportiva Akasha and Scarpa Proton.

More lug (6mm depth compared to the Caldorado 5mm) and more aggressive pattern in addition to a rock plate means this shoe will take some abuse. I’m worried this will be at the cost of the ride quality, but I hope I’m surprised.

New Balance

New Balance Leadville MT1210v3 – weight 10.35 oz men, 8.75 oz women, drop: 8mm, available January 2016, price $124.95

Full redesign on the Leadville v3. Mostly seamless upper with straightforward overlay setup.

The Leadville (1210) is one of those shoes that should run better than it does.  I’ve run in v1 and just couldn’t get into it for some reason.  It’s light, the upper is smooth and the outsole design is decent enough.  Unfortunately, to me the ride quality is just not what I look for in a trail shoe.  It is quite soft and unstable on uneven terrain, and also doesn’t run that great on smoother trails. The last as well is based on the PL last, but with more volume to supposedly accommodate late ultra marathon foot swelling.  In the end it just makes the shoe seem not as secure on 95% of your other runs.  The good news (if you like the 1210) and bad news (if you don’t) is that, while it is a full redesign, the general concept and geometries of the shoe are retained.  The outsole looks arguably better, but without a different fit and midsole design, I’m not sure it will make much difference to me.

Nice outsole design that is Pearl Izumi N2-esque which will be good all around.

New Balance MT10v4– weight 7.2 oz men, 5.8 oz women, drop: 4mm, available April 2016, price $114.95

A very nice looking update. The upper was super soft and although it looks a tad hot, it should be nice overall.

Now here is a NB trail shoe that I’m pretty excited about!  A full refresh for the MT10 in v4. It adds 3mm more cushion than v3, it’s still on the NL-1 (Minimus) last, has full outsole coverage, and an Acteva midsole (maybe I’m the only one, but glad it’s not RevLite).  This basically puts the shoe in a very similar profile to the MT110v1 and I for one am glad to see a more minimal option being offered by NB when many companies aren’t even putting out a trail shoe lighter than 9 oz.  Really excited to run these for shorter outings, and they should perform well on technical terrain given what I know about the specs and fit.  Good job NB!

Nice aggressive, yet versatile looking full coverage Vibram outsole on the MT10v4.

The North Face

North Face Ultra Endurance – weight 11.0 oz men, drop: 8mm, price $125.00

I like the upper design. looks comfortable, secure and durable.

The Ultra Endurance looks to be a nice new offering from North Face.  The Ultra MT took me by surprise this year (review forthcoming) with its Vibram Megagrip outsole and rockplate on a low profile mountain shoe (something not typically done…I don’t know why because it is great!).  The Ultra Endurance looks to take some of the design direction of the MT and give it a little more cushion and protection with a more trail friendly outsole design that is still Vibram Megagrip.  Overall a nice looking shoe that will expand The North Face’s somewhat lacking shoe offerings.

Great looking Vibram Megagrip outsole with a forefoot rock plate.

Saucony

Saucony Peregrine 6 – weight 9.4 oz men, 8.5 oz women, Stack: 21.5mm Heel, 17.5mm FF, available 1/1/2016 , price $120.00

Nice looking upper that seems softer and potentially a little less pointy than previous versions.

The Saucony Peregrine is a shoe that I’ve had mixed feelings about int he past.  I ran in versions 1 and 2 and liked the protective ride on a 4mm drop profile, but the last is pointy and the shoe was really stiff.  To be fair, I did try on the Peregrine 5 and it seemed to be a better fit and more flexible as well, although I didin’t run in it.  The Peregrine 6 gets a new PWRTRAC outsole, which should soften the ride a bit, and the design will definitely enhance flexibility.  It also features an Everun insert in the heel (a topsole material that goes between the midsole and footbed) – it will be interesting to see what it contributes to the ride. It has a rock plate in both the heel and forefoot, and probably the softest looking upper of the whole Peregrine series.  This all adds up to create some potential for a great shoe.  Keeping my fingers crossed!

Nice looking outsole design (albeit maybe a tad agressive?). The most flexible feeling Peregrine to me and PWRTRAC is sticky and soft (like blown rubber).

Salomon

Salomon S-Lab Sense 5 Ultra – weight 7.8 oz men, stack: 18mm Heel/14mm FF, price $180.00

Slightly lighter overlays and more open mesh design.

The S-Lab Sense is an iconic shoe in the trail world, popularized by Salomon and their marquee athlete Kilian Jornet.  In its 5th iteration the Sense continues to see only minor tweaks.  For version 5 the main updates are a modified outsole geometry that sees some lugs being removed which results in a 20 g weight savings and a much more minimal mesh upper.  The rest of the midsole, pro-feel film rock protection, and upper design stays the same as version 4.  These changes might be small but I think will bring the Sense back to its roots a bit (a good thing…the 8.5oz version 4 was just too heavy for the type of shoe it is).  I’m hoping to get a chance to run in a pair this spring so I can let you know how it feels!

You can see tissue paper through mesh…thin!

New outsole that if you look closely, you can tell they removed some lugs to reduce weight. I still think they need to fill in the gaps in the outsole.  Features a new Premium Wet Traction Contragrip that should be stickier.

Salomon Sense Pro 2 – weight 9.3 oz men, stack: 23mm Heel/17mm FF, price $130.00

Simple and clean upper with lighter overlays than v1, but fairly unchanged upper design. New midsole but similar geometry.

The Sense Pro was a great addition to Salomon’s lineup. It hit a sweet spot with many runners as it offered the feel of the Sense series, refinement of an S-Lab shoe, yet more protection and a lower price point.  The Sense Pro 2 is a full update top to bottom and looks to provide some nice improvements.  A new, softer midsole should be welcome (Sense Pro ran stiff and firm) for most and a new more well-rounded outsole should really make the Sense Pro 2 a nice middle of the road option. Excited to give these a try come spring.

Similar outsole design to the Sense 4 and should offer good varied surface grip.

Scarpa

Scarpa Proton – weight 12.2 oz men, 10.4 oz women, drop: 10mm, available Late Winter

Good upper design that is seamless and looks comfortable. Having run in the Scarpa Tru, the last is a nice shape.

The Scarpa Proton is a part of a new series of offerings by Scarpa that look to be much more refined, and also offer a nice variation of drops and feature sets.  The Neutron and Atom I’ll feature in my mountain shoe preview, but the Proton, being higher stack and bulk, fits in my trail preview since I think higher weight and bulk tend to degrade a shoe’s performance in the mountains.  The shoe may surprise me though.  The upper looks simple but comfortable, and the outsole design is simple and looks versatile.  Rock plate, Vibram rubber and mountain design philosophy.  Excited to see how the whole lineup will run.

Great lug design and placement.

Skechers

Skechers GOtrail Ultra 3– weight 11.4 oz men, 9.2 oz women, 4mm drop (30mm H/26mm FF midsole heights), available January 2016, price $120

Nice and simple upper with a more refined design, aesthetic and overlay setup. Skechers Performance is maturing.

The Skechers GOtrail Ultra 3 could be a real sleeper hit. While the GOrun Ultra and Ultra 2 have had a following, to me the shoe wasn’t that refined, and the non-rubber outsole was an issue in a trail shoe of its design.  The Ultra 3 is taking on the likes of Hoka One One with what could be a much better shoe in the end (I know the last will be better). The midsole is Skechers’ new 5 Gen material, which I’ve run in and really like. It also has some actual rubber coverage, a unique drainage system, and a new soft and relatively seamless upper design.  I’m personally pretty excited about it, even though I normally don’t prefer so much cushion.  The Gen 5 is that good and the design is flexible enough.

Decent looking outsole that will provide plenty of flex and traction. I just hope it holds up longer than it looks like it would; lots of exposed EVA that usually leads to torn off lugs for me.

That’s it for the trail roundup, stay tuned for the mountain shoes in a future post!

Brooks

Brooks Nuero upper. Notice material that attaches to laces. It actually wraps all the way under the foot.

Brooks Nuero – weight: 9.4 oz (men); 7.9 oz (women), drop: 6mm, available 03/01/16, price: $130

The Brooks Nuero was one of the most innovative road shoes I saw at the show.  Without running in them I can’t say whether it will be a good innovation or not, but kudos to Brooks for trying.  While it is hard to say whether this will be a "racing" shoe or not, Brooks seems to think it will be a fast running shoe, so I decided to include it in my racing shoe writeup. The main unique feature is the decision to have the shoe uncouple in the midfoot at a diagonal angle that is supposed to allow the forefoot and heel to move more independently but yet be rigid enough on push off to be responsive. As such, this isn’t supposed to be just a flexible shoe, but to both be snappy and move naturally.  It will be interesting to see whether they can pull this off when it comes out in March.

Podded outsole with some pods filled in and others just encapsulated by EVA.

Showing how the sole uncouples at midfoot. Was very unique to see this in person.

Hoka One One

Hoka One One Carbon Rocket – weight 6.3 oz men, 5.4 oz women. Stack height: 20mm heel, 19mm forefoot, 4/1/2016 release date.

Hoka Carbon Rocket upper is a pretty stripped back traditional racing shoe style and should function well. Both the Tracer and Carbon Rocket appear to be on a more standard racing shoe-style last.

The Carbon Rocket was probably one of the most exciting road racing shoes I’ve seen in quite a while, and could either be super snappy and fast feeling or way too stiff.  I was really shocked with how stiff the shoe felt with its nearly full length carbon fiber plate that has 2 prongs near the front.  To better describe the shoe’s snappiness, it makes the adidas adios, a shoe that is one of the snappier shoes I’ve run in, seem extremely flexible :).  It has a fair bit of cushion to it though, and is super light so it really does have potential to be a great racing shoe that I could see using for a marathon.  Pete an I both will hopefully have a chance to run in these late this winter and let you all know all know how they feel!

Hoka Carbon Rocket – RMAT on the bottom with pretty sparse rubber coverage, EVA above that, and carbon plate above the EVA right below the foot.

Hoka One One Tracer – weights 7 oz men, 6.3 women. Stack height: 22mm heel, 18mm forefoot, 4/1/16 release date

Hoka Tracer – Light and seamless upper.

The Hoka Tracer might be just as easily justified as a trainer with its stack height and extra rubber over the Carbon Rocket, but at 7 oz and on the same racing oriented last that the CR is on, I’m going to put it in with the other racers. Many runners might choose the Tracer over the Carbon Rocket as a 26.2 shoe, especially if the stiff plate is not your thing. The Carbon Rocket might be a little more unique, but the Tracer might be what more people enjoy since it still possesses a great blend of protection and propulsion with its dual density (soft in heel firm in forefoot) midsole design, yet is still really light!

Hoka Tracer – More rubber than the Carbon Rocket, but still not a "robust" outsole by any means and no RMAT either so it is yet to be seen which of the two will hold up better.

New Balance

New Balance 1400v4 – weight 7.2 oz men’s, 6.2 oz women’s, 10mm drop, 4/1/2016 Release Date, $99.95

New upper that stays seamless and should be just as light and comfy as v3.

The 1400v3 (here for Pete’s review) is a shoe that I really like for short and fast runs on trails, but it obviously works well on roads too.  While the v3 was just an upper change, the 1400v4 gets a complete overhaul without changing the overall geometry and fit from what we all love about the 1400.  Biggest change is in the outsole design, which offers just a bit more rubber coverage (a good thing all around IMO and better for trail too).

Outsole with more connected pieces of rubber in the forefoot.

New Balance 1500v2 – Weight 7.9 oz men’s, 6.7 oz women’s, 1/1/2016 Release Date, $109.95

New, refined upper with carryover midsole/outsole.

The 1500, which was New Balance’s first shoe based on the same last as the Zante and Vazee Pace, has a unique niche being that it is both light and still offers some medial support to those who want that feature.  I’ve run in v1, mostly on trail, and like the fit and feel overall.  The 1500v2 is an upper update only and focuses on lighter overlays, while also offering more security.

Salomon

S-Lab Sonic – 7.8 oz mens, Stack Height: 24mm heel, 16mm forefoot, $170

The Salomon S-Lab Sonic is a slightly updated S-Lab X-Series that, in a somewhat surprise move, has Salomon removing speed laces in favor of good old regular laces (I guess I’m not the only one who prefers these!). This upper is very light and airy in person.

I haven’t tried the current S-Lab X-Series, which the S-Lab Sonic updates/replaces, but with this update I’d like to. Salomon reduced the material in the upper slightly and removed the speed laces which they said their athletes requested for the shoe. I usually cut the speed laces off shoes, so this was a welcome change.  The price tag on this one, like the Hoka Carbon Rocket, is likely to be a deterrent, but there’s no doubt Salomon now makes a legit road shoe.

Carryover midsole and outsole as far as I could tell.

Saucony

Saucony Kinvara 7 – Weight 7.7 oz men’s, 6.6 oz women’s, Stack Height 22mm heel, 18mm forefoot, 3/1/2016 Release, $110

The good ‘ole Kinvara in its 7th iteration. Now with a new tech called Everun in the heel.

The Kinvara gets its 7th version with the main story being a new Everun topsole (goes on top of the strobel, between the midsole and footbed) material that Saucony reports to last 3x longer than standard EVA and is dramatically more lively and responsive.  My only wish with the Kinvara is that they had put it full length as it is in the Triumph ISO2, Hurricane ISO2 and Guide 9.  Regardless, it looks like a good update that should please Kinvara fans and potentially attract new ones.

New outsole that doesn’t differ dramatically other than its move away from the more typical Kinvara triangle shapes, but offers similar coverage.

Skechers Performance

Skechers GOmeb Speed 3 2016 – Weight 7.2 oz for men, 18mm heel, 14 mm forefoot. January Release Date, $125.

Contrary to what you’d expect from just putting 2016 on the end of the name, the Skechers GoMeb Speed 3 2016 is actually a pretty large update overall with an all new, fantastic knit upper and new midsole material.

I’ve got a soft spot in my heart for the Skechers Speed series since I ran my second marathon in the Speed 2 and really love that shoe.  The Speed 3 was a little heavier and perhaps more protective than the Speed 2, but lost a little magic for me. The Speed 3 2016 is really quite an overhaul with a full knitted upper similar to the GOrun Ultra Road (which is fantastic), but specific to the needs of the Speed 3. The midsole material is also new (called 5Gen) and more responsive than the Resalyte used in previous versions (also at a softer durometer).  I’m very excited to get this one on my feet this winter! The knit upper is really nice, and something I hope could become a signature feature for Skechers Performance shoes, especially since they deliver a knit upper at a much lower price than Nike or adidas which are all $150 and up for their stretchier knit uppers. I like the more static nature of the knit upper on the GORun Ultra Road, which will be similar to the GOmeb Speed 3 2016, since it holds the foot much more securely.

That’s it for Road Racing shoes that I saw at Outdoor Retailer.  More posts coming for Road Training shoes, Trail, and Mountain shoes coming as well.  Let me know if you have any further questions and I can do my best to answer!

Version 2 of the 1400 was one of my all-time favorite shoes. It was lightweight, simple in construction, and had my desired ride combo of a soft heel and firm forefoot. In fact, I think my only complaint about the shoe was that the interior was a bit scratchy/abrasive, thus precluding sockless running. Other than that, it was pretty much perfection.

When updating a great shoe you always run the risk of destroying what made it so special. New Balance was wise in their approach to updating the 1400 by only changing the upper. The sole is identical to that of the v2, thus the phenomenal ride has not changed. The stack heights are 23mm under the heel, and 13mm under the forefoot, and it weighs in at 6.3 oz in men’s size 9. As such, there is plenty of fairly soft cushion under the heel, allowing for use on longer runs, but it’s snappy and thin enough under the forefoot that it can be used for picking up the pace. It’s a do-everything shoe, and quite honestly, if I had to reduce my shoe collection to a single shoe right now this would be it. It’s that good.

One aspect of the sole worth mentioning is that there appears to be some kind of plate embedded in it. This adds a bit of longitudinal stiffness, and also provides a bit of protection from rocks. I know quite a few people who use the 1400 for racing on trails, and I’ve noticed that it has protected me pretty well while running on crushed rock roads. Wonder if the plate might explain some of this?

Outsole coverage on the 1400 v3 is fairly extensive everywhere but the midfoot, and durability so far for me has been good. I’m not sure you’ll get 500 miles out of a shoe like this unless you are really easy on soles, but for the price it should do pretty well.

The new upper on the 1400 v3 is pretty simple – it’s composed of a breathable mesh with welded overlays for support. But the big change here from the previous version is that the interior is much softer and not as abrasive against bare skin. I’ve run up to five miles sockless in them without any issues other than development of a rank odor.

In terms of fit, the 1400 v3 is a near perfect match for my foot. It’s not a wide shoe, and I did go up a half size, but it’s also not constrictive in any way. It simply disappears on my feet, and that’s pretty much the best compliment I can give to any shoe.

If I haven’t made it clear enough yet, I absolutely love this shoe. For most shoes that I review, I aim to get about 30 miles on them before writing my thoughts up. In this case I’ve more than doubled that mileage simply because I’ve enjoyed running in them so much. It’s really been tough to want to run in anything else! The MSRP of $100 (it can usually be found for less) makes it all the more attractive in a world where shoe prices seem to be skyrocketing. If you haven’t yet tried the NB 1400, do yourself a favor and give it a go – I have no doubt that it will be among my top 3 shoes of the year!

The New Balance 1400 v3 can be purchased at Running Warehouse US and Wiggle UK.

Last year I reviewed the New Balance Fresh Foam 980 and found that although I liked the shoe, it suffered from a fatal flaw that made it unwearable for me on longer runs. The problem was the toebox – it was too pointy up front and squeezed my toes together. The result was blistering between my toes on long runs, and going up a half size did not solve the problem.

The other problem I had with the Fresh Foam 980 wasn’t so much a problem with the shoe per se, but rather with how it was marketed. Ads for the 980 kept using the word “soft,” but the shoe was anything but cushy. Rather, it was quite firm and responsive. This isn’t a bad thing if that is how you like a shoe to ride, but it’s not what people might have expected given the marketing message.

I’d heard rumors that New Balance was going to address the fit issue with the 980 in an update to the shoe. Renamed the Fresh Foam Boracay, I received a pair of the updated model about a month ago and have run about 40 miles in them so far (Disclosure: these shoes were media samples provided free of charge by the manufacturer). Keep on reading to find out what has changed (and what hasn’t).

Specs

Per Running Warehouse, the New Balance Fresh Foam Boracay weighs in at 9 oz in men’s size 9 and has stack heights of 22mm heel, 18mm forefoot (4mm drop). As I did with the 980, I went up a half size in the Boracay and fit is perfect.

Review

I’m happy to report that New Balance has indeed addressed the fit issue I had with the FF 980. Though the change is pretty subtle, there does seem to be just a bit more room up front, and I have less of a sensation of toe squeezing in the Boracay. More importantly, in runs as long as 10 miles I have not experienced any toe blistering. However, this is still not a particularly roomy shoe, so if you prefer a spacious toebox you may want to look elsewhere.

To be honest, the fit change is the only one that was particularly noticeable to me. The upper is new, but remains a breathable mesh with welded overlays. It appears that New Balance removed a bit of padding around the ankle collar, but I did not notice this until I compared the shoes side by side just now. The midsole has a new pattern of hexagons along the sides, but the ride is similarly firm compared to the original. The full coverage outsole also gets a new pattern, but functionally feels the same.

One thing that I don’t like about the Boracay, though it is a rather minor annoyance, is that the edges of the tongue tend to curl under when putting the shoe on. This necessitates sticking you finger into the shoe to flatten it out. In their review, Sole Review noticed the same thing. Seems like it should be an easy fix next time around.

A quick note on durability – I have not experienced any issues with durability in the Boracay so far, but I have seen reports of the upper tearing where it meets the sole on the inner side of the shoe. I’m not sure how widespread this issue is, but it’s something to consider, and this may not be the best shoe to use off-road or in conditions that stress the upper attachment.

Conclusion

So what do you get in the Fresh Foam Boracay? Basically, this is a light weight, well-cushioned but firm shoe suitable for long miles. I found the ride to be smooth and I enjoyed running in them more than I typically do with firmish shoes. They are snappy enough to pick up the pace, but provide enough comfort and protection for double digit mileage.

One challenge that the Boracay faces is that in my opinion it has been eclipsed by it’s new sibling the Fresh Foam Zante. The Zante is one of my top shoes of 2015 so far, and it beats the Boracay in terms of fit, ride, and comfort. New Balance is pitching the Zante as the choice for more uptempo running, but its stack height is only 1mm lower in the heel and forefoot, and the heel feels softer to me which better fits my preference. If you haven’t yet tried the Zante, I highly recommend it. If you prefer a firmer ride and want to try a Fresh Foam, go for the Boracay.

Thanks for reading! For an additional take on the New Balance Boracay, see this review by Sam Winebaum.

Purchasing Options

The New Balance Fresh Foam Boracay is available for sale in the US at Running Warehouse, Zappos, and Amazon.com. Outside of the US, the Boracay is available at Running Warehouse EU. Purchases made via these links provide a small commission to Runblogger and help to support the production of reviews like this one – thanks!

The 1500 is part of a quartet of New Balance racing shoes. The 1400, one of my favorite all-around shoes, is a bit more cushioned, particularly under the heel, and is suitable for longer miles (v3 of the 1400 is coming soon!). The 1600 is a bit less shoe, and the 5000 is an ultralight speed shoe. Among these, the 1500 is unique in that it has a medial post and thus is touted as being suitable for mild overpronators.  Let me address this right off the bat – the shoe does have a post, but it’s small and I can honestly say that I have never noticed it on the run. Don’t let this scare you from trying the shoe.

Specs

Per Running Warehouse the New Balance 1500 weighs in at 7.3 oz in men’s size 9, and has stack heights of 23mm heel, 16mm forefoot. As I typically do in racing shoes, I went up half a size from my normal and the fit is near perfect.

Upper Construction and Fit

For a racing shoe, the fit of the 1500 is fantastic. It hugs my foot without being overly tight anywhere, and the forefoot is decently roomy. The upper is fairly simple in construction – it’s composed mostly of a breathable mesh and welded overlays.There is only one set of seams from the back of the midfoot forward (located in the region of the arch), so this shoe might be a good candidate for those who like to run sockless. The ankle collar and tongue are lightly padded and lined by a nice, smooth fabric. There is a fairly prominent heel counter, but this has not caused me any problems.

I’m also impressed by how the 1500 looks – my pair in gray is fairly subdued, but in a good way. It’s a shoe that can be used casually without making it look like you’re about to run a 5k.

Sole

The sole of the 1500 is pretty firm, and not very resilient. I often find this to be the case with New Balance’s RevLite midsole foam (though not in the 1400 v2 for some reason). For longer, slower miles it feels kind of dead, but the ride improves when you pick up the pace (this is kind of how I felt about the NB 1600 and the Skechers GoMeb Speed 1 and 2). For that reason I would not personally consider this shoe for a marathon, but it would work well for a 5K or maybe even a half. It’s also a shoe that can handle speed work. The main issue though is that for the same purposes you can get a lighter, flashier shoe in the 1600. My guess is the 1500 was made for those who wouldn’t consider the 1400 or 1600 due to the lack of stability elements (mainly a marketing move if you ask me).

One of the things that I really like about the 1500 is the outsole. It’s full coverage, so durability should be good, and the forefoot is covered by rubber nubs that are very grippy. They almost could be called lugs, and for this reason the 1500 could even double as a light-duty trail shoe. It’s not going to handle mud, but the grip is good enough that I was able to run a few times over crusty ice in them without much problem this winter.

Conclusion

If you’re looking for a firm, lightweight racer and are hesitant to try any shoe that doesn’t have a post or other stability elements, the 1500 would be a solid choice. If you’re afraid of stability elements, don’t worry, they are really noticeable in this shoe. It doesn’t offer the most comfortable ride for long, slow distance, but it has a bit of snap when you pick up the pace. It’s also pretty generous in forefoot space for a flat, so not a bad choice if you like a bit of extra room up front.

The New Balance 1500 is available for purchase at Running Warehouse, Zappos, and Amazon. Purchases from these retailers help to support this site – thanks!

According to Sam Winebaum, v3 is just an upper update, with a “softer internal fit, and less areas of vulnerability at flex in the forefoot areas.” I did find the interior of v2 to be a bit rough, so this sounds promising, and it’s good to hear that the sole will remain the same. Very excited about this one!

The Zante is the third addition to the Fresh Foam collection (the FF Trail was released earlier this year). The Zante isn’t actually going to be available widely until next year (now available at Running Warehouse), but they released a special edition version of the shoe for the NYC Marathon. I purchased a pair and have put enough miles on them now to share some thoughts.

Specs

Stack Height: 6mm drop (I measure roughly 26-27mm heel, 21mm forefoot)

Weight: 7.5oz

To get an idea of how New Balance is positioning the Zante, here’s an excerpt from the description on their website:

“The Fresh Foam Zante NYC fits like a supportive sock, hugging your arch while allowing your toes to spread out comfortably. Compared to the original Fresh Foam 980, it’s sleek fit feels more like a racing flat. The toe spring helps the shoe look fast and feel fast, assisting with the quick transition of the foot from heel to toe.”

Unlike the marketing for the 980, I’d say they are pretty spot-on in describing the Zante. It’s like a sleeker, better fitting version of the 980, and I’ve really enjoyed running in them.

Upper and Fit

Compared to the 980, the both the upper and fit of the Zante are much improved. The front half of the upper is composed of a stretchy mesh that feels quite soft and stretchy. This allows for a much greater degree of toe wiggle than in the toe squishing toebox of the 980. It also feels as if there might be a tad more room up front, and the fit is near perfect on my average width foot (I did go a half size up as I did in the 980).

There is minimal structure to the upper over the forefoot, just a few welded overlays. One possible point of concern is that I am seeing some tearing of the upper just in front of the arch on my right foot (see image below). In fairness, I’m not sure if this is due to wear and tear from running, or if I might have snagged the upper on something. There is no evidence of tearing on the left shoe. I’d be interested to hear if anyone else has experienced this? I’m hoping I just snagged it as I’d hate to see an upper flaw ruin an otherwise solid shoe.

The back half of the upper is slightly thicker and more structured, and the heel counter, though present, is soft and very flexible. Internally, the Zante is soft and comfortable. I haven’t tried running sockless in them, but I’d be willing to try once things warm up where I live.

The tongue of the Zante is attached to the upper on both sides, giving the shoe a bootie-like construction. It hugs the foot nicely, and I’d have to say that this is one of the best uppers I have seen on a New Balance shoe in awhile.

I also want to add that I really like the look of the Zante – it’s not a flashy shoe, but the upper has a really nice design and the NYC colorway is pretty sweet.

Sole

This is where things get interesting. I’ve talked to a few other people who have run in the Zante and the comparison I am seeing frequently is a a cross between the Pearl Izumi Road N1 and the Saucony Kinvara. My initial thought was a cross between the Skechers GoRun 1 and the PI Road N1. The reason being is that it has the firm sole feel and smooth transition of the Pearl N1, and a midfoot bump and upper reminiscent of the Skechers GR1.

One of the first things I noticed upon putting the shoes on my feet was the distinct midfoot bump. Some might call it arch support, but to me it feels more like a bump or ridge that extends across the width of the shoe under the arch. In this sense it’s like the GR1 or maybe the original Brooks PureConnect (the PI N1 even has a bit of this type of feel). It was a bit disconcerting at first, but like the bump in the GoRun the sensation went away after running in them a bit. You will feel it while standing in them, but it has been a non-issue for me on the run.

My first run in the Zante was on a very cold day, and I felt that the sole was very firm, much like that of the 980. After running in them in a variety of temperatures for the following several weeks I’ve come to think that the Zante is a tad softer than the 980, moreso under the heel (as with most shoes, the sole feels firmer in the cold). The midfoot through forefoot are firm and responsive, and unless you are a heavy heel striker that’s probably how you’ll describe the Zante experience. However, when forcing a harder heel strike (I’m a light heel striker) I was better able to feel the softness of the heel and the smooth transition from heel to forefoot. I think the Zante will appeal to both types of runners, and it’s interesting how different the ride feels depending on how you contact.

The outsole of the Zante is full coverage rubber – as a result, I expect durability should be decent.

Conclusions

The New Balance Fresh Foam  Zante is the kind of shoe that will work well when you pick up the pace due to the firm and responsive forefoot, and it’s also well-cushioned enough to handle longer runs. Overall it’s a very versatile shoe that should appeal to a wide range of runners. If the upper tear on my shoe is not a widespread issue I’d rank it among the better shoes I have reviewed this year. I highly recommend the Zante!

For other takes on the Fresh Foam Zante, see this review by Sam Winebaum and this review by Peter Stuart on Believe in the Run.

Purchasing Options

The New Balance Fresh Foam Zante is available at Running Warehouse, NewBalance.com, and Zappos. Outside of the US the Zante is available at Running Warehouse EU. Purchases made via these links provide a small commission to Runblogger and help to support the production of reviews like this one – thanks!