Scarpa Atom S

Undoubtably the best winter specific shoe design I’ve seen. Scarpa is on a roll in the technical mountain space.

When it comes to a pure mountain winter running shoe, this is it folks!  Scarpa pulled out all the stops on the Atom S and came away with the most comfortable and functional shoe of its kind.  The upper is lined with Outdry all the way up to the top of the gaiter, thus making the shoe waterproof all the way to the top.  The gaiter seals up on the calf with no zippers and disappears after a few minutes.  The midsole is stiffened up a bit from the Atom with what I believe is slightly firmer foam and a harder strobel material.  The outsole is Vibram Icetrek and works great on everything I’ve taken it on.  While the Atom S is currently only available in Europe, I believe there will be an Atom S Evo that is coming this next winter that carries over a very similar upper while putting the new Spin midsole and outsole on it.  Should be even better!

The North Face Ultra MT Winter

A really comfortable winter shoe and probably the most well rounded of the bunch. Enough lugs for the snow and ice and yet still runs decent on regular trail.

I really hope the Ultra MT Winter is not a one off shoe (which is what I expect).  They pretty quietly put out this shoe this winter and it is fantastic.  The Ultra MT Winter has a super comfortable upper on a winter shoe and in a bit lighter, less mountain specific application (non-waterproof back half and gaiter which helps with breathability).  Vibram IceTrek outsole as well on this shoe and I’ve got nothing but good things to say about the compound.  It is the MegaGrip equivalent for winter.  The Ultra MT Winter also has the distinction of being the only shoe with speedlaces that I’ve not yet felt the need to cut off.  The ample tongue padding and thicker/softer lace cord (hint hint Salomon and others) really take care of the major issues of speedlaces and haven’t been a problem for me.  Well done The North Face and I sincerely hope this isn’t the last winter shoe they produce.  Yes, these types of shoes probably don’t sell in big numbers but for a company focused on producing mountain specific product, they give credibility to that aim.  They are on sale now and I’d highly recommend grabbing a pair for the mountains this spring or even for saving for next winter.

Nicely padded tongue and speed laces that actually work well with the top of my foot…note the thicker cord diameter.

Altra Lone Peak 3 Neoshell Mid

The best version of the Lone Peak 3 in my opinion. A stiffer midsole and harder rubber compound with a more supportive upper really dial it in.

I’m a big fan of Altra’s application of Polartec Neoshell on their Lone Peak series.  I enjoyed the original Neoshells last year and was very excited to hear of a boot version coming down the pipe for this year.  I’m happy to say that I was not disappointed.  The Neoshell Mid is THE shoe I would use for long winter slogs and currently would be the option I would go with for a winter 100 miler if I was to tackle one (Susitna 100, White Mountains 100, Arrowhead 135 for ex).  Since knowing about the Iditarod Trail Invitational and running a 45 mile winter race in Alaska in 2014, I’ve always been evaluating winter shoes for their potential utility in these long and insane winter races and the Neoshell Mid tops the list for me so far.  The wide Altra toebox, stiffer midsole and harder outsole compound relative to the regular LP 3.0 is welcome and actually makes it run better than the LP 3 in my view.  The upper is super comfortable and warm and does not pick up any water weight…huge bonuses if you have to be out all day in the cold and or wet.

Salomon S-Lab XA Alpine

The most specific and technical shoe of the bunch. Salomon’s clean design aesthetic on full display.

The XA Alpine is no doubt the most niche of all the shoes I tried this winter and I love that about it.  It is at the same time a nimble trail running shoe, with gaiter, great wet-grip contragrip outsole and designed to use flexible crampons (Kahtoola KTS for example).  The fit is one of the best of any Salomons I’ve tried and the midsole, while stiff is adequately protective and runnable.  The shoe just has great design style and construction as well (a continual strong suit of Salomon).  I wouldn’t recommend them for the average runner just looking to keep snow out or stay dry on trails in the winter, but as a tool for mountain travel in the winter or even spring/summer in the high mountains it is very specifically designed and nothing else comparable exists on the market (…yet,  Scarpa has the Atom Tech releasing next winter which should be comparable). The XA Alpine adds to Salomon’s technical credibility and I respect Salomon for pushing a shoe like this out there to the general public since they could easily just make these for their high caliber athletes only.

Basically a Sense upper underneath the gaiter.

Saucony Razor ICE+

A nice and light gaitered shoe. Outsole is most unique factor and most limited as well.

I was pretty excited to see Saucony get back into the winter running shoe market with Razor ICE+.  They were one of the first to do such a shoe with the original ProGrid Razor and the ICE+ has a nice clean and light design aesthetic.  Of all the shoes in this round-up, it most reminds me of the old New Balance Winter MT110 which was and still is the lightest winter specific shoe out there.  The 110 Winter’s big drawback was the lack of winter traction and adequate cushion for frozen ground.  The Razor thankfully rectifies some of this but still comes up a bit short in the traction department.  The Razor ICE+ has decent cushion for a lightweight shoe and I’ve had no problems in this regard for runs up to 2 hrs (haven’t taken it out longer than that).  The traction scenario is a bit perplexing.  While, on one hand, the shoe delivers some superb grip on wet and smooth ice due to the implementation of Vibram Arctic Grip (something only available to Wolverine Worldwide companies currently; think Saucony and Merrell in the running space), the tread design is very light and shallow for a shoe that you will spend most of your time in mud, snow and generally nasty conditions.  It’s grip on anything but hard pack dirt and ice is subpar.  I’d recommend the shoe if you are looking for something to perform on ice without having to use metal spikes, even road runs, but if you are looking for an all around winter trail shoe, there are better options listed above in this post.  The good news is the overall design and implementation of the shoe is good and so there is some potential to be tapped into.  If Saucony can redesign with a full Everun midsole and deeper lugs and either more smartly implement Arctic Grip or ditch it all together in favor of Ice Trek or Mega Grip, they’d have a pretty slick winter trail shoe.

Pretty simple and light upper. Most reminiscent of the New Balance MT110 Winter out of the bunch. I removed the speed laces and replaced with regular laces.

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!

1. Montrail Fluidflex F.K.T – weight 274 grams (9.7 oz) mens 9, 22mm H/18mm FF, $110.00

The Montrail Fluidflex ST was a shoe that I saw some potential in last year and Montrail decided to fine tune the upper for 2016 with a new design that is a little lower volume, has a lower heel collar (relative to the last version not in general) and new seamless overlays.  The shoe really runs well and I’ve been particularly happy with it on workouts where I’m running for 2 hours on the trails with some work at tempo pace.  The shoe can handle the distance of a 12-15 mile run just fine, but feels snappy and sharp enough to feel at home at faster paces.  It’d be on my shortlist for a smoother surfaced trail 50k and I’ll likely keep it in my rotation going forward specifically for trail workout days.  The midsole and outsole are carried over from the ST with the Fluid Guide still present that stiffens the midfoot foam just a bit.  Good overall update.  I’m hoping they look at tweaking the midsole and outsole a bit next giving it just a bit sharper, narrower midsole profile and a little more rubber coverage wouldn’t hurt.

3. Scott Kinabalu RC – weight 255 grams (9.0 oz) mens 9, 19mm H/14mm FF, $130.00

Scott appears to have made some effort to keep their lineup relevant with some updates to their Kinabalu and off-shoots of the Kinabalu name in the Kinabalu Enduro and Kinabalu RC.  The RC, essentially takes the previously Trail Rocket 2.0 platform and adds a rockplate to it with a new upper.   I like what this has done to the ride, giving the shoe more snap and protection for its weight.  The upper is very low volume throughout…maybe a bit too low for the average foot, but with a heavily padded tongue you can really cinch the shoe down and it doesn’t feel too constricting, although the upper does run a bit hot.  Overall the ride reminds me of the Nike Kiger 2 without zoom units, which is a very good thing since the Kiger 2 is probably the best light trail shoe ever in my mind.  The Kinabalu RC has a fast, near road racing shoe-like ride but still protective enough for rocky terrain.  The only downsides, I feel are the shoe is a bit expensive for what it is (essentially a trail racing flat) and the slightly hot upper.  I do feel, however, that the Kinabalu RC is one of the best light trail shoes to come out this year and that SCOTT has done the best they can do with their carryover platform and to really continue progressing the line, they need a new midsole design and materials.  The good news is after seeing the 2017 lineup at Outdoor Retailer this year, the Kinabalu RC will get a new upper and new midsole material which should move it in the right direction!  Stay tuned for more!

3. Salomon Sense Pro 2 – weight 260 grams (9.2 oz) mens 9, 23mm H/17mm FF, $130.00

The Sense Pro hit a great sweet spot for many runners in that it gave the fit and feel of the S-Lab Sense with a little more protection, cushion and without the extra $50 price tag.  I essentially see the Sense Pro 2 and Sense 5 as very similar shoes with just slightly different leanings so many of my thoughts on the Sense 5 (see #4 below) apply here.  However, some things different and stand out in the process.  First, the 6mm offset, in the case of these two shoes is by far preferable since the shoe has a much better flow and transition from midfoot to toeoff.  The Sense 5 is really flat from the midfoot forward, which, while fine when going uphill, feels like it is fighting toe off just a bit on the flats and downhills.  I’ve seen in places where even Salomon team runners like Max King have mentioned this about the Sense 5.  Second, the Sense Pro 2 has a little more stack height and a slightly (relative to the Sense 5) softer midsole feel that gives the shoe a more forgiving ride.  Granted in the scope of all shoes on the market, the Sense Pro 2 is still quite firm.  Lastly, I feel the last on the Sense Pro 2 is just a bit more accommodating fit wise and is more comfortable overall.  All of this combined with the more normal price tag makes choosing between the two shoes an easy decision in favor of the Sense Pro 2.

4. Salomon S-Lab Sense 5 Ultra – weight 223 grams (7.9 oz) mens 9, 19mm H/15mm FF, $180.00

The S-Lab Sense is quite the iconic shoe.  Having been originally developed for Kilian Jornet’s winning run at the 2011 Western States 100, the shoe has seen quite a few iterations since then (5 in fact, go figure) with the shoe generally getting more substantial with each version.  The Sense 4 was nearly 8.5 oz and had a fairly well lugged outsole, but, and this is the kicker, on the same midsole mold as the original.  So essentially you have a midsole design meant for a 7.0 oz racing shoe that is still being used on 8+ ounce models.  Version 5 does head the other direction to bring the shoe back under 8 oz by removing some of the lug and using a very thin and open mesh on the upper.  Overall I think they’ve basically fine tuned this platform to the utmost in the Sense 5 and it is a nice light trail shoe, but I still honestly find the shoe lacking in some areas that I wish it was just better.  In a way, it would still be best suited as a 7.0 oz trail racing flat, but instead Salomon has firmed up the foam to try to make it more protective and durable..  Problem is, it still has all those midsole/outsole cutouts which reduce protection and durability.  This results in a semi-harsh ride without any durability or protection benefits because of all the cutouts and narrow racing design. The cutouts made sense on a shoe trying to shave every gram, but don’t on a shoe that is trying to be more well rounded.  The construction and quality is top notch but the design needs an overhaul and is basically 5 years old at this point.  It still is a fun, fast little shoe, but there are so many other shoes in the same weight class that I’d choose over the Sense at this point (Nike Kiger anyone?) that it is just not at the top of my list and that is not even getting into the, in-a-class-of-its-own, $180.00 price tag.  The high point to the end of my long standing frustration with some of the design choices with the S-Lab Sense over the years is that the Sense 6 coming in 2017 gets a full outsole and midsole refresh that should help with durability and hopefully ride (if the midsole material is better/less harsh).

 5. Brooks PureGrit 5 – weight 277 grams (9.8 oz) mens 9; 21mm H/17mm FF, $120

The Brooks PureGrit has always been a shoe that I’ve wanted to like and, nearly always not worked out for one reason or another.  In version 5 some of the issues I’ve had a addressed and some remain.  The main thing I like about the shoe is the low profile, yet protective all around ride.  It feels minimal and fun to run in, but substantial enough to run longer in.  The midsole material is firm but has some responsiveness to it and the rock plate is substantial enough to really add to the protection and responsiveness of the shoe.  The outsole also is well done and versatile in design.  All in all, the platform is really solid on the shoe.  For me, however, the fit is still a glaring issue on this shoe.  While better than previous versions for me in some areas, there are still some major shortcomings in the fit department.  First off the amount of eyelets are quite low and start much further up the foot than most trail shoes.  This leaves an open feeing over the ball of the foot and toes, which is fine walking around, but at speed on technical trail, my foot was moving a lot in this shoe.  Second there is near zero tongue padding/lace pressure dispersion, which all but eliminates abating the first problems since you can’t crank the laces down unless you don’t want to feel the top of your feet.  Maybe there is a “Brooks” type of foot out there that works for other runners, but for me, the Brooks lasts fit about as poor as any other brand out there which is a real shame.  I’m hoping the forthcoming Mazama, with its speedier focus, fits just a bit more secure.

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!

I was a little leery giving the Speedcross Pros a review (disclosure: the shoes were provided free of charge from Salomon) since I really don’t like the Speedcross 3, which is most likely their best selling model of all time.  It has been around unchanged for quite some time and, while I can understand its initial popularity years ago, I can’t seem to grasp why it is still as popular given all the great options these days that are just as grippy, yet much more nimble and comfortable.  The good news is, even if you don’t like the Speedcross 3, the Speedcross Pro modernizes the Speedcross line, while still retaining most of what folks probably like about the Speedcross 3 (for good or bad).

Specs

Price: $150

Weight: 400 g (14.1 oz) in my size 13, 323 g (11.4 oz) in men’s 9 and 283 g (10 oz) in women’s 8

Stack Height: 29mm heel, 19mm forefoot

Specs from Running Warehouse

Medium width throughout, which I found not too wide, but not super precise either. Right in the middle of comfort and performance in fit.

With speedlaces and plastic eyelet liners removed. Much improved and the fit was able to be more fine tuned, but still not the most secure upper and pretty stiff heel counter.

Upper and Fit

The upper on the Speedcross Pro is likely the best and most significant upgrade from the Speedcross 3.  It is completely stitch free and features the Endofit sleeve that connects with the tongue (pioneered by the Sense series).  I’m still pretty indifferent on how much this improves the fit of Salomon shoes, and in many models I only feel that it adds unnecessaryweight and thickness to the upper.  That said, I didn’t have any problems with it on the Speedcross Pro, and since the upper is a pretty closed cell material it is going to run hot anyway.  Overall, I think the upper quality is right up there with their S-Lab products, and probably a little more room in the fit compared to the Fellcross 3 and Sense 3.  The upper should hold up well under rough conditions, and will be comfortable in the colder/wetter type of use it is designed for.

As usual, I did cut the speed laces off and replaced them with regular laces which helped with getting a little better lock down, and relieved pressure on the top of the foot.  This is one area that Salomon really needs to improve on though; they always run speed laces and usually, especially in their S-Lab product,  have a very thin neoprene-like tongue material that just doesn’t distribute any pressure from the static speed laces.  A little thicker/stiffer tongue material like the Dynafit Feline SL helps a lot to relieve speed lace pressure and would help improve the comfort in Salomon shoes especially on steep downhills.

Pretty nice profile and clean Salomon lines and construction. The overlasted forefoot is a nice touch too. Chunky heel really detracts though.

Midsole and Ride

While the Speedcross Pro is an improvement in the ride department compared to the Speedcross 3, this is the main area where I feel the shoe doesn’t meet my expectations in a mountain shoe.  The Speedcross 3 has a very odd mix of a soft, flexible, low forefoot and a stiff and chunky heel.  The combo makes sense only if you are trying to retain high levels of heel cushion, and yet still have enough proprioception in the forefoot to handle technical terrain.  While hard heel strikers may appreciate this, I think most runners who run in technical terrain frequently adopt a much more nimble stride and when you do, the heel on the Speedcross 3 is just in the way and actually downright unstable.

The good news is that in the Speedcross Pro this midsole characteristic is subdued a little compared to the Speedcross 3.  The bad news is that it is still there in a pretty noticeable way.  The Speedcross 3 was pretty much not runnable on technical terrain for me whereas the Speedcross Pro is usable, but definitely not the type of ride that inspires confidence running sub 6 pace on steep and loose terrain.  The heel is still too chunky and wide and the forefoot still a little soft.  The ride is more forgiving than many other mountain/off trail shoes out there, but the problem is that it comes at the expense of its stability on uneven terrain. With a shoe with as much lug as the Speecross series has, this is a tradeoff not worth making, in my opinion.  Either reduce the lug and make it more of an all around shoe, or sharpen up the ride for steep terrain.

Shot of the fairly thick, wide and chunky heel. Just not a good match for the end use of the shoe.

Outsole

The outsole is slightly different from the Speedcross 3 and more akin to the Fellcross 3 in design (with shallower lugs).  I found the outsole adequate for a varied set of conditions and the traction is good all around.  The biggest fault is really on the midsole not being stable enough to use all of the grip.  Other than that, the outsole is simple and solid in design and, while the Contragrip rubber is not the best on the market, it is still a fairly high quality rubber.  I’m also not sure I’m entirely sold on the Chevron lug shape for some situations (side-hilling in particular), but it isn’t a huge problem and generally functions well.

Overall a nice outsole with a cleaner design than the Speedcross 3 and it has held up well so far.

Overall Thoughts

The Speedcross Pro is a great improvement to, in my view, the outdated Speedcross 3 and is much more closer to the S-Lab models in build and function (a good thing!).  Regardless, some of the negative aspects (unless you love the Speedcross 3 that is) is a very beefy, heavy and unstable feel and ride for the end use it is designed for.  Unless, for some reason, you like having lugs on more mellow terrain, the shoe is overkill for the type of terrain it performs best on.  On moderate trail, it really does ride smooth and comfortable, something shoes with this much lug rarely do well.  However, as soon as it gets genuinely steep, loose or uneven, I felt that the lack of control and stability really holds the shoe back.  The $150 price tag is something that also holds it back, as there are better shoes from Dynafit and inov-8 out there for less money.  That said, if you like the Speedcross 3 a lot, I think the Speedcross Pro is a very refined iteration of that shoe, which, for some, may make it a fantastic option.

The Salomon Speedcross Pro is available for purchase at Running Warehouse US and Running Warehouse EU.

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!

Salomon S-Lab Sense 4 Ultra

I just recently reviewed the Salomon Sense 3 Ultra – one of my favorite shoes of the year so far. Light and fast, like a racing flat for the trails. Looks like the Sense 4 Ultra will have a more breathable mesh on the upper (breathability was one of my few complaints about the 3), and an updated lug design.

Salomon S-Lab X-Series

The X-Series is is basically an adaptation of the Salomon Sense trail shoe line to the road. The X-Series features a stretchier upper in the forefoot and a softer sole than in their trail shoes, both of which sound very appealing to a guy who loved the Sense Pro and Sense 3 Ultra but runs mostly on the road.

I spent two weeks in late July/early August coaching at the Craftsbury running camps up in northern Vermont. While there, I did almost all of my non-asphalt running in the Sense 3 Ultra (which was the majority of the miles I ran). Terrain included single-track trails and lots of rocky dirt roads, and even a 5K race that was mostly single-track (brutal but fun!). I was able to put the shoes to the test, and aside from developing a wicked stench they performed marvelously. In fact, I may like them even more than their “Pro” cousin (Disclosure: these shoes were a personal purchase during a shoe-sale induced moment of weakness).

The Sense 3 Ultra is in essence a low-profile trail shoe built for running fast off-road. Per Running Warehouse it weighs in at 7.8oz in men’s size 9, and has a stack height of 19mm heel, 14mm forefoot (heads up – a bunch of Salmon shoes, including the Ultra, are currently on sale through 9/1 at Running Warehouse). In contrast, the Sense Pro is about 1.5oz heavier and adds 3mm of stack to the forefoot and heel. So it’s just a bit more shoe than the Ultra. For another comparison, the stack height of the Saucony A6 road racing flat is 17mm heel, 13mm forefoot, so pretty similar to the Ultra.

Upper Construction

The upper of the Sense 3 Ultra, which again is very similar to that of the Sense Pro, is very nicely constructed and has a feeling of quality about it (which it should for an MSRP of $160). The top of the forefoot and small portions along the midfoot are composed of a tight mesh and there are extensive welded overlays covering much of the upper (including a welded rand along the junction between the upper and sole). Given the amount of upper covered by overlays, this is not a terribly breathable shoe (might explain my stench issues). Unfortunately, though I’ve soaked the shoes running in wet grass and rain, I never fully submerged them so cannot comment on drainage. The toe bumper is flexible yet provides good protection.

The “Endofit” tongue of the Ultra (see image at left) wraps around both sides of the foot and attaches to the footbed at the junction of the upper and sole. Same design as in the Sense Pro (did I mention they were similar shoes?), and it helps to keep debris away from the foot (though grit does tend to collect between the upper and tongue). This Endofit design hugs the foot and contributes to the performance feel of the shoe. As with the Sense Pro, the Ultra has speed laces which work well for me, though they are a bit longer than necessary. There is a pouch at the top of the tongue that can be used to tuck away slack – it’s a bit hard to access after cinching the laces tight but you can get them in there with a bit of fiddling around.

Fit

I’d describe the fit of the Ultra as racing-flat snug. Perhaps a bit snugger than the fit of the Sense Pro, particularly up front (see comparison photo at left). However, for some reason both shoes seem to work well on my feet and I haven’t had any blistering, abrasion, or excessive toe squeezing. I haven’t run ultra distance in these shoes (my max in them is 10 miles) so that would be a better test of fit with extended wear, but I’ve had no issues with comfort so far.

Sole Construction

The sole of the Sense 3 Ultra is low-profile and firm, which contributes to the fast feel. The outsole is thin with small triangular lugs, so weight of the sole is not excessive (an issue I had with the Merrell AllOut Rush that I reviewed last week). This is not going to be a go-to shoe for running in mud, but traction was adequate for the types of terrain I’ve run on in them (single-track, grassy cross country ski trails, dirt roads).

In terms of protection, the Profeel-film rock plate (gray areas seen in the forefoot cutouts in the image above) did a good job handling roots and rocks, never had any issues stepping on hard stuff on the trails.

Conclusion

The Salomon Sense 3 Ultra is a low-profile, lightweight shoe that feels fast on the trails. I’ve enjoyed nearly every mile I’ve run in them, with my only real complaints being that they are a tad snug and they have developed a hard-to-kill stink. If you have wide feet, look elsewhere, but if you like a performance fit for cruising in the woods, these would be a great option.

The Salomon Sense 3 Ultra (and several other Salomon shoes) are currently on sale through 9/1 at Running Warehouse. In the US it is also available at Zappos (currently on sale) and Amazon. Outside the US it can be purchased from Wiggle (currently on sale there a well). Purchases made via these links help to support the production of reviews like this one – thanks!

New Balance Fresh Foam Boracay and Zante

New Balance is apparently ditching their numbering scheme for naming shoe models (hooray!!!), and the Fresh Foam 980 Road will be updated in the form of the New Balance Fresh Foam Boracay. Sam reports that the Boracay will weigh in at just under 10oz, and will retain it’s 4mm drop platform. I enjoyed running in the Fresh Foam 980 Road except for the fact that it had a pointy toebox – Sam indicates that the midsole is a wider platform in the Boracay so hopefully this will improve fit.

New Balance Fresh Foam Boracay – photo via Sam Winebaum

One of the new shoes I’m most excited about is the New Balance Fresh Foam Zante. My understanding is that the Zante is kind of a racier, lower profile Fresh Foam shoe. Sam reports that the Zante will weigh in under 8oz, have a 6mm heel-forefoot drop, and will retail for $100. Looks like my kind of shoe!

New Balance Fresh Foam Zante – photo via Sam Winebaum

Altra Superior 2.0 and Instinct 3.0

Altra introduced several new updates at OR. Sam provides details on all of them, and here I’ll feature the Superior 2.0 and Instinct 3.0.

I loved the original Altra Superior – is was roomy, low profile, and flexible. However, durability was a bit of an issue (for example, the sole on my pair is separating from the upper) and traction was not great. The Superior 1.5 was an upper update, but with version 2.0 the shoe gets a complete overhaul. Sam reports that the 2.0 adds a more aggressive outsole with 2mm more cushion yet drops 2.5 oz from v1.5.

Altra Superior 2.0 – photos via Sam Winebaum

I had lunch with Altra co-founder Golden Harper a few weeks ago and got a sneak peak at the Instinct 3.0. Rather than their typical practice of doing an upper update to the 2.0 and releasing a 2.5, Altra decided to put the shoe through a complete overhaul and jump right to version 3.0. This may be due in part to frequent reports that the 2.0 is too soft compared to previous versions. Sam reports that version 3.0 will have a slightly thinner, firmer midsole compared to v2.

Altra Instinct 3.0 – photo via Sam Winebaum

In addition to the Superior and Instinct, Altra is also updating the Provision and Olympus. For more details on those head over to Sam’s Altra preview post.

Salomon Sense X-Series

Two of my favorite shoes so far this year have been the Salomon Sense Pro and Salomon Sense 3 Ultra. I ran over 50 miles on dirt roads and trails in the Ultras the when I was up in Vermont for the second half of July and loved them – should have a review up soon. I was excited to see Sam post about a new Salomon shoe called the S-Lab X-Series. Looks like this is kind of a road-trail version of the Sense with a bit softer heel cushion and a more road-worthy outsole.

Salomon S-Lab X-Series – photo via Sam Winebaum

Sam also provides some photos of the Sense 4 Ultra and Sense 4 Soft-Ground.

That’s it for now, if I find any more info on new shoes introduced at OR I’ll be sure to share!

Salomon sent me a pair the Sense Pro several months ago (Disclosure: these were media samples provided free of charge for review purposes), and my first impression upon trying them on was that they were too tight. I came really close to sending them back. But, the shoes looked great, and I desperately wanted to run in them. I’d also never tried a Salomon shoe before, and wanted to see what the brand had offer.

I tried swapping a thinner insole into the Sense Pros and that created enough room to make them wearable. After a few runs they broke in nicely and I was able to put the original insole back in. I’m really glad I kept them since the Sense Pro has quickly become one of my favorite shoes. In fact, it may be the shoe that has been on my feet more than any other so far this year (combined running and casual use). What’s more, probably 3/4 of my 50 or so miles in them have been on trails, so I’ve actually been able to put them to the test on the surfaces they were designed to tackle.

Let’s start with the specs (via Running Warehouse)
Weight: 9.2oz in men’s size 9
Stack Height: 22mm heel; 17mm forefoot

Fit and Feel

The simplest way I can describe the Sense Pro is that it feels like a racing flat built for the trails. It’s a low-profile shoe that fits very snugly, but for some reason the fit works for me and does not feel constricting. I think the reason is that Salomon has squared off the toebox just enough so that it doesn’t squeeze my toes together. If you have wide feet these will likely not work for you – closest comparisons I could make for fit would be maybe the Saucony A5, Pearl Izumi N0, or the Adidas Adios Boost. If you like feeling locked into a trail shoe, these might be perfect.

Though the Sense Pro is not ultralight, it’s light enough that it stills feels fast. That may have something to do with the fit being reminiscent of a flat, and I was actually surprised when I weighed my pair in at 9.6 oz. I would have guessed more in the 7-8 oz range.

A note on sizing – Salomon sent me a size 9.5. This might be the first shoe I’ve ever worn in that size as I’m almost always a size 10 or 10.5 in other shoes. However, the fit does seem to be right on me, so I suspect they sent me a half size down since the shoe runs a bit big.

Upper

The upper of the Sense Pro is very similar (though not identical) to that of the Salomon S-Lab Sense 3 Ultra (which I recently purchased since I like the Sense Pro so much). It has a flexible toe bumper, and lots of welded overlays for support. I like the fact that the overlays extend along the junction between the sole and the upper forming a rand – for a post on the importance of randing in a trail shoe read this. The upper has a feeling of quality to it – this is a very well-crafted shoe. I have not noticed any delaminating of the overlays or unusual upper wear after 50 miles in them.

The Sense Pro is the first shoe I’ve run in that has speed laces. I’ve come to like them a lot, but they do present some challenges since the laces are a bit long. Salomon has built a little pocket into the top of the tongue into which you can tuck the slack, but I’ve found that a bit challenging to access (rather, I’m lazy and haven’t taken the time to mess with the pocket). I’ve simply tucked the slack under the laces and that seems to have worked well. The speed lacing makes it easy to slip the shoes on and off, and I can keep them loose when I wear the shoes casually.

The tongue of the Sense Pro is attached internally to the footbed both sides to hug the foot and keep debris out – Salomon calls this the Endofit. I did notice that trail grit does tend to accumulate between the Endofit sleeve and the upper of the shoe and must be shaken out on occasion.

Sole

The sole of the Salomon Sense Pro is 5mm drop, and has a firm feel to it (it’s apparently the same sole as found on the Sense Mantra). It feels perfect for running fast on the trails, and I’ve even enjoyed running on roads in them. The latter is a bit of a surprise to me since I don’t generally like firmer shoes on roads unless they are very minimal.

The outsole is full coverage rubber, and the lugs are small but grippy. This is not a mud shoe, but I’ve not had issues with traction over other varied trail surfaces. The 10 mile trail race I ran in them was on a wet, cool day and the trail was technical with lots of switchbacks, soggy leaf cover, roots, and wet rocks. Traction was excellent. I ran on the same trails again on Monday, and once again had no issues with traction. I did hit a few patches of wet mud, and the shoes drained fairly quickly after getting submerged.

The Sense Pro has a rock plate that extends back through the midfoot. Protection is excellent, and have had no issues running over roots or pointy granite rocks in them.

Performance

As mentioned at the beginning of the post, I’ve run about 50 miles in the Sense Pros over varied surfaces, including a 10 mile trail race. They have worked remarkably well for everything I have thrown at them (except for mud).

I liked the Sense Pro so much that I decided to buy a pair of the Sense 3 Ultras as well, if for no other reason than to figure out how the shoes differ. I’ve not yet run in the Sense 3 Ultra, only worn them around a bit and did a 4 mile hike in them.

The shoes are pretty similar, differing mainly in weight (Sense 3 Ultra is about 1.5 oz lighter), stack height (Sense Ultra drops 3mm from the heel and forefoot heights), and price (the Ultra costs $30 more). The Sense Ultra also feels just a tad snugger, has a thinner insole, is less padded around the ankle collar, and the lace rows are more widely separated – see photo to the left.

Salomon Sense Pro (blue) and Sense 3 Ultra (red)

One more thing to note is that though I wear a 9.5 in the Sense Pro, I ordered a 10 in the Sense 3 Ultra. I think this was the right call.

Conclusion

If you’re looking for a low profile, snug-fitting trail shoe that will handle most trail conditions, the Salomon Sense Pro is a great choice. It’s a shoe that is going to continue to get a lot of use from me, and I’d go so far as to say that it’s one of the best trail shoes I have tried, an all-around winner!

The Salomon Sense Pro is available for purchase at Running Warehouse, Zappos (currently on sale), and Amazon. Outside the US it can be purchased direct from Salomon, or at Millett Sports in the UK. Purchases made via these links help to support the production of reviews like this one – thanks!

For another take on the Salomon Sense Pro, check out this video review by Ginger Runner.

The Sense were produced and released for the public in mid-2012.  Since that time, I have had three pairs of the original Sense and one pair of the Sense’s successor, the Sense Ultra (I’ll refer to these as the ‘Ultra’ going forward for simplicity sake).  Both the Sense and the Ultra are terrific shoes. I have tried many (probably too many) shoes since I started mountain trail running, and these are hands down my favorite line of shoes to date. 

My running approach/style:  I started trail running three and a half years ago in Vibram Five Fingers and huaraches, then moved to Merrell Trail Gloves, New Balance MT10s and Inov-8s.  Since that time, I’ve tried a lot of shoes, mostly of the minimalist variety.  I am a ‘forefoot striker’ and have come to like a shoe that offers flexibility (both lateral and torsional), is lightweight, and has enough protection and cushion to allow me to run anywhere from 50k to 100k without feeling like my feet have gone through a meat grinder (which is how my feet felt after running the Chuckanut 50k in Merrell Trail Gloves two years ago).  No longer a purist-minded minimalist, I want all of the aforementioned characteristics in my shoe, but have a very short list of shoes that make the mark.

The original Salomon Sense meet almost all of my requirements, but came up lacking in the cushion/protection department when I ran more than 50k on hard mountainous terrain.  This is where the Ultra comes in.  Together, these are a powerful duo.  When going out for a couple of hours, I grab the Sense, when going out for a 50k or more, the Ultra does the trick. 

Both shoes offer an incredible fit.  Many runners have described putting on the Sense as feeling like they were custom made for their feet.  I agree with this, and can’t imagine a more form fitting yet comfortable shoe.  Salomon refers to the fit as their ‘Endo-fit’ approach.  Be patient putting the shoe on, as it’s snug until you get your foot all the way inside.  I recommend wearing very thin socks (Drymax Hyperthin Mini Crew is my first choice for these shoes), as the shoe was designed to be worn sockless and therefore may feel too snug with thicker socks. 

The insole was designed to be worn sockless (how Kilian prefers to run), but I still prefer the shoes with socks.  There are some seams on the medial and lateral sides that are easily perceptible on bare skin, and I can easily imagine these areas leading to blisters. 

Here is my breakdown of the difference between the two shoes:

Weight:  Sense 6.4 vs. 7.4 in the Ultra.  Super light by anyone’s standards. 

Durability:  Some runners found that the outsole began peeling off the midsole with the Sense.  I never had this issue.  There have also been reports of delamination on the upper.  My only problem thus far with either of the shoes has been wear through of the fabric on the medial side of the fabric.

Outsole & Traction:  The Ultra’s outsole is narrower than the Sense; however, this doesn’t seem to result in any difference in feel or function when running.  Both have great flexibility and solid ground feel. 

If there is a serious drawback to either of these shoes as an overall training and racing shoe, it’s either the steep price or the lack of significant traction.  I haven’t found the lack of aggressive tread to be an issue, and credit the design team’s innovative approach for this.  The outsole and midsole bend, you might say morph, as the demand arises.  It is true that these shoes are not intended to be top performers in mud, snow and ice.  For everything else though, they perform admirably.  The Ultra does have deeper lugs than the Sense.  While this is perceptible to the eye, it is a rather slight difference in terms of function.  If you’re going fell running or jumping over crevasses (think Kilian in one of his short mountain running movies), grab a pair of Salomon Speedcross (review coming in a few weeks!) or the like.  Perhaps more significant than the depth of the lugs on the Ultra is the presence of lugs on the midfoot and front of the heel section.  Kilian wanted his Sense with only the bare necessities.  Given the rather slight traction of that shoe though, it’s a welcome change to have traction covering the entire bottom of the sole. 

Protection:  The Profeel Film is what the S-Lab design team came up with to replace a rockplate.  This innovation is, in my opinion, revolutionary.  Why more trail shoe designers haven’t jumped on board yet is beyond me.  The Profeel Film (a puncture-proof weave) functions similar to what you might assume a thin layer of Kevlar would do.  It blunts push through of rock and root, but adds very little weight or rigidity to the shoe.  While the original Sense incorporated the Profeel Film only under the forefoot (might be fine for Kilian, but killed my feet midway through the White River 50 mile Endurance Run).  The Ultra utilizes the Profeel Film throughout the bottom of the shoe, as opposed to just the forefoot (thank you designers!). 

Flexibility:  This is probably the most important aspect of both shoes in my opinion.  Salomon nailed it.  Their aim to deliver ‘propriotection’ is spot on.  The shoes have enough torsional and lateral flex to allow the foot to quickly adapt to challenging foot placements (roots, rocks, holes in the trail, etc.).  There is a sweet spot, and the designers found it, between giving just enough cushion and protection without sacrificing ground feel.  For comparison sake, neither shoe flexes as much as Vibram Five Fingers, Merrell Trail Gloves or the LaSportiva Vertical K’s, but they do offer more flex than the Inov-8 Trailroc Line (which have a strangely rigid outsole in my opinion), New Balance 110’s, and the Salomon Mantra. 

There is slightly more flexibility in the Sense than in the Ultra, due to the reduced OS Tendon in the Sense.

Cushion:  The stack heights of both the Sense and the Ultra are reported by Running Warehouse to be around 19 mm heel and 15 mm forefoot. They have hardened the midsole in the Ultra, presumably to alleviate premature degeneration of this section of the shoe. 

The Upper:  Very little change has occurred in the design of the upper.  There is a slight extension of harder/protective material over the toe in the Ultras.  The same fabric is found in both shoes, and is clearly made of lightweight and very flexible material.  This allows, in part, for the shoes’ overall light weight, but unfortunately undermines the shoes’ longevity to some extent.  This will likely be more of an issue for forefoot runners with wider feet (it has been for me).  When the shoe touches ground during a run, feet naturally splay and pressure is placed on the sides of the shoe.  My first pair of Senses began to rip on the medial side of the shoe (adjacent to where the toes flex) after about 100 miles.  My second pair of Senses are showing some wear in this spot after about the same distance, but haven’t begun ripping yet (I also went up a full size in my second pair, which allows a bit more room for foot splay).  The Ultras have about 150 trail miles on them and are showing a little wear in the same area.

Both shoes have the ultra-thin yet impressively resilient speed laces.  Like other Salomon shoes, the excess laces tuck conveniently under a sleeve at the top of the tongue. 

Summary:  As I mentioned before, these are my go-to shoes for just about all my mountain trail runs.  When it comes to exceedingly slippery or nasty conditions, something else is indicated.  The shoes are both expensive.  Ultras are currently $180 and Sense are still $200 (though some deals have recently appeared online, as warehouses make room for the Ultra).  That said, there has clearly been an incredible amount of attention paid to the design of these shoes, and you get what you pay for.  Word of caution though – if you start running in either of these shoes, you’re unlikely to settle for much else.  They are leading the pack in their category, hands down in my opinion. 

Ben Luedke is an avid mountain trail runner living in the Seattle, WA area. He is the founder and manager of the Seattle Mountain Running Group, and has been ultra running on mountain trails for three and a half years. Ben regularly organizes self-supported mountain ultras in the mountains of the Pacific Northwest. You can follow Ben’s adventures and additional reviews at www.RunningTheCascades.com.