Saucony Hattory minimalist running shoes – 4.4 oz

[Gregory Stein]

Greetings!

Do anybody have this footwear: http://www.saucony.eu/he-IL/2852/step-into-minimalism.html?
4.4 oz for pair!

[Sumi Wada]

In my experience, most specs for shoes/boots are given per shoe, not for the pair.

4.4oz per shoe makes sense. They look like my little paddle shoes, which are 5oz each.

[David Hunter]

I own them. Like them a lot. The weight is 4+ ounces per shoe. (Depends on the size.)

[Erik Hagen]

My size 10 men's weigh 10 1/4 oz for the pair. I really like them for trail hiking but not so much for scrambling over talus. They also run about 1/2 size too small so you may need to size up.

[Mark Verber]

For the people who are using the Hattory… are you using them on just streets, trails, hardback ground, or have you taken them into the back country with mixed terrain. How is their traction on broken ground, trails turned into sand, leave covered trails, etc?

I ask because several years ago I tried several minimalist shoes (before the crazy that seems to have produced a number of trail worthy options) which were great in town and awful in the back country because the lack of traction. Several times I nearly killed myself because I didn't have traction.

–Mark

[Martin RJ Carpenter]

Essentially streets for me as spare footwear for when getting lifts to/from walks, B&B trips etc.

There is a reasonable tread on the bottom of the shoes so they might cope plausibly well off them. What'd worry me is that the sole unit is mostly made out of EVA instead of rubber. So durability might well be limited, no idea cf grip on rock etc either.

To be honest – given the current extant alternatives – I can't really see why you'd want to either.
(The trailroc sole does look as if it'd be an awful lot better.).

[Mark Verber]

Thanks Martin for sharing your experience.

> given the current extant alternatives – I can't really see why you'd want to either.

I have been using the Trailroc 245 for a bit now… they are the most comfortable shoe I have ever wore and have good traction in the back country. I am always open to trying something else if it would make sense. The Hattory is 1/2 the weight but I didn't think it would be the right thing in the back country. I wasn't going to try then for that unless someone on this thread said "They don't look like it, but they really work well on trails."

[Erik Hagen]

I've worn my Hattori's on 2 overnight trips in Yosemite and the Ansel Adams Wilderness so my experience is still fairly limited. Overall I've been fairly impressed and the shoes are quite comfortable. The biggest issue I have is that with the velco strap over the top, it's hard to get a tight fit (I have the AW model). I see they have a newer version (LC model) that has laces which would be a huge improvement. With the velco strap there is a fair amount of slippage within the shoe.

Where I have been impressed is coming down trails with dust covered granite. I was expecting to slip and slide but the traction was more than adequate. I also wore them up the the top of a peak covered in talus (off trail for ~ 1 mile). On talus the sharp edges were easily felt on the bottom of my feet and ended up with some bruising. I still had good external traction on the talus but internal slippage was a major concern. I expected the soles to be damaged but they held up fine with no visable damage. On sandy, gravely trails I did get some slippage when pushing off but for the most part that didn't bother me. Overall I still really like these shoes and will continue to wear them when I plan on staying on trail.

[Author]

Posts