Jan 25, 2013 at 8:49 am #1298409
Anyone considered wearing non-trail shoes on the trail? I hesitate to think the difference is that extreme. I know everyone's conditioned to using serious lugs, but when I go out in sneakers I don't feel like I can't climb or slow my descents. My experience is limited.
I'm looking specifically at the new Brooks PureDrift shoes, at 5oz each and with good cushioning, I feel like I'd love these on the trail but my gut is telling me to be cautious and edge towards the Brooks PureGrit instead, for the lugs…
In one of the cheesy videos on the Brooks website, Sasquatch says he wants a shoe that works for different types of terrain, including trail, and he chooses the PureDrift. It's obviously marketing nonsense, but they don't look too bad. I'll probably just get the PureGrit, though, which is the 2013 update to the long-lauded Brooks Cascadia.Jan 25, 2013 at 8:59 am #1947156
@areichowLocale: Northern Minnesota
I personally don't know about a show that light, but as far as not having lugs: seems like that depends on the terrain and how wet it is. I used to hike a lot in Converse All-Stars, with their flat rubber bottoms. Usually fine, especially on even rock surfaces, but not so fun when you start having to deal with mud. Wasn't a fan of that.Jan 25, 2013 at 9:26 am #1947160
My typical hiking shoes (f-light 195) don't have aggressive lugs and I like them that way. But in the mud and snow I go to a more aggressive soled shoe.
5oz is a pretty light shoe though. I can't imagine there would be much cushion or durability, so be aware of thatJan 25, 2013 at 9:40 am #1947166
I tried to use Brooks Pure Connects as lightweight shoes but they were awful. Which seem similar to the Drift.
there is a difference between trail running and hiking. most folks don't trail run for more than 1 day. so things you can deal with for 1 run is different than multiple days.
mesh bottoms let even the smallest trail moisture in to soak your socks. not fun
Mesh tops and bottoms lets in dirt-causes blisters
foam sole is not that grippy.. especially when wet.
it might be that my feet don't like the minimal drop but my feet got super tired wearing those compared to my Solomon XA Comp5s
anyone want a pair of PureConnects sz 8? barely used ;)Jan 25, 2013 at 9:57 am #1947172
I've used the Brooks PureConnect for running and walking since September off-trail, and they're the reason I'd consider switching to the PureDrift. Durability looked awful on the PureConnects at first glance, but in practice they just didn't wear out- they are starting to smooth out on some of the tread, but most of the tread is intact and I have been very impressed with the shoe overall. The upper is rock-solid.
I expect the PureDrift to be just as durable.
So a big +1 on the Brooks shoes; for a certain type of runner, picking up Jake D's Pure Connects is a good deal!
However, when running in rain/slush I also experienced moisture coming up through the bottom of the shoe, but never dirt. Maybe there's a way to seal it off using a lot of DWR spray; it wouldn't wear out too quick, since it's between the tread pads.
I think given that I'll enjoy these shoes, I'll try them out and then report back on how they did.Jan 25, 2013 at 10:12 am #1947180
@ngatelLocale: Southern California
"Anyone considered wearing non-trail shoes on the trail?"
Been doing it for years. Minimalist ShoesJan 25, 2013 at 10:23 am #1947184
Yea.. they are similar to my racing flats i used in HS for track. maybe even lighter. so for up to a few miles they would be fine for me. just hiking felt weird.
i'd probably wear them around as normal shoes if they weren't green and i wanted to sell them haha.
the dirt may have been coming in from the tops since they are so low.. a pair of Dirty Girls would probably solve that.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.