Inov-8 Terroc 330 or Roclite 305?

Tony,

If it helps I would get the Roclite pair. I’m using 318GTX (not 305) at the moment and my walking is rocky paths, or no paths I have found them superb. I only recently used them on multi day walks. Before that I only used trail shoes overnight or on day walks.

Looking at the Inov- 8 web site for the level of comfort and shank support each shoe has. The Terrocs don’t have much.

Martin,

Thanks for your feed back, but I probably did not express my concern clearly.

The 3058's appeal to me because it does offer more cushioning, but I am concerned that the shoes are not as wide as the Terroc 330's.

According to a BPL report, the 305's are based on the same "last" as the 330, so it should be just as wide.

I was hoping to hear from people who have used the 305's and 330's to get their inside to how they compare width wise and over all comfort comparison.

-Tony

Afaik, they're made on the same last but the upper construction of the 305 is different, making them still narrower. You could look at the Roclite 295. They fit almost the same like the Terrocs but have more cushioning (although not as much as the 305).

I think they are made on the same last but perhaps the roclite uppers are more rigid, making the terrocs stretch just a bit more with use. The main thing I noticed is the roclites have a lower heel cup which is too low for my partner whereas the terrocs press on the bottom of my ankle bone and so I prefer the lower roclites.

Jack Spratt

The toebox on all versions of the Roclites are narrower than is found on the Terrocs. I have both, but almost always wear the 330's because of this, particularly on long hikes.

John,

Thanks for feed back…exactly what I was looking for.

Bummer, I was hoping to have a bit more cushion than the Terrocs provide.

Then again, if I can manage to cut my weight more and have loads of 25 to 20 lbs vs. 30 to 35 lb, that would go a long way to my feet not hurting. (My base weight is running around 15 to 18 lbs right now).

-Tony

I would suggest you take a look at the Roclite 295. I've used Terroc's, than Roclite 315s and currently the Roclite 295. The last one is definitely roomier and is almost if not exactly as wide as the Terroc's. I can wiggle with my toes in both the Terroc and the Roclite 295. Something I couldn't do in the Roclite 315.

I tried the Roclite 295 on my last trip (carried about 17 lbs total) and my feet were killing me when I got done and for a couple of days after that. They do have a nice wide toe box though (I usually have to size up or get a 4E).

guess it all depends on your feet b/c I have the roclite 295's and they are the most comfortable shoes I have ever hiked in. That being said they do require a break in period (and by that I mean the users foot not the shoe).

How long does it take for your feet to adjust? I put about 22 miles on them last weekend. I also found that I can't use my SOLE insoles in them because there isn't enough volume. At this point they're no where near as comfy as my Trail Pegasus with the semi-custom fit SOLEs.

I found them to work for me after a few 18+ mile hikes and a few weeks of running. During break in my arches and lower ankles were always sore but they adjusted after some time.

Yes the 295 is very similar fit to the 330, althogh perhaps very slightly more snug.

Breaking in you feet over that kind of period sounds really odd. The fact that you have to break in your feet at all sounds like something is awry. IMHO, the shoe should fit your foot…you shouldn't need to make your foot fit the shoe.

I think it's a case of your feet getting used to moving naturally again. Most Westerners have lost a lot of the strength in their feet, due to being stuck in rigid shoes for most of our lives. For the first few outings, the ligaments and tendons are put under stresses that they're not used to. Give it time, and the feet adjust and start working like they were designed to do.

I walk around barefoot or in flip flops 99% of the time and have for years. Since your feet can't get any more natural than barefoot, I don't think that's the case.

Sounds to me as though the shoes weren't big enough. 'not enough volume' describes it well. If you normally go barefoot then your feet should be strong enough. But they may be big in volume as a result of the exercise, and the shoes while wide may not have enough circumference.

Been there, done that (on a long trip), took a year or two to recover. Never again!

right on Mike

I think we'll see true boots (over-the-ankle) in the future that will be UL light, supportive and durable. I feel we have the materials but not the "will" in many companies to make them as of yet.

Wouldn't it be nice if Danner could take 8 oz. off their lightest boot? (BOOT, not pair) Danner makes all their boots in many widths. And the military rates their military models as their highest quality boots so quality is never a problem with Oregon-made Danners

Eric

I'm going to try the 295 a half-size larger with my semi-custom insoles when I go out this weekend. I'll report back on my experiences.