Running shoes

You might want to take a look at the Salomon XA Comp 2 and the Montrail Melee.

I have been using the XA Comp for the last year. It is mostly mesh, highly breathable, dries quickly, and is the first trail running shoe that I didn’t need to add Superfeet. (Not sure how that tracks with your foot support requirements.) I use it for backpacking, not running.

Ken

Take a look at the Montrail “Leona Divide”. I bought a pair last Spring and have used them as my only backpacking shoes. They have a wider toe box (which for me is great) and they have a full-length protector plate (don’t worry, its flexible) that does a good job of protecting the bottom of your feet from rocks, etc. that are on the trail–i.e. avoids those bruises to the bottoms of your feet. Weight: about 12 oz.

schnees.com is now carrying the Inov8 line if you want another pair.

I have worn several pairs each of the Leona Divide and the New Balance 780 series. The Leona Divides are great, though mine seem to wear out a bit fast. They have the best traction of any running shoe I’ve ever seen. The New Balance are my current favorite, for comfort rather than features.

Thanks, all, for the suggestions. Yes, if I wasn’t clear, this is for lightweight backpacking (of course!).

I’ve not looked all these in person, but the Leona Divide description mentions that it’s medially posted. For me at least, it seems shoes with such support tend to overcorrect. The extra material under the inner ankle almost pushes the ankle outward sometimes, which means you have to be consciously aware not to let your foot twist out too much. It seems nice to have shoes that protect but don’t try to “align” your foot one way or another, especially on rough ground or offtrail. (Of course, this might be an oversimplified theory based on insufficient experience with different shoes….)

The XA Comp seems promising, though if online numbers are correct, it is a fair bit heaver than the Tech Amphibians. (Another theory, but it does seem like Jardine is right and saving an extra ounce really helps with distance.) I like the feel of the latter, but am not sure how durable or general purpose they are. The adjustable heel seems like a nice feature — maybe it offers a little more flexibility in case you are trying to adjust around sore spots or accomodate the way one’s feet tend to grow a bit on the trail?

And thanks, Jay, for the tip on Schnees. (I see they’re in Bozeman as well. Evidently the place to be to buy gear.)

Hi Joshua… REI is now carrying the Inov-8 310 and 330, so they are much easier to get in the states. You can order them through their website and many of the local stores actually have them in stock.

For those of you who haven’t checked out inov-8… I would strongly recommend them. http://www.inov-8.com is a british company which is making some really excellent trail running shoes. I have been using the Inov-8 Flyroc (310) for a few weeks now and have around 180 miles on them. So what’s good?

They are one of the lightest shoes I have worn which provided adaquate support. A mere 24 ounces for a pair of size 10.5 / 44. I feel extremely light on my feet.

The sole is thin enough to feel the terrain, but protective enough that I can hop between jagged granite boulders without hurting my feet. They have only moderate cushioning, but it seems to be enough for me. The sole design provides good traction in many conditions.

The uppers are mostly mesh which works really well. For example, when I compare the Flyroc to the Solomon XA Comp2, the Flyroc is almost as cool / air permeable as Solomon XA Comp, faster drying, and more water resistant. I was able to run for a couple of hours in moderate rain and my feet stayed mostly dry. Note: once the Flyroc has been soak and mucked up they no longer seem to be water resistant, they seem to pull water in.

Best of all for me… not blisters. I switched to trail runners and Wright DoubleSocks and few years ago and have come to expect not getting blisters in common locations like my heel or the sides of my feet, the ball of my foot, etc… but I would still get blisters between some of my toes which are crooked and bump into each other at almost 60 degree angles. The Flyroc shoes are the first shoes I have worn where I got no blisters given a reasonable workout.

What’s promoting this thread update was a trip last weekend to Hetch Hetchy. I covered 21 miles backpacking first day including 5000ft gain, 4000ft lose. Around 9 miles in I soaked my feet wading through a marshy/muddy area and I only had one pair of clean socks which I was reserving to sleep in. So the next 13 miles my feet were in wet, muddy socks while I went up and down around 4000ft including some snow walking. The second day including 7 miles worth of backpacking, and then 7 miles of trail running. At the end of the second day, no blisters, no foot pain except for something unrelated to the shoes performance. [On the first day I got a splinter in my heel when my shoes were off, and didn’t realize it. By the second day it was slightly infected and felt and looked a bit like a blister until I was able to clean it up and treat it.]

–Mark

I havent seen anyone mention the montrail vitesse II. Granted i only recieved my shoes yesterday lunch time, but i went out and put a hard 40 miles on them and my feet dont feel all that bad today. i think montrail have a more technical fit which i like. it seems like a lot of long distance hikers go for the vitesse. they have everything you mentioned. insoles seem to be the go too, making an already well designed shoe so much better. there are lots of positive reviews for this shoe try http://www.backpackgeartest.com. on another not i havent actually worn any type of foot wear for many years, that being the joy of being in a warm place and still studying at uni. so i think i could be a little outdated on what it feels like to wear a good pair of shoes.

Joshua,

I still use older NB805’s – I think 808’s or 809’s are the current model. Also, more for their supreme comfort (on my foot at least) than for features. A few yrs ago, bought several pairs at 60%-70% off & so have a “lifetime” supply.

Also, even at full price, the 805’s would not have been overly expensive – don’t recall what the full price was, but I think they would have been ~$80 at full price.

Unfortunately, if my understanding is correct, they are only designed in the USA, but now manufactured overseas – unlike the NB of years ago. Still have my original, introductory year NB Rainier light hikers. They’re very worn out – have reglued the soles several times over the many hundreds of miles of use. Uppers still in reasonable shape, but heavily scuffed. Hope the 805’s last as long. A few hundred miles & still on my first pair of 805’s. One of the benefits of being very small & lighter is less wear & tear on some of the gear – like footwear for instance. The light pack weight helps I’m sure.

When it’s wet, have now only started to use them with both vbSocks or GTXsocks – haven’t decided which I like better – I don’t like wet feet.

I use them for near daily 2-4 hr fitness hiking with 8lb to 20lb pack (depending upon several factors) over relatively rough terrain, & short duration (3-7day) treks into the wilds.

I don’t use them (yet) for cold/snow hikes – maybe next winter.

Used some cheap LLBean GTX light hikers this winter. They actually worked very well once the original insoles were removed & Shock Doctor Ultra2 insoles were added with an added thin gel insole underneath the Ultra2’s. Can do 10+ hrs over rough terrain with 20lb pack and feet still feel good. The insoles transformed a mediocre pair of light hikers into some amazingly comfortable boots. Have prob. 300 miles on these boots & insoles. Still in good shape – both soles & uppers (scuffed a bit though). Don’t use them much anymore except this winter in the cold & snow.

To: Jacob (“The Ironman”) Thompson,

Way to go “Ironman” – 40 miles since yesterday lunch? Amazing!!!. At 4mph avg, you would have been hiking for 10hrs (or were you trail running at a higher rate of speed?) & you still have the energy to come back & read/post!!! Were you trail running, or hiking,if so, with what pack wt?

Hope you don’t mind the nickname. If so, please accept my sincere apologies. I meant no offense. I am just very impressed. Good for you; keep goin’.

pj

Jacob,
I think I mentioned these on another thread. I’ve transitioned from Montrail Torre GTX to Montrail Kalahari for packing (45-55 pounds), and I’m using the Vitesse II’s for lighter hiking. I added SuperFeet insoles. I like Montrails because of their wider toe box. I wear the Vitesse with just a liner sock and haven’t had a blister yet.

I don’t mind the nickname at all, actually ive been trying to think of a trail name maybe this one will fit. I did hike for nearly right on 10 hrs with a 1 hr break period and 2 half for some good rest and also have a meal. i was actually doing it as a test for the montrail vitesse II that im going to do a review on. i only just got them in the morning, put a pair of superfeet in them, which i ordered at the same time. As i said before im really impressed with these shoes, even though ive been a barefooter for so long.

I totally agree with the comment about toe room. this shoe really does fit comfortably around the whole foot. but because of the superbly designed heel cup you foot is locked in and affords you the comfy area in the toe region. definitely gives a much better breathing space as well because the mesh is nearly right on the toe box so you can feel a nice breeze getting in there. the reduction of sweat in this area, i believe makes the world of difference in blister control. it was raining for a bit on my walk as well and they did get wet but dried really quickly. as i said before i havent tried any of the other mentioned shoes but i chose them on the basis of what i feel i need from a shoe. and the vitesse have excelled.

PJ: im just putting up a trip report now that will have the rest of the info on it.

Thanks for the information on the Inov-8 shoes. I had a look at the Inov-8 website, and at the REI website. The Flyroc 310 look promising, but as I don’t live anywhere near an REI store, I wouldn’t be able to try them on.

So, if I wear a perfect men’s 11 in a Montrail trail runner or in a Salomon XA series, how does that compare to the Inov-8? Any ideas? I may pick up a pair of the Montrail Masai shoes this weekend, to replace my Salomon XA Comp that are falling apart. Buty if that doesn’t happen, I’d be interested in mail-ordering the Inov-8s.

Thanks,
Ken

I am a die hard Vitesse user, I’m in the Vitesse II’s now. I recently picked up a few different Inov-8 models, including the Terroc, which is Inov-8’s closest competitor to the Vitesse.

The big difference between the two shoes is that Inov-8 core design principle is on flexibility of the shoe (longitudinal, fore to aft, of the sole). You can literally roll the toes of these shoes back up to the ankle. It’s akin to a “slipper”.

Thus, unless you have extremely well conditioned feet, you may have lack-of-support issues that could cause excessive working of the logitudinal musculature in your foot if you go try to bang out a high mileage day off the bat. Think of it this way: a slightly stiffer shoe like the Vitesse is a little more forgiving for those of us that are not regular trail distance athletes. Now, once your feet get in shape, the flexibility is a very nice feature and promotes natural stride better than a stiffer shoe.

The other caveat is that you really “feel” the track with the Inov-8’s. Hell cushioning is very good, but forefoot cushioning and a midsole is minimal. These are “slippers”!

The Mudroc 270’s are a really neat, and light trail shoe, but these effects (flexibility and midsole protection) are further exaggerated.

Add the weight of a backpack and the flexibility and midsole protection are even more important.

So, consider these aspects of the shoes, and recognize that your ability to use something like an Inov-8 will depend a lot on your foot conditioning for longer mileages, because the risk of overuse injuries with a less protective shoe will increase.

Good things about the Inov-8 Terroc’s relative to the Vitesse:

– lighter
– more breathable
– dry faster
– better tread for trails

The Vitesse gets the edge in:

– better off trail tread, especially for climbing
– more lateral stability with that huge side lug
– more longitudinal support, which is nice for backpacking with some weight on your back, not so hot for trail racing

From a fit standpoint, both of these shoes have nice roomy toeboxes and exceptional heel cups. This means that I (and I do mean “I” this may not work for you depending on where your metatarsal break is) can size up a full size over my normal size, my foot won’t slip around in the shoe, and I’ve got massive amounts of toebox room. That’s why I went with the Vitesse, and the Inov-8’s are the only other shoe I can do this with.

Will I backpack in Inov-8’s this year? Maybe. The jury’s out until I give them a whirl with 15 pounds on my back and a 30 mile day, I suppose.

Jacob,

Look fwd to your review of the shoes. Where will it be available (BPL? BackpackingGearTest.org?)? I’d very much like to read it when it’s published.

Also, thanks for setting my mind at ease re: the ‘nickname’.

“Ironman” seems to suit you – so, it would appear.

“Nihilist” – I really like the Latin nickname and understand the meaning, but it’s perhaps a bit esoteric for some people’s tastes. Can’t see any reason, from my rather limited perspective, that you shouldn’t stick with it.

Also, just remember when you are out there on the trail, in whatever condtions you find yourself…,

“Nunquam non paratus!”

(just happens to be the Johnson clan’s motto – going back over 800 yrs – one of those, perhaps “phoney” things, they like to sell to tourists, that my daughter picked up, a few years ago, when she was studying abroad in London).

“Nunquam non paratus” means “Never not prepared !”

[pronounced, if I remember my Latin correctly, “noon-kwam non par-ah-toose” (“noon” like in “noon-day”, i.e. 1200 hundred military time; short ‘a’-s, like “par” in golf, and “open, and say ‘ah’ “; and “toose” – rhymes with a hangman’s “noose”). Best check with someone who studied Latin more recently.]

Take care,
pj

Ryan,

Thanks for your reply on the Inov-8 shoes. That’s exactly the information I needed. That sort of flexibility is not something I want in a trail shoe (though I can see the appeal for someone who is out running on trail every day.)

Ken

Ryan,

Any thoughts on the Salomon XA Pro 3D for backpacking?

Thanks

Hi, Whats the differences between the 1’s and 2’s and do you find you have to size up 1/2 a size from other brands.

Thanks, Mark, for the update on inov-8 availability.

Ryan’s summary of inov-8 features pretty much agrees with my own exeperience with the old Mudroc. I hiked a fair bit in them last year, including a few days on the JMT last fall, at 25-30 miles/day.

I grew to like the flexibility and somewhat unusual design of the sole. It’s true there is little lateral support; the sole feels almost rounded on the outside, so the foot can tip left or right easily. This takes some getting used to, but gives them a more barefoot feel. The “flat” bottoms on other shoes (I’m using a Salomon Tech Amphibian now) by comparison feel more clumsy.

One other feature is that they lace quite far up the front of the foot, which helps keep your foot secure against the heel of the shoe. The main problem I had was that the heel gave me blisters at first. This issue went away as they broke in and as I learned to lace them a bit more loosely. I have since heard that they improved the heel cup on newer models. A final note: inov-8 sells some very lightweight volume adjusters that help if you have narrow feet.

So does anyone have a sense for how the newer inov-8 models (310, 330) compare to the inov-8 Mudroc (290)?