Opinions wanted re: Brooks Cascadia

My advice is to buy these at REI and take them out on some runs/hikes (you can always return them). If you are considering these shoes I assume you checked out some blog reviews. They rarely offer insight more substantive than "I really like this shoe." Just try 'em out and you'll probably love them like everyone else. I'm on my second pair and I will keep them amongst my other shoes for long runs/hikes. They would be great for the JMT because the rock-plate is very effective so no sore feet at the end of the day. Also they are better than most runners on snow which you will encounter in varying degrees. Read some of the reviews on REI.com if you need a push:

http://www.rei.com/product/795695

I LOVE my Cascadias! I have a wide forefoot, and these fit me very well. I hiked 200 miles of the JMT last year with no major issues. I am still using the same pair for my every day workouts. Everyone seems to rave about Inov-8 shoes, but with my wide foot, they are like wearing a medevial torture devices.

I also run in Brooks (Addiction). After trying a variety of trail running shoes (new balance 876 etc) for backpacking, I went back to Brooks. Disappointingly, the fit of the Cascadia is nothing like the Addiction. I had to size up half a size and there was a funny built up feeling to the arch. I finally ended up going with the Adrenaline ASRs. They don't have all the features of the popular trail runners for backpacking, but they had the Brooks fit I was used to. Probably next time, I'll just buy an extra pair of Addictions. Fit is everything.

If you get the Cascadias, make sure you try them first. Totally different feel from what you are used to.

I think the Cascadia is the perfect trail shoe–light, breathable, great sole, comfortable midsole, fast drying.

Like Ike, I had to size up a 1/2 size. I agree with Ike on the different feel between the Adrenaline and the Cascadia, although with opposite results. The Adrenaline didn't fit me very well, while the Cascadia fit like a glove out of the box. The Cascadia has a 'cushier' feel to it, IMO. You may want to try them on at an REI or similar store. The 20% off you can get at REI is a nice bonus, if you wait on a sale.

i'll agree with what has been stated above about adrenaline vs cascadia…

i run, walk, and hike, and i have been plagued throughout the years by poor choices in footware. as we get older, gravity catches up to us! when i was twenty, i could have worn trashbags and been fine… not anymore! at a wedding rehearsal, a knee surgeon recommended a particular running shoe store for me to get fitted… the result… brooks dyad 5 shoes… the best running shoes i've ever worn – six months in, my ankles and knees don't ache.

i tend to put more weight on the outsides of my feet than the insides, the these particular brooks shoes correct for that – passively, i might add.

so… i was just back at that shoe store, and they recommended the brooks cascadia 5 model – given my success with the dyad 5.

the cascadia model is identical to the dyad – but with different, more durable materials for the trail. i tried one on each foot, and i could not tell i was wearing different models.

so, it makes sense that the adrenaline and the cascadia not fit the same… they were not intended to.

my advice: go to a real running store and get fitted. online advice will not help. brooks is a great company that insures uniformity across models and upgrades.

best of luck!