Vibram FiveFingers KSO Treks Review

[Sanad Toukhly]

Frank,

It was mostly just swelling for me. When my feet were bruised I was actually referring to one or two bruises where I lost my balance and smacked the side of my foot on a rock trying to regain my footing. I've gotten my feet bruised when wearing normal shoes as well.

-Sid

[W I S N E R !]

Brandon and Damien:
Those Altras look good to me (thanks for the review Damien)- just like a KSO without the gimmick of separate toes.
The inserts are a good idea…not just for padding, but for insulation when needed.
At the moment I'm waiting on the NB Minumus to come out…wish I had more $$$ to try more shoes. Until then it's barefoot and MT101s with the KSOs for the occasional run. I was using the KSOs to run on the track at my work…but running the wet grass on the inside barefoot feels too good!

Too bad that minimal shoes are so maximally priced :(
…especially given they're all getting suspiciously close to $10 WalMart water socks.
I actually remember reading an article on Krupicka running/hiking/camping for an season in water socks.

Those I can afford, review soon to come :)

[Eugene Smith]

I don't know if this was posted or not on here recently, but Terra Plana is having a sale on theclymb.com if anyone is interested. Yesterday they had all sizes and models at 50% off or so. Terra Plana shoes typically are astronomically priced. If you want a minimalist zero drop shoe without the Five Fingers look those might be a good alternative.

Terra Plana Evo mesh

This model has been heavily reviewed on the minimalist running websites and blogosphere, you can check out the EVO at: Running and Rambling Evo mesh Review

[W I S N E R !]

Here's some reviews:

http://www.barefootrunner.com/2009/03/review-wateraqua-shoes/

http://barefootjason.blogspot.com/2010/03/walmart-aqua-socks-do-they-live-up-to.html

Now, how much do the price paid, preconceived notions and expectations, and brand name influence the reviews of footwear designed to…well…not really be footwear?
We certainly can't rule out the cult coolness factor of "barefoot" specialty companies.

Or another way to look at it:
If those Wal Mart water socks had Altra or New Balance or Vibram sewn on them, a bit better styling, and a $75 dollar price tag, would the reviews read simply "great ground feel but durability and fit could be better"?

[Eugene Smith]

Now, how much do the price paid, preconceived notions and expectations, and brand name influence the reviews of footwear designed to…well…not really be footwear?
We certainly can't rule out the cult coolness factor of "barefoot" specialty companies.

Very much so Craig. Would VFF be flying off shelves at the rate they are now if it wasn't for the 'cult coolness' of the phenomenon? I don't think they would.

[Damien Tougas]

I was involved in this cost discussion on a different forum. One of the forum members who has been involved in developing shoes had this to say:

The price of shoes has little to do with the manufacturing cost. Marketing, advertising, shipping, and the profits of all the middlemen are the reason shoes cost what they do. The actual cost between a minimalist shoe and the most advance non-minimalist shoe is virtually zero.

[Nick Gatel]

Damien,

I think this is partially correct. As you move towards boots, then probably not true. A Limmer boot is expensive because it is custom built with superior materials and workmanship. Limmer has almost zero advertising expense and no middle men. Also a boot like the top of the line Lowa is going to be much better constructed and expensive to build than most other brands. The cost of labor, government regulations, and taxes in Europe or the USA is going to be significantly higher than something made in China.

[Javan Dempsey]

Gotta disagree with Craig and Nick on this one.

I think your points are valid, but it's more a matter of what you're looking for. I'm looking for the absolute closest thing I can find to barefoot (and no type of sandal counts in my book, you walk differently, sorry), without being completely barefoot.

Craig said:"The VFFs just don't fit in. I find them an unnecessary medium between barefoot and wearing shoes."

I agree with your placement, but disagree with the conclusion. I find them the necessary closest thing to being barefoot, which is much better than wearing shoes.

I find the amount of protection the VFF KSO's offers to be the upper limit of what I think is acceptable, the *only* reason I'll look at beefier foot coverings are due to insulation concerns, and maybe winter traction. If the VFF's could grip snow, and keep my feet warm, I'd wear them (or something like the Altra Adam) any time I wasn't barefoot.

Personally, I won't ever be completely comfortable barefoot 24/7, and I don't think it's a realistic ideal, probably just due to all the injuries I've suffered barefoot. It may be fine for running on well maintained tracks or trails(as you say), but it's entirely too dangerous in any sort of un-anticipated situation. However, I've bushwhacked miles in my KSO's, in nasty terrain, chased my dog down a completely wildly overgrown mountain, etc.

So like I said, I think your points make sense depending on your goals, but for me, if barefoot is "1", VFF's are "2", and things like the MT101's are "3"s on the scale, I'd remove the 3 instead of the 2.

Yes they've become a fad, and if anything, I think that's the core of the polarization about them. Yes they have limitations, believe me, I'm hating every day that I have to wear something else when I'm out and about.

Maybe I'd feel differently if someone made something like the MT101 with zero heel rise, minimal sole, no toe lift, and a toe box that had some vague resemblance to the shape of my forefoot, instead of looking like a blunt arrow, etc, but afaik, it doesn't yet exist.

Anyway, just my rant'ish take. I wish VFF's were still obscure.

Edit: Just wanted to clarify that other than the insulation issue, I find the protection of the KSO's to be more than adequate for me.

[Paul Vertrees]

Nick,

What Salomon trail runners are you using for hiking? I run trails in XA Pro 3D Ultras (non GTX model), and I wondered about using them for hiking. I have some concerns about how they grip wet rock though. I would value your input. Thanks.

[Clint Hewitt]

This was a great article and a great review. It was nice to see VFF being discussed on my favorite sight.

Last year I thru hiked the AT and for about 1600+ miles I wore KSO Treks. I thought I would give some additional thoughts.

I went through two pairs, the durability averaged out to 800 miles a pair. the first pair being completely destroyed after about 750 miles (It went through worse conditions, could have been replaced at 600miles), and the second pair that is still in descent enough condition to wear after about 850miles (Mostly dry thru the summer months)

To start I want to talk about the problems that I had with the VFF shoe design. In order of occurrence.

CONS

1.The VIBRAM LOGO TAG located under the heel was the first thing to cause an issue on both pairs. It bunched up and caused rubbing and discomfort. Had to be torn out before they caused blisters. The fact that it was there is senseless, it serves no purpose.

2. Similarly, The LEATHER BOTTOM INSOLE wears and bunches, due to water, pressure and movement. This like the tag caused a deal of discomfort. I found my self with both pairs sitting in the middle of the trail at some point scratching with my nails and snipping with my Leatherman at the bits of leather bottom, till all but the leather up in the toes and around the sewn edges was gone and the EVA foam underneath was exposed. Knowing what the problem was with the second pair this event came more preemptively.

3. The STICHING AND FABRIC failure between the toes is what made the first pair unusable and it began to happen on the second. Holes either rubbed or stitches tore. it was not a big deal on the small toes but, the big toe was wear I had the most problems with the fabric and it is directly related to number 4 below. Towards the very end of the first pair the rubber was starting to delaminate from the tips of the toes as well. And the left big toe had completely ripped away from the rubber. It kinda of flopped around but was not a huge problem.

4. The BIG TOE RUBBER looks like it needs another 1/4 of rubber added on to the inside, heading towards the second toe. Once the fabric wore out completely my big toe would pop half way out and I would be walking directly on my toe. (also wore a hole through my socks in half a day).
*Caveat – this may not be an issue for every one. This only happened on my right side and I believe it is because of my body and walking gait. At my hip I measured 5mm shorter on my left then on my right. Watching my feet walk, even with all intention towards good form, my Left foot/ Big toe would roll inward onto the extra rubber of the VFF and be cupped in rubber that is on the outside of the big toe. My right foot/ big toe would push outward to the side, causing my big toe to "want to slide off" the rubber, once the fabric wore away, it did. This was a very subtle movement of my unique walking gait but it did play a role in the performance of the shoes. The last 50 miles before Waynseboro VA I was walking directly on the ground with half my right big toe. IT held up pretty well, toughened up.

6. Over time the VFF will BECOME LOOSER on your feet as stitches and fabric stretch and/ or break. When I received my second pair in Waynsboro, VA. The new VFF felt very tight on my feet. While some of this may be attributed to foot swelling, mostly it was because I had gotten so used to the first pair which by that point were in disrepair and falling of my feet.

5. In a related note, the adjustable strap adjust pressure down as well as forward. This became a problem. It was never more evident then when going down the "Priest" (4miles continuous down) With the fabric of the shoe becoming loose, It was important to tightten the strap down. For Three reasons
1.in order to hold the sole of the shoe onto my feet
2.keep my feet from sliding forward causing the fabric in between my toes to cause discomforting pressure
3. keep my feet from sliding forward causing the tips of my toes to jam in to the tips of the VFF, (Think turf toe)

The design of the strap only compounded the problems of 2 and 3. The tighter I strapped my foot down and in, the more the strap would push my toes forward. The Priest was the first time that the trail and my choice to wear VFF caused my feet "irregular pain" that lasted for about a week. I.e. not the regular swelling, but structural in my toes. Normally even when the shoes were loose it was not a problem because you alternate up, down and flat. It was the continuous 4miles straight down that put me over the edge.

OTHER PROBLEMS (in order of importance)

1. MAN MADE SURFACES SUCK!!! Regrettably for most of the time I did not have camp shoes, they were stubbornly deemed not worth there weight. In hind sight I wont hike in VFF again with out some other foot wear. I could not walk more then a hundred feet on any man made surface before my feet would be screaming at me in pain. Through all the rocks of PA and all of the other terrain I crossed nothing compared to the pain that man made surfaces inflict. It is not even close. There is something about a hard flat surface that does not agree with bare feet. I can not emphasize this enough. This was by far the worst aspect of only having VFF as shoes. Even when trying to walk with the best form and placing my feet as gently as I could it still was a problem. Town became a get to the hotel and don't move experience. In one episode while blue blazing on a rode with two fellow hikers I just layed down on someones front lawn, because my feet told me no more road. The solution to that situation was stubbornly wearing my hiking partners hot pink crocs, the desire to be self sufficient and the embarrassment of hot pink crocs was outweighed by the thought of a tasty meal in town.

2. STUBBING TOES – it happens, not that big of a problem, only one stubbed right pinky toe hurt for longer than 30 seconds. But I looked at the ground and my feet a lot!

3. I found the TEMPERATURE MINIMUM for these to be 40* when wet. As for dry im not really sure I would not recommend going below freezing.

PROS – In order of importance

1. NO HEEL LIFT allows the heel to go all the way to the ground, converting from regular hiking shoes the biggest benefit was while going down hill, since your heel was allowed to go down further your knee is not pushed out in front over and past your feet as much. Instead you stay over your feet more putting less strain on your the front of your knees.

(Edit) Additional anecdote: Topic Plantar Fasciitis, I believe that this no heel lift or lowering of a your heel compared to traditional shoes, prevents or helps to alleviate Plantar Fasciitis. With no heel lift your tendon fully stretches. Lifting the heel makes the tendons used, shorter. Previous to the trail I never suffered from this, during the trail this was not a problem. But after the trail when the weather became colder I started to wear Big clunky winter boots with a huge heel lift and Super Feet insoles. after about a week of wearing them one morning getting out of bed as my feet hit the floor and I had a shooting pain in my heal. Little bit of reading online, and I realized what had happened, my tendons had contracted causing minor PF. A little bit of stretching, removing the insoles and limiting the boot usage, I was fine. Ironically on the trail I had tried to convince a fellow hiker suffering significantly from PF of this hypothetical theory (I had read it somewhere at some point prepping for my hike). It was not until it happened to me did I fully believe this to be true.

2. NO ANKLE SUPPORT allows free rotation of ankle, coupled with only a 4mm sole, allows for a greater margin of "error" when taking awkward steps. In a traditional high top or mid top, your ankle is locked in place. Which transfers the torque of a bad step up to your knees and hips. Also you are standing on about an inch of rubber. When you take a bad step, ie, a misstep or a unseen rock, your foot has that much further to go till it catches itself. The VFF allow your ankle to rotate free and to roll on to inside slightly if necessary, it does not have an inch to fall off of the platform of the shoe.

(Not sure if I am being clear about this point, but it is a huge benefit)

3. BALANCE, coupled with point number 2, the VFF give you a better sense of balance. It is that process of placing the onus onto your feet, ankles and calves, that strengthens your entire lower body. I fell only twice during my entire thru hike, and only once was it in VFF. (In VT I came to the crest of a small hump one step heading downward I put my feet together to break… it was pure mud… I plopped right onto my butt as my feet slipped forward.)

4. Increased feel for the ground

5. As stated above and before by others it strengthens the foot and lower leg. When I switched to Adidas Adi-zero shoes (Love them) at the base of the White Mountains after about a week my feet felt better than ever. I think the conditioning of the VFF on my feet made regular shoes, even minimal ones feel like a cushy palace!

6. Conversation starter, boy is it, I do not know how many people stopped and asked about the shoes, I never minded answering the questions, sometimes I would go into more detail than others depending on peoples interest level and my energy level. But my Hiking partner defiantly started getting sick of it, later she said partly because people were stopping to talk to me and not her. :)

7. Did not have a single blister the entire trail. Not sure if that is because of the shoes or just my feet and the conditions. I always wore socks I found Injinji Merino Wool Outdoor Blend worked the best. The synthetic Micro socks I did not like, the looked and smelled awful.

8. I liked the leather upper, it protected my feet well enough from sticks and things and the smooth inside feel was nice. Also the leather upper was durable, fabric failure at the toes was at the seems and the mesh between the toes.

9. The bottom of the shoe really held up well. I found that the rubber did not wear away that quickly and only towards then end of both pairs did it start to de-laminate in spots. I thought that it provided good enough traction for the conditions

Summary

I enjoyed my thru hike, and the VFF Treks were a good part of it. They forced me to slow down and pay attention to my walking, how and where I placed my foot almost every single step. This I think played a part in only falling one time wearing them. So they provided a level of safety. But at times they limited my movements, like when in town on man made surfaces. Not unlike alot of thru hikers, my feet had some pain and swelling almost always.

I had reasons before the trail on why I wanted to wear them, I was looking for balance in my life physically and spiritually. Just like the trail the VFF had its ups and downs. Would I wear them again on a thru hike? I don't think I would. I experienced it and now like the AT its time to experience new shoes and new trails. I have my eyes on NB Minimus and the PCT!

RECOMMENDATIONS

For the shoe
1. Eliminate Tag under heal
2. Eliminate leather sole, the EVA foam was fine on its own.
3. Independent strap system for Heel and forefoot which allow for maximum control over fit (this system is used in other VFF models)
4. Additional rubber for the big toes (ie wider)

For the user
5. Wear with socks, Injinji Outdoor
6. Be in tune with how you walk, though these almost force you to.
7. If out on the trail for a while have secondary shoes, ie camp/town shoes
8. Hiking poles help take the weight off a misstep, which you feel sooner because of the sensitivity VFF provides. Also I recommend on nicely groomed trail to just carry them in your hand as to not become dependent on them for balance over time.(ie train your muscles). In summary to maintain muscle balance I would have poles but only use when necessary over extended periods of time.
9. Like others have said ease into it with miles and weight
10. Walk Softly and carry a big spirit

To end my comments on VFF I would like to share a comment a friend and fellow thru hiker said to me on the trail near Slatington PA.

"You know Herro, there are parts of the trail where I think you could wear those…I don't this is one of them!"

I hope this was helpful. Once again great original article. I wanted to add pictures to this post to show the wear and tear but I am currently in Maine and my VFF are at my uncles in NY and I have yet to go back. I will update when I can.

[Damien Tougas]

Hey Clint, is there any way I can contact you off-list to ask you some questions? You can PM me if you like…

[Nick Gatel]

Paul,

I have been very happy with them. I don't do a lot of wet hiking in California, but have not had any "slippery" problems. But again, foot placement is more important than hoping your shoes will not slip on terrain that might not be the ideal path. I will say that a traditional Vibram lug sole is going to grip better than a flatish running shoe of any brand. But the lighter shoes provide quick feed back to your brain that your last foot plant might not have been ideal and you may have enough time to adjust :)

[Nick Gatel]

Clint,

Excellent review! A lot of miles in them to actually point out the real pros and cons. I think you have presented enough valuable information to help anyone make an intelligent decision whether or not these will work for them.

[Clint Hewitt]

Thanks Nick, I appreciate your comments. I have been wanting to post a review for quite sometime, I guess I just needed some distance from the experience to gain some perspective.

Prior to the trail some friends of mine had a reaction to my decision like "Your going to do what…wearing what!?!?"

Sometimes now I have a similar thought "I did what, wearing what!?!?"

Sometimes the miles where pleasant, others excruciating, I am thankful for the experience.

Thanks again.

[George Matthews]

Good review and valuable comments.

We are one herd of really crazy footpeople here : )

[Author]

Posts