Altra 3 Lone Peak and Six Moon Designs packs

Welcome…I have been using lone peaks – almost exclusively – for my trail running and backpacking since the original version (2012?). I like the generous toe box and zero drop. I have found durability to be below average in previous versions but the 3.0 seems to have improved a bit on materials and design (the ‘rudder’ is finally gone!). I don’t have a lot of miles on my new ones yet, however, so time will tell. Most folks here (myself included) lean towards ventilated/breathable shoes as opposed to the mid version with neoshell. Shoe (and pack) choice is pretty personal — fit and comfort can vary a lot between individuals–you’ll really have to get some time in with them to see if they work for you.

If you are able to search the forums here you will probably find a few threads on the topics you’re interested in. Best of luck with your CT hike-

lone peak’s are indeed hugely popular at the moment among thru hikers. they are really comfortable and cushioned, which is helpful if you are walking 2000 miles in a row! i found the 2.5’s to be less grippy than other shoes, especially on anything wet. that’s less of a problem in the west. zero drop is also not for everyone, and it’s considered smart to slowly work that kind of shoe into your life to avoid injury.

there are lots of other popular trail runners around here though – new balance, salomon, la sportiva, saucony, topo, and on and on.

i have no experience with smd packs, though i do use one of their tents. they are a well respected company. at the moment, the ula circuit (and/or ohm) and zpacks arc blast are probably the most popular packs in this little niche. but again there are many other pack makers that people swear by.

Sorry for the length of this! I had a lot of time to reflect on these and I know they are very popular so wanted to put out some info specific to their strengths and weaknesses.
120 Miles on my Altra Lone Peak 3.0’s last week. I’m 185lbs with total pack weight with water not exceeding 22lbs. I did 2 shorter day hikes with weight before taking them on a fast trek of the Wonderland Trail (4.5 days with 2 of those days in constant rain).  I typically hike in shoes with 6mm drop and run in 4mm drop shoes and occasionally in barefoot style to keep foot strength up.

Pros:

1. Huge toebox is very comfortable
2. On terrain that’s not too steep they have a wonderful gait
3. Grip is better than expected, excellent on wet wood considering, excellent in dirt/mud, ok on wet granite
4. Dry quickly and ventilate well
5. Integrated hook and loop for gaiter attachments

Cons:

1. I am not a fan of zero drop shoes for steep hiking. Totally fine on PCT/AT style trails but the Wonderland trail was very steep and over stressed my achellies tendons and became a problem after a few long days. I put garbage under the heel to create a bit of drop and issues resolved. Zero drop is fine on mild trails but repeated long steep climbs caused problems I’ve never had in other shoes.
2. Wear: they are quickly loosing cushioning. I’ll be shocked if they got a total of 250 miles before being worthless. This is unacceptable for a $130 shoe.
3. Not just the toebox is wide, the whole shoe is wide. To make them fit well and not slip on my feet (wide forefoot, average heel, size 12) I have to lace them tighter than any other shoe I’ve worn. They don’t become uncomfortable laced tightly but if they loosen at all they start moving around. That said, even with a 24 mile, 12,000 ft elevation change day in solid rain I had sore feet but no blisters.
4. Very minimal arch support. I have low arches but would have benefited from some mild arch support, the Lone Peak’s seem like they have some support but it’s so soft it doesn’t support.

I did a non-scientific comparison of the same 10 mile hike 2 days in a row, 1st in my Salomon mid’s, 2nd in the Altra’s with same perceived effort and weight in pack. Trail is PCT/AT style smooth with easy grades up and a bit steeper down but nothing like the Wonderland. I was 13 minutes faster in the Altra’s and my feet were more comfortable. Lots of variables there but my foot comfort was hard to argue with.

In summary, if I was hiking the PCT and could afford to change shoes 7-8 times I’d wear these. However, the cost is truly extraordinary when you factor is how fast they break down so I really can’t recommend them without serious caveats. I also do a lot of off trail and steeper stuff so I’ll keep them around for specific applications but they will not be my go-to shoe. YRMV

Here is a link to a BPL thread discussing the SMD Fusion:

https://backpackinglight.com/forums/topic/question-for-smd-fusion-1st-gen-owners/

The second generation Fusion uses the same frame and hipbelt but they are slightly larger and weigh quite a bit more. SMD still has the first generation Fusion 50 on sale for $100 w/ free shipping (good bang for the buck).

Footwear is such a personal thing it’s impossible to recommend anything. We can talk about drainage, wear, maybe traction, but anything else is just personal fit. For example, I hate any arch support in shoes, and I find the zero drop to be perfect for me on all types of trail, including steep and rocky terrain.

I also love the fit of the lone peaks, and even though I have crazy skinny feet (A width), my feet adore the roominess of the altra brand.

TL;DR – The SMD Fusion packs are great if your base weight is greater than 15lbs. If you are looking to go sub-15lb, there are lighter and equal choices available.

I owned a second generation SMD Fusion 50. I will say upfront that I think the craftsmanship and build of the pack is superb (can’t speak for the first generation). It carries heavy weight very well and I am surprised it doesn’t get more props for being a load hauler. The fabric is very durable, the stitching is on point, and the straps and doo-dads all work in harmony. If I was carrying weights consistently in excess of 25lbs or greater, this would be my favorite pack.

But, ultralight it is not. My large pack with large hip belt weighed in at  51 ounces.  If you’re someone carrying 30-40lbs this would be ultralight with respective to your pack weight, but my base weight is 10lbs so it’s not worth it to wear a pack that’s one third my pack weight.

The original Fusion 50 comes in at roughly 40oz. My baseweight with pack using a custom ULA Relay ranges between 6 and  7lbs….but many times I grab the Fusion as even though it’s adding a little over a pound in weight, it carries so well and transfers weight beautifully to my hips. Sometimes I believe the extra weight of a light frame is well worth it…..and the last time I checked it was overall base weight that determined ultralight categorization, not necessarily empty pack weight.

True it is overall base weight. I was just trying to give an example of how heavy that one item is comparatively.

@ Colin

Thanks for that info on the LP 3.0s.

While I am very glad to hear that the grip is better (as that has been my main complaint with them since I live and hike in the wet, where they are pretty treacherous), I am however disappointed at the continuing durability problems.

I had a pair of 2.5s earlier this year that died before they even reached 200 miles on them: the inner soles just gave out and started turning to cardboard somewhere around the 175 mile mark. My pair before that at least got around 250 miles, though even that is pretty low. And this is all on-trail hiking, too.

LPs are the most comfortable hiking shoes I’ve worn, but I don’t want to be buying a new pair even other month.

So I’ve switched to other shoes until Altra gets it together with some quality control and durability. Sounds like they aren’t there yet.