Cascadia 12's

The Cascadia 10’s were wonderful — for a few weeks, and then abysmal thereafter.  The place where the foot bends (at the toes) had two plastic reinforcements bonded to the fabric of the shoe.  The two plastic reinforcements would act as scissors on the fabric and quickly wore through (quickly = a matter of weeks, and I’m not a through hiker).  Soon enough, the fabric gave way all the way down to the sole, and the shoe had to be discarded.

HJ

I love how comfortable the Cascadia 10’s and 11’s were and how much support and protection the soles provided on sharp rocky surfaces. Based on the photos and description of the new Cascadia 12’s, it looks like Brooks tried to address two of the biggest issues that both the 10’s and 11’s had (holes in the uppers and slick soles).

The scissor action that creates holes above the little and big toes after limited mileage happened to me after about 150 miles, with both the Cascadia 10’s and 11’s. Fortunately, I was able to extend the life on the 11’s by applying Aquaseal over the fabric were holes were developing. The other main issue was on wet surfaces, the soles were the slickest of any hiking or running shoe I’ve ever worn – a noticeable shortcoming in the Pacific Northwest, but not as noticeably in the Sierras.

On the 12’s, the uppers in the toes appear to be a single piece of breathable fabric without any reinforced areas that “scissor” the breathable fabric between them. And the description mentions “Rugged outsoles improve traction at midfoot on wet surfaces”, so hopefully this will give the shoe more friction on wet trails.

Another issue that has hopefully been improved for the 12’s is the tendency of the toe to slip when hiking uphill at speed. The description of a “fifth pivot point at the toes for improved flex and toe-off” may be meant to address this?

Jimmy,

Link isn’t working for me. But onto to the real issue: I wore Cascadias religiously from version 6 through 10. I tried to like the 10’s but the narrow toe box was what finally led me to return them (thank you REI). I’ve got a lovely bunion on my left foot and the Cascadias were always wide enough to be comfortable, and didn’t put any pressure on the bunion due to side reinforcements. The 10’s were much, much narrower and had additional reinforcements along the side that made foot hurt. I’d heard that versions 10 and 11 had issues the fabric wearing (and the reinforcements) quickly on the top part of the shoe, where it flexes; it looks like they’ve addressed that with the 12s.

I’m pretty interested in the Brooks Caldera – I believe it has a larger toe box than the Cascadias and a gaiter trap – seems like the Caldera is where the Cascadias should have gone.

At the moment I’m pretty satisfied with the Altra Lone Peak 3.0 though if the width of the Cascadias returns to what it once was, I’d be tempted. The Calderas strike a close resemblance to the new Lone Peaks.

All – thanks guys for the comments on past models and what to look out for if going with a pair of Brooks shoes. Much appreciated. Footwear for me is wicked frustrating, just not willing to settle for anything other than a perfect fit. Hard to find but once I do I never have issues with my feet.

Dylan- appreciate the recommendations. I was also eyeing the lone peaks but have not yet tried a pair. They come in a mid as well which I prefer if it is not too high. How are they on cushioning? I am finding the thicker EVA foam leaves my knees and hips feeling much less fatigued after days of walking on North East rocks, roots and boulders :)

I’ve worn all of the Cascadias from 7 through the current 12 and I have not noticed the toebox getting any tighter but then I have a thread here about scrunching my toes. Further reading on the topic leads me to question whether I might be happier with a wider toebox than my current shoes.

I can confirm the ripping issue appears to be fixed in the 12.

For me Cascadia 9s were the “vintage” model.

8s were pretty good but faster wearing uppers for some reason. I have some 9s with more than 500 mi on them and they’ve still got some life left in them. Avoided 10s like the plague because of all the reported problems… even Scott Jurek—who is sponsored by Brooks—is quoted as saying he had all kinds of problems with them on his AT FKT.

I didn’t hear much about the 11s but I recently got the GTX version of them for early winter. Sure ’nuff, they are narrower in the toe box but I can live with them because I got them 1/2 size larger.

I hope they’re returning to their former glory with the 12s.

I hadn’t even heard about the Caldera model. Dang, more shiny stuff I can’t afford right now, not that I really need it. :^)

Jimmy,

I feel the cushioning in the Lone Peak 3.0 is the same as previous models, which is to say I think they are pretty damn comfy. I was completely satisfied with the cushion in the Cascadias and when I transitioned to Altras I felt there wasn’t a big difference. The new Lone Peaks are a huge improvement over the 2.5s – the mid foot is narrower and the heel locks down much better than previous models – feels more like Cascadias but with a spacious toe box.

I’m pretty interested in the Brooks Caldera – I believe it has a larger toe box than the Cascadias and a gaiter trap – seems like the Caldera is where the Cascadias should have gone.

Have you tried the Calderas yet???

Inquiring former Cascadia lovers want to know.

Per your comments above, I hope they’ve returned to the wider shape of the Cascadia 9, and with that and a 4mm drop the Calderas would be a very tempting choice for me.

Just bought a pair of Cascadia 12’s and really like them so far. I’ve only hiked a few miles around my ‘hood so far, but they feel almost identical to my feet as my old Cascadia 8’s, which I liked so much I bought 3 pairs when they went on sale after the 9’s were released. The 8’s were the bee’s knees for me, so I hadn’t even looked at footwear until my last pair of them finally bit the dust.

I tried on, and very seriously considered, the Caldera’s. They are advertised as a more padded, slightly more roomy Cascadia. I don’t think the toe box was any wider than that of the Cascadia’s, but it did have more depth in the toe box – more volume. For me the stack height was just a little too tall and I felt less stable than in the Cascadias (not unstable, just less so). I also don’t know about thicker padding being a substitute for a rock plate, which is what Brooks did with the Caldera. I generally hike in some pretty rocky terrain and have very much appreciated the rock plate in the Cascadia’s. One thing I really like about both shoes is the heel cup – it locks my heels in without having to overly tighten the shoes. In fact, I can leave them untied and my heels don’t budge. I love that.

So, not an in depth review by any means, but IMO the Caldera should be a consideration for folks who want a more plush, slightly more voluminous version of the Cascadia.

Thanks for the follow up Erik,

especially the info on the Calderas. I am sold on footwear with more cushioning (eva foam) after my experience with my Hoka tor’s. After some glue problem issues I returned to using them as the comfort was just too good to go without for me. As we have mostly rock laden trail in these parts I could see a big difference at the end of the day in a flexible foam based shoe as apposed to a stiffer soled shoe but that’s of course a personal preference. Not having known about the Calderas at the time of the original post it gives me one more option for a low cut shoe.

Thanks for sharing your experiences on these.
How is the fit on these length wise?

I think the fit is good lengthwise. I have about a thumb width between the front of my foot and the front of the shoe, which is just right for me.

I did have to size up a half size from the Cascadia 8’s to the 12’s, BUT I have gained a few lb’s over the last couple of years and I think my feet have gotten slightly larger, so I don’t think the sizing up was due to any changes Brooks made.

I love my cascadia 8’s.  I frequently check ebay/ thrift stores/ flea markets for them.  I have purchased about 6 pairs, new and used.  When the supply dries out, I’ll be looking for a replacement, hopefully the 12’s will work out!  Also on the hunt for approach shoes for off trail travel.  The shoe search never stops!

Re: The Calderas- I had a pair of them for a bit before sending them back to Zappos. My experience from spending sometime wearing them/walking around in my office was that the fit was excellent for my feet and the shoes seemed to have a nice feature set.

That said, I agree with the post above that they are a bit tall for my tastes, and the added padding gave the impression that I was walking on some kind of squishy, bouncy materials. I didn’t really like the feel, so I sent them back. I’m sticking with good ol’ fashioned Lone Peaks for another year, it seems.

I had the same observations with toebox width on the Cascadias as well.  The Cascadia 5’s were about the perfect toebox width.  Unfortunately, all the EVA is worn out on my old 5’s and I had to throw them away.  I still have a pair of 7’s and 8’s.  These both have wider toeboxes than the latest Cascadia’s, but not as wide as the 5’s.

I don’t really understand why they keep narrowing the toebox.  The Brooks Ghost 9 (the latest version) has a ROOMY toebox.  I’m tempting to wear for backpacking, it’s so comfortable.  Why do they insist on such narrow toeboxes for a trail runner, esp. when feet expand over long miles?

I haven’t tried the 12’s, but I did see the REI special the other day at REI and am tempted to give them a try.  The Caldera’s look promising, but as someone else mentioned they are more voluminous (higher volume) than wide.

I tried on a pair of Lone Peaks a year or two ago and didn’t like the fit. It didn’t crade my foot well.  I’m curious to try the new ones.

I’m glad to hear I’m not the only one who laments the ever-narrowing toebox on the Cascadia’s.  If they would sell new 5’s, I’d gladly pay double.  Someone please send this message to Brooks, as I’ve worn nothing but Cascadias for the last 6 years, and my 7’s and 8’s are almost worn out.

+1 for the Cascadia 5’s.  Best shoe ever!!  Even though mine are shot, i can’t bring myself to throw them away due to nostalgia!  The 7’s were ok, the 9’s fell apart too fast, and the 11’s were HORRIBLE!  I’m gonna try the 12’s, but if they don’t cut it I’m gonna have to move on…  They should just make the 5 again, but call it the 14 (skip 13 – it’s bad luck!).

For anyone pining old Cascadia iterations, check out the New Balance Leadville. REI now carries them. They remind me a lot of old Cascadias. In fact, I wonder if they intentionally are trying to recreate old Cascadias to capitalize on the malaise over the recent versions.