|
|
agtxbb
Joined: 28 Aug 2006 Posts: 16 Texas, United States |
Posted: Mon 28 Aug 2006 09:26 pm GMT |
top |
What should I expect from a quality trail shoe? Your favorite(s)? Your "not so" favorite(s)?
Just looking for general knowledge. I usually seek out the more difficult trails (steep uphills, rocky terrain, etc.), if that helps in making a good recommendation. |
backcountryrunner Joined: 25 Aug 2006 Posts: 199 Utah, United States |
Posted: Tue 29 Aug 2006 12:19 am GMT |
top |
Personally, I love the Asics Eagle Trail. I've only tried a few other kinds of shoes (Adidas, for one), but haven't felt the need to try anything else, as this shoe is wonderful. The May 06 issue of Trail Runner gave it a "best in dirt" "multi-purpose trainer" stamp of approval. I'm surpised the shoe doesn't get mentioned more -- seems the Montrail, North Face types get all the attention.
I run on all kinds of terrain -- flat dirt, rocky, steep, some light snow, etc ... and the Eagle Trail works great in all. A salesman at a local shoe shop recommended it for several reasons, one being the tread/sole, which is segmented into sections, allowing for more flexibility on uneven terrain, versus a flat, hard platform. Apparently Asics has a patent on that design, but I'm not sure if that's true or not. The lacing system and heel padding/gel also rocks -- allows the shoe to almost custom fit so minimizes foot sliding and pinching. Anyway, I can't say enough about the shoe. (Geeze, I sound like an Asics salesman.)
BTW, I have the old model ... I haven't tried the updated one, new in 06 I believe. |
agtxbb
Joined: 28 Aug 2006 Posts: 16 Texas, United States |
Posted: Tue 29 Aug 2006 02:30 pm GMT |
top |
Thanks! That's exactly what I needed. I'll definitely give that shoe a try. I'm curious about the "segmented in sections", and wonder if it works the foot more (or is more strenuous) than a "normal" tread/sole?
Thanks again! |
backcountryrunner Joined: 25 Aug 2006 Posts: 199 Utah, United States |
Posted: Tue 29 Aug 2006 04:16 pm GMT |
top |
The shoe has given me plenty of support - it's still a trail shoe in that it is more robust than a road shoe and the sole does a good job of protecting from rocks. In my experience, the segmented tread base works the feet and ankles less, as the entire sole doesn't tilt as one piece when landing on a bump, thus not torquing the ankle as much. It's hard to explain, and may not be THAT big of a deal, but it seems to work as intended.
I'm guessing many runners see the Gel-Eagle Trail more of a transition shoe, from road to trails versus a "serious" trail shoe ... but it could just be an image thing, as Asics isn't an outdoor products company like Montrail, Salomon, Inov-8, Lafuma, etc. If/when the Gel-Eagle Trail fails me I'll try the others :-) |
backcountryrunner Joined: 25 Aug 2006 Posts: 199 Utah, United States |
Posted: Wed 30 Aug 2006 09:57 pm GMT |
top |
Any other opinions here? Or do you all wear the Eagle Trail? :-) |
dirtrunner
Joined: 30 Aug 2006 Posts: 42 Texas, United States |
Posted: Thu 31 Aug 2006 01:05 pm GMT |
top |
I run in Vasque Lightspeeds for shorter races and Amps and Velocity for longer distances. |
apple
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 5 Texas, United States |
Posted: Tue 05 Sep 2006 10:22 pm GMT |
top |
Grid Omni 5 Trail - Saucony. I bought this particular shoe for the extra stability (I broke my right ankle/fibula into 5 pieces earlier this year, which was then plated). I have not been disappointed in the shoe, as I can be a real klutz. :) I also run on steep hills and somewhat rough terrain.
[edited: Tue 05 Sep 2006 10:25 pm] |
MollyBloom
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 16 California, United States |
Posted: Thu 14 Sep 2006 06:36 pm GMT |
top |
I like the Asics Trail Attacks. Lightweight, fit like a glove. Rub a little on my bunion though... |
criosrun Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 22 California, United States |
Posted: Thu 14 Sep 2006 06:55 pm GMT |
top |
I have used many different shoes thru the years. Right now I'm using Montrail Masai for a few years. And lately also using the Inov8 terrocs. Love them both and just last week did some hiking up the Mt. Whitney trail with the terrocs. |
redrocksrunner
Joined: 06 Sep 2006 Posts: 10 Utah, United States |
Posted: Sun 17 Sep 2006 02:20 pm GMT |
top |
I run in both the montrail hardrock and the Keen humboldt and love them both.
The hardrock has a better foot protection plate so if I am running trails with lots of pointy side up rocks, the hardrocks are the shoe of choice. On less rocky trails I use the humboldt.
Other shoes like asics, solomon don't seem stable enough and I roll my ankle. |
MntnRnnr
Joined: 28 Aug 2006 Posts: 4 Virginia, United States |
Posted: Sun 15 Oct 2006 02:14 am GMT |
top |
Been using the Asics Gel Trabuco for several years now. IMO it keeps getting better and I love the current version - the IX. As BackcountryRunner mentioned re: the Gel Eagle, the Trabuco isn't necessarily a hardcore trail shoe but I've found it to be quite capable on moderately technical singletrack. Another nice benefit is that they have enough support for a mild pronator to spend some time on the road. From my research the Trabuco is apparantly classified as being a little more supportive than the Gel Eagle which is aimed at those with neutral foot biomechanics. I'm not sure how much that matters off-road, though...
I've tried several different shoes - Salomon XA Pro, North Face (can't remember exact model), Nike - and the Asics seem to work best for me. YMMV. |
run4urlife Joined: 15 Oct 2006 Posts: 11 Pennsylvania, United States |
Posted: Sun 15 Oct 2006 02:47 am GMT |
top |
I am new to the sport (coming from marathoning) and found that trail shoes are just not categorized like typical running shoes. I need a "motion control" type shoe. Thanks to my local shoe guy, I was able to get two that is is ordering in for me: the Brooks Adreline ASR and the new New Balance 921s (the later of which looks really sweet)! Any suggestions where I can keep on on trail running shoes that are clearly categorized for my type (motion control)? |
dirtrunner
Joined: 30 Aug 2006 Posts: 42 Texas, United States |
Posted: Sun 15 Oct 2006 03:54 am GMT |
top |
The Brooks are a nice shoe if your running on a nice solf trail. But if you put them on a rocky road they will leave you little protection from sharp dull objects that hurt like heck. |
Marcel Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 36 California, United States |
Posted: Mon 16 Oct 2006 01:00 am GMT |
top |
Well, I just got my first pair of trail shoes, a pair of Brooks Cascadia that were on sale for $39! I've done about ten trail ultras in my Brooks Adrenaline and never had a problem, but I thought it was time to be part of the "in crowd" :-) These Cascadias were a tiny bit too large, but another customer in the store showed me some amazing tricks with shoe laces that made the shoes feel nice and snug (one trick allowed him to untie the laces with one hand, kind of a quick release thing!). These shoes are amazingly bright orange; I'm not concerned that I'll take any buckshot from a Quail hunter on the trails this fall! |
AKTrail Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Posts: 16 Alaska, United States |
Posted: Wed 18 Oct 2006 08:38 pm GMT |
top |
I am new to the sport (coming from marathoning) and found that trailshoes are just not categorized like typical running shoes. I need a"motion control" type shoe. Thanks to my local shoe guy, I was able toget two that is is ordering in for me: the Brooks Adreline ASR and thenew New Balance 921s (the later of which looks really sweet)! Anysuggestions where I can keep on on trail running shoes that are clearlycategorized for my type (motion control)? FWIW, the Adrenaline ASR to *me* feels very much like my old Saucony Grid Stabil - rigid, stiff, too controlling for me. While not classed as MC, you might find it acts like MC. It's much stiffer than the Adrenaline, Trespass, or Cascadia. YMMV. |
run4urlife Joined: 15 Oct 2006 Posts: 11 Pennsylvania, United States |
Posted: Thu 19 Oct 2006 03:06 am GMT |
top |
It's funny that some of you have mentioned the Cascadia. I spoke to my shoe guy, and he mentioned that he had ordered some of those for me as well was thinking (but not sure) that with my orthotics, the Cascadia may be stiff enough for me, but he was not sure and would have to see me in them first. Thanks for all the input so far! |
AKTrail Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Posts: 16 Alaska, United States |
Posted: Thu 19 Oct 2006 08:13 am GMT |
top |
It's funny that some of you have mentioned the Cascadia. I spoke to myshoe guy, and he mentioned that he had ordered some of those for me aswell was thinking (but not sure) that with my orthotics, the Cascadiamay be stiff enough for me, but he was not sure and would have to seeme in them first. Thanks for all the input so far! FWIW. I'd had achilles issues, had a gait analysis by a good PT, and he diagnosed a bunch of issues, including late overpronation. I use custom orthotics from an earlier podiatrist, although they may not have been the most appropriate. Diagonal roll bars near the forefoot are what helps me. My shoes need to be able to flex at the forefoot (pull toe toward ankle), but not twist. He put me in the Trespass (discontinued, but I've still got a couple pairs), which felt very much like Adrenaline, except it had a trail tread. Cascadias flex, but they also twist in the forefoot area, which isn't good for me. While they're not ideal for me, I have been able to use them for short runs or on gravel roads (don't like the Trespass tread on the roads). The double pivot thingy may make them tolerable, but I think that's too far back to really be helping me. My achilles did bother me after a couple hours of continuous running on gravel road in Cascadias, but that could have been the continuous nature of the running, rather than the variability of trail running / hiking. IOW, may have been the run, and not the shoe. I like the feel of the shoe on my feet. Depending upon what your issues are, these comments may or may not be relevant. YMMV. In terms of weather resistance, the Trespass has the least (like none?) but drains best. Cascadias have some resistance, but doesn't drain as well as Trespass and takes longer to dry. Adrenaline ASR has the most weather resistance. |
AKTrail Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Posts: 16 Alaska, United States |
Posted: Thu 19 Oct 2006 08:18 am GMT |
top |
Speaking of Cascadias, has anyone tried the newer versions and how they compare with the original? I think they're up to 2 or 3 now.
And has anyone found trail shoes that fit and act like Adrenalines (or original trespasses) (wide forefoot, although wouldn't mind narrower heel) ? Need to flex in forefoot but not twist. |
falconsooner Joined: 20 Oct 2006 Posts: 2 Texas, United States |
Posted: Fri 20 Oct 2006 03:44 pm GMT |
top |
As one who is always in search of the perfect trail shoe...I have tried 4 different brands over the past year. I require a size 14 to 15 shoe so finding a shoe that fits is an issue. Here is my thoughts on shoes I've tried.
Asics Trail Eagle - Solid all around shoe. Good on multiple of surfaces, not real good on sharp rocks (no protective plate). Very flexible. Good toe bumper. Great in the mud! I did have a problem with rolling my ankle while wearing them.
Mizuno Wave Ascend - A good combo road/easier trail shoe. Not very protective on rocky surfaces and tread not real good in mud. Felt lighter than most trail shoes. The pair I bought was slightly too small so it did cause some foot pain.
Merrell Overdrive - A very fun shoe to run trails in. Shoe felt very light and a good shoe for neutral runners. Great styling. Good toe protection and tread. Okay on rocks (about like the Eagles). Biggest complaint is the construction. Parts of sole started to come apart after 60-70 miles. Replacement pair is on the way. I'll see how it does.
Brooks Cascadia 2 - I got a size 15 and only color avail was the boring pavement gray (I wanted the Toady Green). Shoe felt very protective and I have found it to be good on the rocks here in San Antonio. Shoe feels a little heavier than Merrills but it feels like it is constructed very well and will last. Tread doesn't seem to be very aggressive so not sure how it will do in mud. Overall, I am very happy with them and they are my shoe of choice at the moment.
Chris |
backcountryrunner Joined: 25 Aug 2006 Posts: 199 Utah, United States |
Posted: Fri 20 Oct 2006 04:09 pm GMT |
top |
Great info, falconsooner. Welcome to the forum! |
produce guy Joined: 28 Aug 2006 Posts: 5 Texas, United States |
Posted: Tue 20 Nov 2007 08:14 pm GMT |
top |
I just bought a pair of New Balance 810's and I love 'em,grat shoe for the rough trails we have here in cetral T.X. I would buy another pair. |
xterrabuzz Joined: 23 Nov 2007 Posts: 5 Minnesota, United States |
Posted: Fri 23 Nov 2007 08:51 pm GMT |
top |
Hey Man, I love th new Salomon SpeedcrossII. Lightweight, agile. A far call from other Solamon shoes from the past. I do most of my running on trails with lots of wet rocks/mub and the have a great mud shedding tread. Good luck. |
backcountryrunner Joined: 25 Aug 2006 Posts: 199 Utah, United States |
Posted: Tue 27 Nov 2007 07:36 am GMT |
top |
Several months ago I purchased a pair of Asics GT-2120 instead of my usual Asics Eagle Trail ... and I really, really like them. Or it could be the new inserts I put in them ... but I think I'll be getting the 2120's from now on. |
AKTrail Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Posts: 16 Alaska, United States |
Posted: Sun 16 Dec 2007 08:53 pm GMT |
top |
Just as an update, when I posted in 2006 about Brooks Adrenaline ASR being very rigid, that's the original version. I have since tried the ASR3 and have maybe 300-400 miles between 2 pairs, and they work reasonably well for me - at least as a winter shoe.
I still prefer the Brooks Trespass for summer because of its drainability for stream crossings, although prefer the ASR in damp conditions (dew). But the ASR doesn't have an open mesh (= warmer in winter, soaks up water in summer) and the less aggressive tread provides places to insert screws when running on snow. The less agressive tread means the dirt traction isn't quite as good. I've also tried the ASR4 a little (maybe 20 mi) and while it's very similar to the 3, either the toebox is a little smaller near the toes or my feet and orthotics haven't seated themselves in the sock liner yet.
Regarding durability, one eyelet on my 1st pair pulled out a while ago, but since I skip a set, I think I can use the adjacent hole. |
Dolly Joined: 01 May 2008 Posts: 6 California, United States |
Posted: Fri 06 Jun 2008 09:42 pm GMT |
top |
I just a read a short article on pre-shoe shopping at www.traxee.com....on what kind of feet you have!! I am pretty new at this...had no idea that me feet were not 'normal'!! Best wishes everyone. |
daveb Joined: 30 May 2008 Posts: 2 California, United States |
Posted: Tue 17 Jun 2008 04:26 pm GMT |
top |
Has anyone found a good trail shoe in wide sizes, the only one I've been able to find was Vasque. Thanks |
Clydesdale
Joined: 26 Jul 2008 Posts: 15 South Dakota, United States |
Posted: Mon 28 Jul 2008 09:43 pm GMT |
top |
I have to say I have tried several good trail shoes, but have recently fallen in love with Vasque. I am currently running in the Blur which provides great rock protection and stability. The tread pattern has good grip and sheds mud and smaller rocks. I have been running in them for about a year with no problems.
This spring I bought the waterpoof version and had a blast running in the rain on wet sloppy trails. They did a good job of keeping my feet dry and happy. I only crashed once when I lost traction because of the severe trail conditions. Even then the shoes tread didn't jam up with mud and was totally clean in a couple of strides. If you are going to be out in the rain or snow I would recomend going gortex, it is worth the extra bucks. |
rebeebit Joined: 23 Jul 2008 Posts: 6 Colorado, United States |
Posted: Tue 29 Jul 2008 10:14 pm GMT |
top |
I believe Montrail Hardrocks (if not all Montrail running shoes) come in wide sizes! I LOVE my Hardrocks! |
trailrunnerB Joined: 11 Sep 2009 Posts: 1 Montana, United States |
Posted: Fri 11 Sep 2009 06:41 pm GMT |
top |
I use the Inov8 295 for my trail shoes. They are very lightweight, 295 grams to be exact. The tread pattern is great. It is made from a low density air blown rubber which provides a lot of rebound and cushioned support while keeping an amazing amount of grip on everything. Because of the sole of the shoe giving so much cush to the shoe. They can reduce the amount of eva foam in the mid sole. Doing that you get a much lower profile shoe. Your heel is lower so you don't roll your ankle as often. I have broken my ankle a few times and it sprains just by looking at it. I don't have a problem anymore. I bought my shoes at Prolitegear.com here is the link http://www.prolitegear.com/site/xdpy/sb/Inov-8.htm Happy trails. |
jimsty
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 66 Christchurch, New Zealand |
Posted: Fri 11 Sep 2009 06:49 pm GMT |
top |
Trying to get my hands on some Montrail (doesn't seem to be anyone that stocks them in NZ) ?! Have been using Asics trabuco's for a while, great shoes but just feel like I want a change. Quite like the look and feel of some of the Salomon trail shoes though... ____________________ JAMES STYLER (p.f.t), (b.b) Columnist for V02 MAX magazine Interview with 2 x Ironman World Champion Chrissie Wellington here: http://www.chrissiewellington.org/media/ironwoman-extraordinaire/TEL: 027 5534266 WEB: www.stylerhealth.com
[edited: Fri 11 Sep 2009 06:49 pm] |
kevingoorijan Joined: 24 Apr 2010 Posts: 5 California, United States |
Posted: Sat 24 Apr 2010 07:06 am GMT |
top |
What should I expect from a quality [url= http://www.zbsports.com]smart wool[/url] socks with trail shoe? Your favorite(s)? Your "not so" favorite(s)? Just looking for general knowledge. I usually seek out the more difficult trails (steep uphills, rocky terrain, etc.), if that helps in making a good recommendation. As long as the shoe has lots of traction and its soft, then its okay for me. But brand wise, I am loyal to mizuno.
[edited: Wed 28 Apr 2010 10:19 am] |
|