Showing posts with label shoe review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label shoe review. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Altra Lone Peak Shoe Review
I first heard about this shoe over two years ago from my friend Brian Beckstead who couldn't contain his excitement over his revolutionary new shoe design. While I did not immediately dismiss him, I definitely had my doubts about his description of a "Zero Drop" shoe. I'm happy to report my doubts have been erased.
First a couple of housekeeping issues before the review.
Definition of Zero Drop: The amount of drop found in the sole of the shoe from heel to toe. Most mainstream shoes are in the 10 to 12 mm range. All of the Altra shoes have a zero drop from heel to toe, meaning the sole is even along the length of the sole. Another important distinction; zero drop does not mean minimal. Hoka's don't have a very big drop and have a ton of protection.
Why Zero Drop? That's a very good question. There is no science behind the fact that zero drop could be better (or worse) for your running form, yet. I trust there will be plenty of studies done over the next year to discover the advantages or disadvantages. Many shoe companies are already cutting the drop in order to keep up with market demand. My own personal opinion; it simply makes it easier to strike on my mid to forefoot area. For me, that translates into happy knees and joints. The landing is softer and much of the shock is taken up by my muscles and supporting tendons. I discovered this by accident shortly before my knee surgery nearly two years ago. At that time I had made the switch to Inov-8 shoes looking for something with some grip to use at the HURT 100. Little did I realize the Inov-8 310's and 295's had less drop than my normal shoes (8mm), but I did notice I could strike mid to forefoot much easier.
The Review:
Right out of the box the Lone Peaks come with an instruction manual, explaining zero drop and why it is important to make a slow transition into using them daily. I ignored the advice and just started running with them every day thinking my legs and feet were already prepped. I was wrong and ended up with a small strain on the outside of my foot, opposite of the arch. Ever since then I have been working them in a few times per week with great success.
The Lone Peaks run a bit large, so you may consider dropping a 1/2 size. Most of my shoes are 8.5's, like the Inov-8's, Montrails and Brooks and I went with an 8.5 in the Lone Peaks but I think I will try an 8 for my next pair.
Priced at the $100 mark and weighing in at 10.2 oz/295 grams they are competitive with other shoes in this range
The Upper: Comfortable is the word. The toebox has more room than I have ever experienced in a shoe. My big toe frequently gets a callous and irritated ingrown toenail but with these shoes I have seen both disappear. I did catch my forefoot on a few rocks when I first started wearing them because of the extra width but I adapted quickly and haven't found it to be a problem since. The extra room plus the toe protection meant that when I did kick a rock I couldn't feel it.
While the forefoot is loose the midfoot upper is super supportive and keeps the foot from moving around inside the shoe. My arch is quite normal and I felt like I had ample support, however the outside arch could probably use just a little more.
The heelcup feels loose but supportive. I thought for sure my heel would lift, based on how it felt when I put them on but it does not. This also means I have not experienced any heel rub whatsoever.
The mesh upper is very breathable and the protection on the sides are all mountain profiles. While I haven't truly waterlogged them yet I believe they will drain just fine.
The Midsole: The Lone Peaks ride 11mm off the ground and have a rockplate that runs the entire length of the shoe. The protection is on par with the Brooks Cascadia's and Montrail Masochist's. I like it because I can still feel the trail but my feet don't take a beating like they did in the Inov-8 295's and 310's. The cushioning is adequate for mid to forefoot striking but not enough to handle heel striking all the time. The midsole is also pretty stiff and I notice it more on the pavement than I do on the trail.
The other striking feature of the midsole is the wide platform. Initially I thought they would feel sloppy but really they are extremely stable and a larger surface area potentially equals better grip...
The Outsole: Aggressive gripping power with style. First, the lugs are similar in design to the Cascadia 5's but the size and arrangement seems more effective to me. I've tested them on hard packed trails, dry loose dirt, mud, and snow with great success. The rubber compound grips almost as well as my favorite sticky shoes and sheds mud quite easily. So far I've put about 100 miles on them and they seem to be holding up well. I'll post an update in the future about their durability.
The trail rudder seemed a little odd to me at first but that's because I spent the 90's era cycling and not running. Many of the original trail shoes from that era had a rudder and I suppose Altra decided to give them a graceful nod for their innovative style. The rudder is supposed to help grip on the super steep descents and while I can't tell if it's the sole reason I'm not slipping, I haven't ended up on backside yet. I'm also anxious to try them out for some glissading action if we ever get some snow this winter.
The last little feature I would like to point out is something to distract your friends running behind you. I've received many comments on the yellow foot imprint that is quite visible from behind. I'm still not sure if there is a functional purpose as the rubber feels like the same compound but I'll find out put it in the update.
Conclusion: Possibly my favorite trail shoe so far. I say "so far" because I really need to do some longer 3 or 4 hour runs to get a real idea if they will keep my feet happy. I also want to test their durability, but like I said earlier, after 100 miles there are no signs of wear. Priced at the $100 mark, I suspect they will hold up quite well through at least 300 miles, we shall see.
I would highly advise making a transition into the shoes slowly. Work them in a couple times a week at first. Zero Drop means the the heel drops more and the achilles is doing more work than it's used to. Take it slow.
Anyone else out there running in the Lone Peaks? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
First a couple of housekeeping issues before the review.
Definition of Zero Drop: The amount of drop found in the sole of the shoe from heel to toe. Most mainstream shoes are in the 10 to 12 mm range. All of the Altra shoes have a zero drop from heel to toe, meaning the sole is even along the length of the sole. Another important distinction; zero drop does not mean minimal. Hoka's don't have a very big drop and have a ton of protection.
 |
| Montrail Masochist heel |
 |
| Montrail Masochist toe |
 |
| Altra Lone Peak heel |
 |
| Altra Lone Peak toe |
Why Zero Drop? That's a very good question. There is no science behind the fact that zero drop could be better (or worse) for your running form, yet. I trust there will be plenty of studies done over the next year to discover the advantages or disadvantages. Many shoe companies are already cutting the drop in order to keep up with market demand. My own personal opinion; it simply makes it easier to strike on my mid to forefoot area. For me, that translates into happy knees and joints. The landing is softer and much of the shock is taken up by my muscles and supporting tendons. I discovered this by accident shortly before my knee surgery nearly two years ago. At that time I had made the switch to Inov-8 shoes looking for something with some grip to use at the HURT 100. Little did I realize the Inov-8 310's and 295's had less drop than my normal shoes (8mm), but I did notice I could strike mid to forefoot much easier.
The Review:
Right out of the box the Lone Peaks come with an instruction manual, explaining zero drop and why it is important to make a slow transition into using them daily. I ignored the advice and just started running with them every day thinking my legs and feet were already prepped. I was wrong and ended up with a small strain on the outside of my foot, opposite of the arch. Ever since then I have been working them in a few times per week with great success.
The Lone Peaks run a bit large, so you may consider dropping a 1/2 size. Most of my shoes are 8.5's, like the Inov-8's, Montrails and Brooks and I went with an 8.5 in the Lone Peaks but I think I will try an 8 for my next pair.
Priced at the $100 mark and weighing in at 10.2 oz/295 grams they are competitive with other shoes in this range
The Upper: Comfortable is the word. The toebox has more room than I have ever experienced in a shoe. My big toe frequently gets a callous and irritated ingrown toenail but with these shoes I have seen both disappear. I did catch my forefoot on a few rocks when I first started wearing them because of the extra width but I adapted quickly and haven't found it to be a problem since. The extra room plus the toe protection meant that when I did kick a rock I couldn't feel it.
While the forefoot is loose the midfoot upper is super supportive and keeps the foot from moving around inside the shoe. My arch is quite normal and I felt like I had ample support, however the outside arch could probably use just a little more.
The heelcup feels loose but supportive. I thought for sure my heel would lift, based on how it felt when I put them on but it does not. This also means I have not experienced any heel rub whatsoever.
The mesh upper is very breathable and the protection on the sides are all mountain profiles. While I haven't truly waterlogged them yet I believe they will drain just fine.
 |
| Big toe box |
 |
| Heel with throwback trail rudder |
 |
| Inside of the Lone Peak, note the cool mountain profile |
 |
| Outside of the Lone Peak, note the cool mountain profile |
The Midsole: The Lone Peaks ride 11mm off the ground and have a rockplate that runs the entire length of the shoe. The protection is on par with the Brooks Cascadia's and Montrail Masochist's. I like it because I can still feel the trail but my feet don't take a beating like they did in the Inov-8 295's and 310's. The cushioning is adequate for mid to forefoot striking but not enough to handle heel striking all the time. The midsole is also pretty stiff and I notice it more on the pavement than I do on the trail.
The other striking feature of the midsole is the wide platform. Initially I thought they would feel sloppy but really they are extremely stable and a larger surface area potentially equals better grip...
The Outsole: Aggressive gripping power with style. First, the lugs are similar in design to the Cascadia 5's but the size and arrangement seems more effective to me. I've tested them on hard packed trails, dry loose dirt, mud, and snow with great success. The rubber compound grips almost as well as my favorite sticky shoes and sheds mud quite easily. So far I've put about 100 miles on them and they seem to be holding up well. I'll post an update in the future about their durability.
 |
| Lone Peak on the left, Cascadia 5 on the right |
The trail rudder seemed a little odd to me at first but that's because I spent the 90's era cycling and not running. Many of the original trail shoes from that era had a rudder and I suppose Altra decided to give them a graceful nod for their innovative style. The rudder is supposed to help grip on the super steep descents and while I can't tell if it's the sole reason I'm not slipping, I haven't ended up on backside yet. I'm also anxious to try them out for some glissading action if we ever get some snow this winter.
The last little feature I would like to point out is something to distract your friends running behind you. I've received many comments on the yellow foot imprint that is quite visible from behind. I'm still not sure if there is a functional purpose as the rubber feels like the same compound but I'll find out put it in the update.
Conclusion: Possibly my favorite trail shoe so far. I say "so far" because I really need to do some longer 3 or 4 hour runs to get a real idea if they will keep my feet happy. I also want to test their durability, but like I said earlier, after 100 miles there are no signs of wear. Priced at the $100 mark, I suspect they will hold up quite well through at least 300 miles, we shall see.
I would highly advise making a transition into the shoes slowly. Work them in a couple times a week at first. Zero Drop means the the heel drops more and the achilles is doing more work than it's used to. Take it slow.
Anyone else out there running in the Lone Peaks? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Montrail Rogue Racer Review
Check out the review I did on the uber-light shoe over on Matt Hart's blog.
 |
| Montrail Rogue Racer - 8.8 oz. |
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Hoka One One Mafate Review
You could call me a fad follower, though while I have tried just about everything, it’s usually at the tail of the trend (read shoes on sale). And there have been quite a few trends in the past years from protective shoes with “ballistic rock plates” to the truely minimalist shoe. Some people even opt out of shoes. This time, though, I’m trying the early adopter approach.
While I am not exactly the first to wear or write about the Hokas, I think another voice out there may be worth something. For the record, I bought my size 8.5 (although now I think a half size up would have worked) Hokas full price--$170, ouch--and I don’t have any relationship with the manufacturer or any retailer.
This week I ran 50 + miles in the Hokas on a variety of terrain ranging from the Grandeur Peak Fun Run loop, the first loop of the BST Marathon, to a run from Neff’s Canyon to Day’s Fork to Snowbird.
The shoes look pretty silly. My 8 year-old son suggested the “citrus” color, which makes these shoes, which give me an extra 2 inches in height, even more ridiculous. Bob Thompson, who met me for a run up Grandeur just laughed, but politely added that he was laughing with me not at me. The shoes really do climb well. There is considerable extra surface area and a great grip, and despite the bulky appearance the weight is only 320 grams (11 oz). I felt like Spiderman running up and down the steep rock surfaces. The extra surface area and added height do tend to make the shoe roll a little. Anyone who tells you that you can’t roll your ankle in these shoes just hasn’t yet. That said, they are stable when running straight forward. Dancing in and out of rocks with lateral movements are not the strongest point of the Hokas.
The marketing line is “Time to Fly”. Frankly, I think it should be “Time to Bounce”. The strong point is that you bounce along on some really springy cushion. Cruising over rocks is easier than any other shoe I have worn. Instead of the tiptoeing that is necessary in a NB MT100, these shoes encourage a straight line over rocks. This morning I ran the first loop of the BST in 1 hour 48 minutes on legs that had been punished yesterday on a 6 hour 25 minute run with Christian. All I could think about as I was “flying” downhill was that these shoes were silly fun. Really steep technical downhills aren’t much better than any other shoes, but runnable downhills are a blast. The Hoka website touts that the compression, shock absorption, and low ramp angle “allows for tremendous confidence running downhill, as runners can now engage their gluteus and lower back as opposed to isolating their quads, relaxing the body and making running downhill fun and comfortable.” I don’t need any more confidence running downhill, but my quads do feel great after some good long runs, and my ass is sore so they may be correct. I am not sure how this would would work for a “lazy ass” runner.
Because the foot sits higher the angle created on a canted trail seemed more acute. This caused my left lateral malleolus (ankle) to rub on the collar of the shoe. By the end of my run with Christian yesterday I really wanted a trail that angled in the other direction. This could certainly be an issue in a 100 mile race like Wasatch where there are long stretches that slant in one direction.
These shoes are billed as a “great value” because they supposedly last twice as long as a typical pair of shoes. Mr. Meltzer says he got over 600 miles out of his first pair. After 50 punishing miles in the Wasatch Mountains, there is some wear along the puffy EVA foam. Time will tell if they are indeed durable and I will keep track of the relative value in terms of longevity. For now, I am quite happy with these silly, bouncy, citrus colored shoes, that make me two inches taller, and allow for ass-engaging downhill running. The bottom line is that while you may be laughed at, these shoes are fun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)