546 replies to this topic

[RunDave]

RunDave, on Mar 24 2010, 09:15 PM, said:

Has anyone tried the Mizuno Wave Cabrakan. They sound like a very good shoe. Perhaps better than the Ascend in that the waveplate stretches into the forefoot to provide better rock protection.

I bought a pair off the internet a while ago, but only got to test them out in the Pioneer Women's Trail run on the weekend. Conditions were wet and muddy with a lot of slippery downhill and singletrack, and the Cabrakans took it in their stride (or my stride). They felt good on flat sealed road and also provided ample protection on rocky ground. The main thing I love about Mizunos is that they always feel great straight out of the box. Hopefully they bring these shoes out here, but if  they don't I'm not too worried because I can get them cheaper over the internet from Britain anyway.

Edited by RunDave, 01 June 2010 - 11:33 PM.

[KateHendo]

RunDave, on Jun 1 2010, 10:52 PM, said:

I bought a pair off the internet a while ago, but only got to test them out in the Pioneer Women's Trail run on the weekend. Conditions were wet and muddy with a lot of slippery downhill and singletrack, and the Cabrakans took it in their stride (or my stride). They felt good on flat sealed road and also provided ample protection on rocky ground. The main thing I love about Mizunos is that they always feel great straight out of the box. Hopefully they bring these shoes out here, but if  they don't I'm not too worried because I can get them cheaper over the internet from Britain anyway.

My husband uses the Cabrakan and loves them. He ran the 6ft track race in March and said they were great - lightweight and sturdy with good traction. I have just bought him another pair online from the UK but got the wrong size so if there are any 10.5 UK/11.5 US out there that want a pair - let me know. Agree re getting them overseas - much cheaper (though not the best when you make a stuff up and have to return them!).

[RunDave]

KateHendo, on Jun 18 2010, 11:43 AM, said:

My husband uses the Cabrakan and loves them. He ran the 6ft track race in March and said they were great - lightweight and sturdy with good traction. I have just bought him another pair online from the UK but got the wrong size so if there are any 10.5 UK/11.5 US out there that want a pair - let me know. Agree re getting them overseas - much cheaper (though not the best when you make a stuff up and have to return them!).

I'd buy them off you but they are one size too large for me and you definitely don't want trail shoes being too big.

[shrek]

I have a question for all you experienced trail runners with trail shoes.

Is it alright to run on roads with trail shoes?

Is there any reason why you shouldn't?

[yeti]

shrek, on Jul 19 2010, 01:12 AM, said:

Is there any reason why you shouldn't?

Softer material / coarser structure of outer soles (i.e. less contact area) compared to road shoes may lead to faster wear.

Yeti

[vat]

shrek, on Jul 20 2010, 01:12 AM, said:

I have a question for all you experienced trail runners with trail shoes.

Is it alright to run on roads with trail shoes?

Is there any reason why you shouldn't?

Agree with yeti, likely to wear faster, but I have tried it in my Cascadias and they ride weirdly, I think because of the rock intrusion prevention.

[Mister G]

Most trail shoes don't have the cushioning or the same ride as road shoes so "clunk" on the bitumen- depending on the individual shoe and your personal mechanics, of course. My old Asics Trabucos did fairly well on the road, but wouldn't dream of wearing most models of Montrail on the road.

[Bi2]

Mister G, on Jul 20 2010, 03:56 PM, said:

Most trail shoes don't have the cushioning or the same ride as road shoes so "clunk" on the bitumen- depending on the individual shoe and your personal mechanics, of course. My old Asics Trabucos did fairly well on the road, but wouldn't dream of wearing most models of Montrail on the road.

I've recently been fitted in some Asics Evolution shoes (motion control) which I am reasonably happy wearing without my custom orthotics.

However I run on a sandy gravel track and it's winter, so there's frequently rain, puddles and mud and my feet get cold. I wear coolmax sock. Also those little stones that get into the shoe are annoying.

Is this a situation where buying trail shoes might help?  Is there a good trail shoe, similar to the Ascis Evolution? I'd still like pronation control and cushioning. Or would I be more likely to find a good, but deep, neutral trail shoe that can be worn with orthotics?  

Mainly I'm after a bit more weather protection and to keep the small stones out. The track is flat so I don't need anything very 'technical'.  I'd be tempted to run in leather walkers, but I doubt they'd have enough support and cushioning for running.

[Bellthorpe]

Gaiters.

[shrek]

Thanks for the replies.

I got a pair of Nike Structure Triax trail shoes for off road (mainly grass/ dirt) runs and was wondering if i could wear them on wet roads after/during rain to minimise socks and feet getting wet.

[shrek]

Does anyone knoe what ESC stands for on some of Nikes trail shoes (eg Nike Structure Triax 12 ESC)?

[Rico]

I have lots of issues with foot comfort/damage and after the Cascadias did such a good job looking after my feet on the 6ft Track I was tempted to try them for the subsequent road marathon but on some test runs found they didn't seem to have the same magic on long road runs.

I would have thought that the slightly trailified road shoe genre (eg trail versions of 2150s or Pegasus or Triax) should be able to handle road.  I'd be right into that option except that one of the trailifying things they promote is water resistent uppers and on some courses you actually want the opposite, ie good drainage.

[tank girl]

I like my Cascadias for road running. They are my shoe of choice for combo trail/bitumen runs.

[Bi2]

Bellthorpe, on Jul 20 2010, 05:28 PM, said:

Gaiters.

Thanks for the gaiter suggestion - never thought of that. Could look a bit stupid, but given what else I run in (cycling knicks, cleaning gloves etc) I could say 'care factor'? Never having worn gaiters even bush walking, I'm not sure they'd help with the cold though.

I would prefer water resistant uppers as I'm not in the habit of running through the puddles or streams. Plus they'd offer better protection from the cold. But Brookes Cascadias are neutral.

Why don't they make running shoes with all leather uppers like walkers and cross trainers? I've been told walkers and cross trainers don't have good enough cushioning for the impact of running.

[yeti]

Bi2, on Jul 26 2010, 09:32 PM, said:

Why don't they make running shoes with all leather uppers like walkers and cross trainers?

Weight?

Yeti

[RunDave]

I liked my mizuno ascends. They were excellent on the road and if anything a bit light on trail features like rugged grip.  I'm now running in mizuno cabrakans which are excellent trail shoes, but also good for long stretches of road.

[RunDave]

tank girl, on Jul 26 2010, 03:52 PM, said:

I like my Cascadias for road running. They are my shoe of choice for combo trail/bitumen runs.

I liked cascadias too, didn't think they were too clunky, but the uppers wore and then blew out a bit too quickly for my budget.

[Puglet]

Bi2, on Jul 27 2010, 09:32 PM, said:

Thanks for the gaiter suggestion - never thought of that. Could look a bit stupid, but given what else I run in (cycling knicks, cleaning gloves etc) I could say 'care factor'? Never having worn gaiters even bush walking, I'm not sure they'd help with the cold though.

I would prefer water resistant uppers as I'm not in the habit of running through the puddles or streams. Plus they'd offer better protection from the cold. But Brookes Cascadias are neutral.

Why don't they make running shoes with all leather uppers like walkers and cross trainers? I've been told walkers and cross trainers don't have good enough cushioning for the impact of running.

I use these: http://www.overboots...atherproof.html

Having hiked and worked in hiking shops for years and seen all of the gaiter options out there I don't use anything else -  they do everything a full gaiter does without the weight or price tag.  The sit perfectly over my cascadias too.

(oh, you find them at tradesmen clothing shops or sometimes army disposal places have them)

Edited by Puglet, 28 July 2010 - 10:43 AM.

[davegh2o]

flyingemu, on May 1 2009, 07:43 PM, said:

... because they look great, and who wouldn't want to be like the cool kids?  

I had the same width problem, I tried the Salomon ultras but were to narrow, I was particularly upset as these were by far the best shoe for the task.

I ended up with the Gore-tex Merrell overdrives and love them.  I am not into the perferrated mesh on the outside but they are very comfortable all the time, and great grip.  The only gripe I have is I have to kep glueing the sole down as it delaminates from the foam regularly.  

I will get another pair soon if I can't find any Asics to try.

Regards Dave

[Mick]

Having worn at least 10 pairs of ASIC 21x0 road shoes in the last few years, when I saw a pair of ASIC 2140 TRAIL shoes going for a good price on ebay I thought I would give them a try.

I used them out on the GNW yesterday and I VERY impressd with the improvment in grip compared to the road version. Definetly more grip that the person with road shoes who decided it was easier to use their hands to slide down the hill to Watagan Creek and look like a dog with an itchy bottom  

I would say I had every bit as much grip as my normal trail shoe of choice, Cascadias. It will be interesting to take them out in the wet and see if they perform any better on hard wet surfaces where the Cascadia's suck.

Perhaps more of a hybrid shoe, but if you were stuck between choosing a road shoe vs trail shoe (eg 6ft) then perhaps they are a good choice.

[JohnLindsay]

I really like my Cascadias for the trails, and like Tank Girl find they are OK on the roads.  BUT if bitumen is wet, they are very slippery.  No problem with wet trails, just on the wet bitumen or pavement which can become like glass as there is not enough surface area contact with those llittle lugs.  Since I like the Cascadia fit, for road running in Ballarat's wet winter I am now wearing Brooks Defyance with has a similar last and feel to the Cascadia.

[dino]

I was using Five Ten (better known for rock climbing shoes) for a while - they were perfect on wet clay/mud, they had really aggressive lugs on them, they were really good on wet/dry rock as well. I got them from the USA and they were a size too big. So that caused more than a few problems, now they just sit on the shelf with all my other retired shoes

I then purchased a pair of Vasque's and they were good but no where near the Five Ten's when it came to performance on the trails.

I purchased some Brooks Cascadias recently and they have been by far the best trail shoe, these will be the shoes I will use for my run across Tassie in a few weeks.

Each to their own I guess, all about trial and error.


http://www.everydayh...au/gary_burgess

[MarkO]

What ever you do, don't get Asics Trabuco 13's as they are a terrible shoe

The older versions where good and would run and trail and road - but these latest are woeful and under cushioned

A shoe to be avoided

[JustinL]

Mick, on Oct 3 2010, 08:45 AM, said:

Having worn at least 10 pairs of ASIC 21x0 road shoes in the last few years, when I saw a pair of ASIC 2140 TRAIL shoes going for a good price on ebay I thought I would give them a try.

I used them out on the GNW yesterday and I VERY impressd with the improvment in grip compared to the road version. Definetly more grip that the person with road shoes who decided it was easier to use their hands to slide down the hill to Watagan Creek and look like a dog with an itchy bottom  

I would say I had every bit as much grip as my normal trail shoe of choice, Cascadias. It will be interesting to take them out in the wet and see if they perform any better on hard wet surfaces where the Cascadia's suck.

Perhaps more of a hybrid shoe, but if you were stuck between choosing a road shoe vs trail shoe (eg 6ft) then perhaps they are a good choice.

Mick, I have been watching these ASIC 2150 trails myself on ebay. Have run in the 21X0 series on the road for the past 18 months and used them on the trails thought it was time to jump in and grab a pair of the trail version.

Would you still recommend them and did you go for the same sizing as road version or bigger size/width?

[Mick]

JustinL, on Oct 26 2010, 09:02 PM, said:

Mick, I have been watching these ASIC 2150 trails myself on ebay. Have run in the 21X0 series on the road for the past 18 months and used them on the trails thought it was time to jump in and grab a pair of the trail version.

Would you still recommend them and did you go for the same sizing as road version or bigger size/width?

I've done a few runs in them now.

I didn't use them at GOW, but I have done a 70km run on the GNW (got one small blister, but my fault for not lubing my feet during training), and then did 30km two days later which was over 3 hours of splashing through puddles. A few times on purpose I stood up to my ankles in water (I was trying to keep my feet wet all day to test some new lube) and they drained really well (only felt heavy for about 3 strides).

I have exactly the same sizing for the trails as the road version, no difference that I can detect.

The grip comparison between Cascadias is interesting. For my 30km Sunday run I was going to break in a new pair of Cascadias. I put them on and walked onto some wet tiles and might has well have been on ice skates. I went and changed to the ASICs and grip was normal. There is definetly something very bad about Cascadias on wet hard surfaces, dangerous. I felt like writing to them and suggesting they try a different type of rubber.

The only shoe I have tried that I would call "good" on wet surfaces is the Tevas. But I would only use these for short runs as the comfort isn't there for me.

[Luko]

I am due for some new shoes and am looking at the Salomon SpeedCross 2 shoes. Was looking at the XA Pro 3D Ultra but these have caught my eye, lighter, more breathable and more aggressive sole. Has anyone used them before or can compare them to the XA?

Cheers, Luke

[inekuips]

I also have my eye on a pair of Salomom Speedcross.  I have been through a couple of pairs of teh XA Pros and I love them, BUT I have always had trouble with the toebox... that hard plastic toebox has caused me to lose toenails on long, steep trails (the likes of 6 foot) when my toe hits it.  I've tried going up a size, down a size, but nothing seems to solve the problem.  The Speedcross look to be a very similar style to the XA Pro, but without the plastic toebox, so I thought they might be worth giving a try.  

I would love to hear if anyone has either had the same problem, or has tried the Speedcross?

ine

[JustinL]

I purchased a pair of ASICS 2150 trail and have been using them for a several weeks now, very happy with these shoes (thanks Mick for the recommendation!).

In general the ride is very similar to the road version, just with the typical trail adjustments of less cushioning and more bite with the sole grip. I have used these on many different trails with different technical surfaces, no problems at all. Crossing rivers/creeks and they drain and dry nicely.

If you are considering a pair, do take notice to the outsole of this shoe. They are not as aggresive as say Salomon wings or ASICS trabucos (have a look at the ASICS US website for the outsole image if interested), so if that is important perhaps these 2150s are not the right choice.

[Kato]

I've recently got not one but two new pairs of trail shoes.  Earlier this year I bought my fourth pair of ASICS Trabucos online and on the weekend I purchased a pair of Nike 27 Pegasus trail shoes.  

The ASICS have done only a few runs, primarily the Mt Glorious race in February.  The day was very hot and extremely humid, and the new shoes have a Gore-Tex layer to prevent water ingress.  Unfortunately, the layer also prevents cooling air or the passage of sweat: consequently, my feat were soaked and prune-like despite there being no puddles and no rainfall during the race.  I tried them again on a long run in March, and had the same result - they just don't breathe enough for the humidity and my response to it.  I used once more on the weekend, and was pleasantly surprised to find that in cooler weather, they didn't soak my feet during a 3:15 long hilly run despite it being showery and my having to run through mud, puddles, and wet grass on the trail part of the morning.  They are a very dull grey and black colour, and have a tiny (5 * 15 mm) reflective patch on their heels.  Because, or perhaps despite this, ASICS advertise the "Scotchlite" reflector in their on-shoe brochure.  The sole is much more aggressive than previous models (bought in Aussie stores).  It doesn't seem particularly grippy on roads, it is SHIT when crossing cattle grids, but it's great on muddy, rocky, and technical dirt going steeply up or down.  The sole seems to have suffered a little damage from the weekend's run, 20 km road and 10 km trail / dirt road.  The fit seems a bit narrower than previous Trabuco models.

The Nike shoes were obtained with a voucher for a free pair of shoes won at Runaway Bay at the Corporate Challenge race.  I chose the Nike voucher because I've been wearing Pegasus on the grass track at running club and Lunarfly on road runs.  Both of these shoes have been very comfortable, so I thought I'd give the swoosh brand another try.  On first appearance there is a huge difference.  The Nike has a flourescent orange tongue, lace, and liner.  Seriously bright, there is also a little more reflective material on the toe and on the heel.  The sole at the heel is a little narrower than the trabuco, maybe 5 mm or more, so might lead to less ankle twisting.  I have only worn them once for a walk but already know that the claimed "H2O Repel" aint worth the label on the side of the shoe it's printed on.  The sole appears quite aggressive, Wednesday night's run will tell.  They're a lot lighter than the Trabuco as well, 365 g versus 489 g each for a size 12.  That's around half a pound of shoes between them.  Whoa.

Anyway, there will be a further report on the Nike to come.  I'll wear them at Wildhorse on the weekend and scare some of the locals, giving them a muddy workout in the process.

[Kato]

Well the Nikes got a workout on the weekend, doing the 30ish km option at the Wildhorse Criterium.  Everyone (and I mean Everyone) commented on the fluoro orange tongue and laces.  They didn't see inside to see the liner, they would have been even more impressed.  In an emergency they could be used to signal passing aircraft, and in the dawn light they actually cast an orange glow around themselves.  Loud.

From the outset they were very comfortable, with a wide toebox unlike the ASICS Trabuco, which seems narrower and very restrictive over the ball of my foot.  A small stone somehow worked its way between the cuff of the shoe and my Injinji sock and down to the back of my arch.  It lodged in the liner there and kept me company for fifteen kilometres or so.  Lucky for me I have developed a forefoot strike over the last few years.

Traction in the Nikes  was excellent over the surfaces presented - clay, mud, sand, rocky inclines and declines, and boulder strewn creeks.  I'm very glad I wore them, as after about four km there was a creek crossing, and again at ten, eleven, sixteen, twenty-four, and thirty kilometres.  The non-draining ASICS Trabucos would have caused my feet to macerate and made heaps of problems on a course like this one.  I can see a place for the ASICS shoes, but not where there is a water crossing involved.

The ASICS shoe's soles seem to be getting shredded by the small amount of road running involved on most of my training trail runs. I haven't tried the Nikes on the road yet, will probably get around to taking them on a training run (with inevitable road section) sometime in the next few weeks, so will be able to report on their sole's relative durability.

On that subject, what is a good shoe for mixed road and muddy hills?  I can't have one without the other.  Maybe I should carry trail shoes in my backpack for the road section and change at the foot of the hills.

[Slug]

Bought myself a pair of the Salomon XA Pro 3D Ultra 2s a couple of weeks ago, and have to say they are an exceptional trail running shoe. I've done two consecutive 40k plus runs in the Blue Mountains on these including the Mt Solitary Ultra in wet, muddy conditions and my feet were absolutely pristine at the end of each run. No blisters or other issues. These shoes also have great grip, but also feel light and durable. For $180 these are great value in my opinion.

[Whippet Man]

I currently have a selection of new trail shoes I am aiming to review. As I said elsewhere I have a pair of the amazing Hoka One Ones. At the other extreme a pair of the Merrell Trail Gloves. I just received a pair of the latest Brooks Cascadias. I also have a pair of Pearl Izumi Peaks that I recently bought myself. And a pair of TNF Singletracks that have been waiting to get a run for months. I can tell you we are blessed by the breadth and quality of the options available to us at the moment and the competition is hot to capture the market. I have yet to run in them all but am working my way through them on varied terrain. The full reviews will be found in Trailrunner Mag Aus/NZ once publication starts online. In the meantime I am feasting on the variety and am impressed at the performances.

[Kato]

Took the Nike shoes on my favourite rocky trail / mud / steep road combo last night.

They are actually a very good shoe on off-road terrain.  The hill I run is around 15%, in parts I'm sure it's steeper.  It has mixed loose rocks, mud and clay, gravel and running water.  It's also deeply rutted and last night was slippery and saturated.  The Nike shoes (like the ASICS Trabucos) had fabulous grip, never losing traction on any part.  There is an incline that is about fifty metres of clay and it hits 15% as I can't even lower my heel to the ground while running some sections.  The Nike shoes bit in and allowed me to continue running.  I could feel the clay squirming against itself below my shoes, but the shoes weren't slipping at all.

They seemed to give good traction on bitumen for a very deeply lugged shoe, I could hear them gripping the surface and releasing it.  They gripped well on a slick slimy concrete causeway better than any shoe I've worn there.  They sucked on cattle grid, but then no shoes are good on wet steel.  The bitumen section caused a small but noticeable amount of wear on the sole.

They have a pretty thick heel which makes forefoot striking very difficult on some of the steeper descents.  The rearward pointing triangular lugs at the front of the shoe seemed up to the task even when my heels weren't hitting the ground though.

Overall I'd rate them slightly higher than the ASICS Gel Trabuco.

[russell2pi]

Just a newbie comment but how do you cope with mixed surfaces and what sole design is best for these? I find when running through wet clay in particular I get a heap of the stuff caked on my soles and at times have to stop and scrape the darn stuff off. You would think that chunky/luggy soles would give best grip in mud but then again maybe they also collect more mud in the crevices?

[Whippet Man]

I was curious too, Kato. How did the Nikes go once off the clay? Did they shed or carry the mud with them? And the rapid road wear-you reckon that will be an issue? Or just keep them away from bitumen completely?

[Rico]

I actually like my pegasus trails better on road than trail.  I like them overall for providing plenty of long range comfort but after twisting my ankle badly I became suspicious of how high heeled they were and whether this was risky on technical trails.

In other trail shoe news I like my Salomon XT Wings in many ways (especially comfort on decents) but can't believe how quickly the soles are wearing out.  The bottom layers are just disappearing before my eyes.

[Kato]

The Nikes have a more triangular lug.  The clay seemed to be shed from them as I was running, but that may be conditions.

I'll keep them both away from the roads.  The ASICS are actually hopeless at wearing, as there is a coloured surface on the lugs which seems to readily part company with the dark sole proper.  

The Nikes have rearward pointing crests at the forefoot, and forward facing crests on the heels.  When I footstrike, the ends of the shoe come down onto the road and seem to grab it, which is good, but makes a sound like Velcro opening when lifting.  That can't be good for the sole, so they won't get much use except pure trail.

[Hallac]

Slug, on 27 April 2011 - 11:27 PM, said:

Bought myself a pair of the Salomon XA Pro 3D Ultra 2s a couple of weeks ago, and have to say they are an exceptional trail running shoe. I've done two consecutive 40k plus runs in the Blue Mountains on these including the Mt Solitary Ultra in wet, muddy conditions and my feet were absolutely pristine at the end of each run. No blisters or other issues. These shoes also have great grip, but also feel light and durable. For $180 these are great value in my opinion.

I'm with you on this Slug.  My version 1 Ultras in the bright yellowish colour have taken me through 2 6ft races blister free (injinji toe socks help as well), a couple of W2Bs etc and I have just ordered a bright blue Ultra 2 from UK for approx $115 to replace them although I think there is still a reasonable bit of mileage in them, but the grip on the back of the heels are starting to wear so it was a good excuse to spend some money

[SeeDanRun]

Kato, on 06 May 2011 - 10:56 PM, said:

The Nikes have rearward pointing crests at the forefoot, and forward facing crests on the heels.  When I footstrike, the ends of the shoe come down onto the road and seem to grab it, which is good, but makes a sound like Velcro opening when lifting.  That can't be good for the sole, so they won't get much use except pure trail.

I get the same feeling with my Trail Pegasus.  I think they perform better on road than any other trail shoe I've worn, but I'm sure it's not good for the soles.  I had a pair of Storm Pegasus years ago (basically the Trail with a non-GoreTex waterproofing upper), and took them as my runners while on holiday.  I would have run a grand total of 40km on the six-week trip, but most of it on road - that wore down the crests more than the previous 2 years of trails did.  

Is there something in the composition of the Trail sole that makes them wear down faster on bitumen?  Or is it just that crest pattern?

[Ponkey]

Just adding my two penneths....

Been using Nike Free 3.0's as my main trail shoe for the past two years and I manage to scrape about 12 months use out of a pair until they finally disintegrate. I have no real problems with them over all distances and I am comfortable in wearing the same pair throughout a 100km ultra. The only real draw back is that they tend to get ripped down the side when on more technical trail especially if the surface is made up of scree or sharp rocks. Also, I have notice that they tend to pick up medium sized stones and twigs in the waffle grip and whilst this is no more than a small annoyance when running on harder packed trail due to the noise they make, I have on the odd occasion cut my inner calves when the twigs are longer.

In the last three months I have picked up a pair of Inov8 X-Talon 190's from the UK and have found these to be my ideal shoe for all off road races, huge grip, super light (190grams), minimal heal lift (less than 3mm across the entire shoe) and little or no cushioning. You really feel the trail and they just cling to anything without the annoying debris gathering tendencies of the Nike Free's. The one thing i cant use them for is extended road use or very hard packed fire trail as the tread wear will be excessive and I am one of these people that likes to run my shoes until they break, which is usually 12 months per pair.

I keep a pair of North Face Rucky Chucky's in reserve for longer day hikes that may include some running, but have moved away from them for my ultras due to their excessive weight and heal lift. Top shoe if you are not into the minimal shoe craze.

I have recently returned from a trip to Europe where I tried our the three different types of shoes on differing terrain in the Pyrenees of Spain and the Lake District and Snowdonia National Parks in the UK. The clear winner was the Talon 190's as they gripped so well in snow (they have crampon like grip), were great on scree where the Nikes got cut to shreds and were perfect level of feel and protection for a long day out on the trail. I do need to qualify that the type of terrain I was training on was very different to that I experience in NSW mountains as the climbs and the trails were much steeper and very technical where as the Blue Mountains has more ope firetrail and few real gnarly sections that I have experienced.

I was lucky enough to pick up a pair of The North Face Single Track on the weekend as part of the prizes for the North Face 100 and will see how these go as a replacement for my Rucky Chuckys, although I dont expect they will get much more use than that and be resigned to gym and shopping shoes!

[damyanos]

I just received a pair of Salomon XT slab 3's in the mail from Hong Kong yesterday. The front running Salomon girls in TNF100 wore these so good enough for me.

Pretty narrow though, hope they stretch a bit. Never had lairy looking shoes before but jeez they look flash.

[Skel]

I bought a pair of Salomon XT wings today.  I have been an avid kayano user for years for my road running / training.  But now I am moving into some trail running, so I was looking for somethign with more grip and something to reduce the ankle rolling (which occured a bit in my kayano's over the past few attempts).

i am also interested in others thoughts on runner for grass running. I run as a boundary umpire in our local AF league - not sure if I should go for a lighter speed type shoe or stick with the kayano's.

[thomo]

Okay I need a trail shoe for the Coastal Classic. Hopefully it will be held   

My road shoes won't handle the conditons that people who have witnessed first hand as recently as the weekend.

Shoe will require ability to go through mud and shed the mud.

I wear neutral cushioned shoes mostly. Wore Vomero 6's in City to Surf. This one Mine

So zero or low-to-the ground shoes are out.  

Appreciate your input and suggestions.

[GB123]

Hi,
I'm using Brooks Beasts for road running but I'm looking at getting into trail running. Can anyone recommend a comparable trail shoe to these? I've looked at the Salomon XT Wings 2 and they seem comfortable enough, though I haven't made a purchase.

Any thoughts?
G

[RaoulDuke]

Like GB123 I'm thinking of taking up trail running as I'm going to be moving closer to the dandenongs. I asked a friend of mine who's an orienteerer and although he wears more specialised shoes with spikes he said a popular shoe in orienteering circles is inov-8.

Any feedback from inov-8 wearers here? I've looked at their website and the roclite 295s look good for trails that aren't too demanding and reviews on wiggle are excellent

[Ultra168]

RaoulDuke, on 23 September 2011 - 07:30 PM, said:

Like GB123 I'm thinking of taking up trail running as I'm going to be moving closer to the dandenongs. I asked a friend of mine who's an orienteerer and although he wears more specialised shoes with spikes he said a popular shoe in orienteering circles is inov-8.

Any feedback from inov-8 wearers here? I've looked at their website and the roclite 295s look good for trails that aren't too demanding and reviews on wiggle are excellent

We have been trying quite a few different trail shoes lately on some of the more popular trails in NSW including GNW and Blue Mountains. A couple of Inov8, Nike and Salomon SpeedCross3 review HERE

[thomo]

Review on Brooks Grit