chris
09-08-2003, 16:43
Reviewer: Chris Willett aka Suge aka Sugarmonkey
Age: 29
Height: 6'4"
Weight: 193-215 lbs (during the testing)
During my Pacific Crest Trail hike, I used four pairs of shoes. Since their are a plethora of trail running shoes out there, this might help people make a decision. All the shoes were size 15, 1 size larger than my normal, street shoe size. All cost in the $80-90 range.
Brooks Adrenaline GTS
--------------------------
I really liked this pure running shoe for the the hot, hot Southern California section of the PCT. There is enough mesh in the shoe that when the wind blows, I feel it in my toes. Keeping my feet ventilated was very important in a land where the ambient temperature would get into the upper 90s or low 100s on a daily basis. The surface temperature was correspondingly higher. I wore this shoe from the Mexican border to Mojave, CA, a distance of 563 miles.
While the sole is a standard running pattern, the rubber is soft enough that I had only a few slipping problems. Traction is certainly better than the NB 806s listed below. Durability was good, with only one small tear in the side mesh of the shoe and some chunked up areas on the sole. Since this is a road shoe, your feet have much less protection than with other shoes. Walking on rubble is not fun with these shoes. I could have gotten another 150 miles out of the shoes, but wanted something with big time tread for the Sierra.
If I were to hike the AT, this would be the shoe that I would use through northern Virginia to Vermont.
Asics Eagle Trail
-------------------
I wore the Eagle Trail from Mojave to Sierra City, traversing the length of the Sierras, a distance of about 630 miles. The Eagle Trail have a massive tread on them, better than my regular hiking boots and only a step below my mountaineering boots. I can't believe Asics put such a sole on a running shoe! Traction is very good. You get a stiffer carriage and a bit more protection than the Brooks shoe, but still less than I would like.
The Sierra consisted of a lot of big mountains, scores of raging rivers, and tons of snow. My feet were wet all day, every day, for the better part of 3 weeks. The shoes took an absolute pounding and looked it. From kicking steps in frozen snow and constantly bouncing off rocks, I grew two large holes near my big toes after a few hundred miles. There were rips in the sides as well.
Despite what seems like a durability problem, these would be my perfect trail shoe if Asics would put in a more protective sole and if REI continued to carry them in size 15 (Asics makes them in size 15). The shredding of the shoes is a testament to the terrain that I went through, rather than design flaws in the shoe.
Were I to hike the AT, I would wear these shoes from Springer to central Virginia and in northern New England.
New Balance 806
--------------------
I really hated this shoe, even if it is about the most popular model out there. Others love the shoe. I wore the NB 806 from Sierra City to Sisters, OR, a distance of around 780 miles. The NBs are built like tanks, and there was absolutely no damage to the shoes when I ditched them in Sisters. Internal cushionning was going, but structurally the shoes were still good. The shoes have very little mesh in them and are the least breathable of all the shoes I wore. These shoes were also the most protective, making rubble walking easy and painfree.
The NB shoes did not fit me as well as I might have hoped. The toe box was a bit too narrow and the heel cup a bit too wide. The result was a sequence of small cracks or cuts on the pads of my toes. Some days these would be rather painful. The shoes might fit you better than they did me, but I have a fairly standard shaped foot. The traction of the NB 806 is substandard. There were times I would slide on things I could take my wingtips down safely. When things got wet, the situation got worse. The tread pattern is poor and not aggresive enough. The rubber used is very hard, which helps to protect the feet, but limits how grippy the shoe can be.
I would not wear these shoes again and cannot recommend them. I won't use NB products until they improve the traction (I had similar problems with the 904 model).
Asics Gel Trabuco V
------------------------
I wore these trail runners from Sisters, OR to the Canadian border, a distance of about 670 miles. I liked these shoes alot, as they provided fairly good traction and a much better fit than the 806s I had been wearing previously. It took about 10 days for my feet to recover from the damage the NB shoes did. After that, I had happy feet the rest of the way to the border.
The Gel Trabucos are a lot like a running shoe, only a little stiffer and with a grippier, more protective sole. There is a lot of mesh, which helps keep your feet cool, but also lets in mud and micro rocks.
The durability of the shoes was very good, with no noticeable wear on them when I finished. They now have a tear on the top. I wished for more foot protection, but the amount the Trabucos provided was adequate. Traction was second best to the Eagle Trail.
Were I to hike the AT and could not get the Eagle Trail, I'd use these shoes.
Age: 29
Height: 6'4"
Weight: 193-215 lbs (during the testing)
During my Pacific Crest Trail hike, I used four pairs of shoes. Since their are a plethora of trail running shoes out there, this might help people make a decision. All the shoes were size 15, 1 size larger than my normal, street shoe size. All cost in the $80-90 range.
Brooks Adrenaline GTS
--------------------------
I really liked this pure running shoe for the the hot, hot Southern California section of the PCT. There is enough mesh in the shoe that when the wind blows, I feel it in my toes. Keeping my feet ventilated was very important in a land where the ambient temperature would get into the upper 90s or low 100s on a daily basis. The surface temperature was correspondingly higher. I wore this shoe from the Mexican border to Mojave, CA, a distance of 563 miles.
While the sole is a standard running pattern, the rubber is soft enough that I had only a few slipping problems. Traction is certainly better than the NB 806s listed below. Durability was good, with only one small tear in the side mesh of the shoe and some chunked up areas on the sole. Since this is a road shoe, your feet have much less protection than with other shoes. Walking on rubble is not fun with these shoes. I could have gotten another 150 miles out of the shoes, but wanted something with big time tread for the Sierra.
If I were to hike the AT, this would be the shoe that I would use through northern Virginia to Vermont.
Asics Eagle Trail
-------------------
I wore the Eagle Trail from Mojave to Sierra City, traversing the length of the Sierras, a distance of about 630 miles. The Eagle Trail have a massive tread on them, better than my regular hiking boots and only a step below my mountaineering boots. I can't believe Asics put such a sole on a running shoe! Traction is very good. You get a stiffer carriage and a bit more protection than the Brooks shoe, but still less than I would like.
The Sierra consisted of a lot of big mountains, scores of raging rivers, and tons of snow. My feet were wet all day, every day, for the better part of 3 weeks. The shoes took an absolute pounding and looked it. From kicking steps in frozen snow and constantly bouncing off rocks, I grew two large holes near my big toes after a few hundred miles. There were rips in the sides as well.
Despite what seems like a durability problem, these would be my perfect trail shoe if Asics would put in a more protective sole and if REI continued to carry them in size 15 (Asics makes them in size 15). The shredding of the shoes is a testament to the terrain that I went through, rather than design flaws in the shoe.
Were I to hike the AT, I would wear these shoes from Springer to central Virginia and in northern New England.
New Balance 806
--------------------
I really hated this shoe, even if it is about the most popular model out there. Others love the shoe. I wore the NB 806 from Sierra City to Sisters, OR, a distance of around 780 miles. The NBs are built like tanks, and there was absolutely no damage to the shoes when I ditched them in Sisters. Internal cushionning was going, but structurally the shoes were still good. The shoes have very little mesh in them and are the least breathable of all the shoes I wore. These shoes were also the most protective, making rubble walking easy and painfree.
The NB shoes did not fit me as well as I might have hoped. The toe box was a bit too narrow and the heel cup a bit too wide. The result was a sequence of small cracks or cuts on the pads of my toes. Some days these would be rather painful. The shoes might fit you better than they did me, but I have a fairly standard shaped foot. The traction of the NB 806 is substandard. There were times I would slide on things I could take my wingtips down safely. When things got wet, the situation got worse. The tread pattern is poor and not aggresive enough. The rubber used is very hard, which helps to protect the feet, but limits how grippy the shoe can be.
I would not wear these shoes again and cannot recommend them. I won't use NB products until they improve the traction (I had similar problems with the 904 model).
Asics Gel Trabuco V
------------------------
I wore these trail runners from Sisters, OR to the Canadian border, a distance of about 670 miles. I liked these shoes alot, as they provided fairly good traction and a much better fit than the 806s I had been wearing previously. It took about 10 days for my feet to recover from the damage the NB shoes did. After that, I had happy feet the rest of the way to the border.
The Gel Trabucos are a lot like a running shoe, only a little stiffer and with a grippier, more protective sole. There is a lot of mesh, which helps keep your feet cool, but also lets in mud and micro rocks.
The durability of the shoes was very good, with no noticeable wear on them when I finished. They now have a tear on the top. I wished for more foot protection, but the amount the Trabucos provided was adequate. Traction was second best to the Eagle Trail.
Were I to hike the AT and could not get the Eagle Trail, I'd use these shoes.