New toys out soon

Scouring the web in my free time for new shoes/gear that get me excited is something that I do oh too often.  But, the 5-10 people who actually read my blog get to enjoy the occasional preview on gear-to-come.

Fellraiser  (photo Castlebergoutdoors.uk)

Fellcross 2 (photo wiggle.uk)

Sense 3.  Did I miss the 2?  (photo Wiggle.uk)

S-lab Skin 5L pack with new soft-flask pockets.  I'll be looking hard at this pack.
(photo Castlebergoutdoors.uk)

Sense Ultra Softground
I'd heard rumors!  It does exist.  Also see Adam Campell wearing it in his movie "Silence"
(photo http://exploringthelimits.wordpress.com)

Inov-8 has also redone the color scheme for several of their trail shoes.  Whether there are changes in performance characteristics, its unclear.  I heard in an interview with Joe Grant that the Inov-8 X-Talon 212 was moved from blown EVA to injected EVA and that gave the shoe a little more protective ride.

X-Talon 212 (photo wiggle.uk)

Oroc 280 a shoe I would love to try out (photo wiggle.uk)

Inov-8 X-Talon 190 update (photo wiggle.uk)

Salomon Speedcross 3 Review

SC3 left SC2 right

On my second pair of SC3s, I did a little old fashion cobbler work and lowered the heel drop to 5 or 6mm:  Reduced Heel SC3s

Had these for a while.  Been meaning to post a review, but finally have put in enough miles that I feel I can give an accurate take on this shoe.  First, my experience with Salomon shoes - I really like the products put out by Salomon.  Yes, they are a little bit pricier, but man these are great pieces of well built gear.  I have run in the Speedcross 2, Fellcross, and now Speedcross 3.  The Fellcross has been my workhorse for most of the summer as well as a racing shoe.  The Speedcrosses are my bombproof rugged trail busters.  Maybe by some peoples standards this shoe is not beefy enough, but for me, someone who spends most of my time in shoes under 9oz the Speedcross 3 feels like a tank.

Compared to the SC2, the SC3's graphics have been updated.  The salomon racing rainbow has been elongated to cover the entire tongue, and some interesting new color schemes have been released.  I went with the all black shoes, because my size in the canary/gun metal were sold out.  Also changed on upper was the toe bumper.  I never had a problem with the SC2 bumper, and I havent had any problems with the SC3 bumper so I guess its all good.  Of course they use Salomon quick-lace technology, with a slightly updated tightening mechanism.

SC3 on the left Fellcross on the right

The cushion is the LT lightweight muscle cushion, which can also be found in the Fellcross.  There is plenty of cushion in the SC3, although they didnt feel as "soft" as my SC2s, I am not sure if this is because of less miles on the SC3 (~150) compared to the SC2 (~500).  A huge change is the heel to toe drop, which according to Salomon and runningwarehouse.com is 9mm.  Its still a significant amount of heel, but lower than the 12mm found on the SC2, I want a 6mm drop SC!!!!  I appreciate Salomon lowering the heel on this shoe, but really wish they had fully committed to making this shoe more midfoot strike friendly.  Unlike the Fellcross which has a 4mm drop, the SC3 feels like it still encourages a significant amount of heel striking.  This was obvious in the SC2, and maybe feels a little less encouraged in the SC3.  During Oil Creek, I was feeling great on the downhills until about mile 70 when my quads started to feel abused.  I had just changed into the SC3s, now I am not sure if it was just time for my quads to hurt, or if something about my downhill running form changed in the SC3s, but it is worth mentioning to anyone reading this (so no one...).

I think the two most significant changes I noticed were the lack of pronation control in the SC3 and a change to the lug pattern.  Being a neutral runner I appreciated the lack of pronation control, however I found both the SC2 and SC3 fairly easy to roll an ankle in.  I think this is due to the narrow footprint of the shoe as well as being fairly high off the ground.

The foam under the arch of the SC3 (left) is not nearly as built up as it is in the SC2 (right).  Removed pronation control

SC3 left SC2 right

In general, the SC3's lug pattern seems a little more thought out.  Its good to see Salomon improving on current designs.  The lugs are more carefully placed in the heel and toes in order to give optimum traction on parts of your foot with high levels of contact with the ground.  Such as the heel for downhills.  If you can see it in the photo, I have warn down the lugs on my SC2 in the heels, while on the SC3 they are heavily reinforced to keep them from getting abused by being connected to lugs that are directly in front of them.  This definitely was noticeable for me, and I felt much more control on steep downs when braking from the heel than I did in the SC2.  This feature or design can also be found on the Fellcross.

A quick comparison to the Fellcross.  These shoes (SC3) are more protective, less flexible and a narrower fit.  I think they are more comfortable on very rocky terrain as there is more push through protection and the larger lugs provide more protection.  However, the sizing doesn't seem to be the same, as I loved my size 10.5 in the Fellcross, but feel claustrophobic in the 10.5 SC3s (They are better after removing the insoles) and if I have a little extra $ before the MT110s are released I might grab a size 11 SC3.  Neither shoe breathes particularly well, but I am excited to use both as winter shoes, I think the SC3 will see a little more work as it seems beefer.

SC3 top Fellcross bottom.  The Fellcross is wider both in the toebox and in the ankle collar

Overall I am pleased with the SC3.  It will be a shoe that I may use when my feet are feeling particularly beat up, during a later part of a race or maybe on back to back runs or difficult two a days.  The traction is fantastic (did I mention I like lugged shoes?), and Salomon is headed in the right direction by releasing the 4mm drop Fellcross and lowering the SC3 to 9mm.  The biggest downfalls of the SC3 in my opinion, is that the toebox is too narrow and not tall enough and the sizing was difficult and not consistent with the SC2 (my 10.5s are perfect).

Hope this helps.  If there are any unanswered questions, let me know.

Salomon Fellcross Review Preview

Being a huge fan of the Salomon Speedcross 2, I was hugely excited for the updated Speedcross 3, especially since Salomon has reduced the heel to toe drop in the SC3.  Upon doing research for the SC3 I stumbled upon an intriguing new shoe being built by Salomon.  Enter the Fellcross.  Similar in design to the super successful Speedcross, the Fellcross builds upon a very similar platform.  The Fellcross is advertised to be built for fell racing, a type of trail running popular across the pond that from what I understand consists of lots of mud, as well as steep ups and downs.

Awesome traction from this heavily lugged outsole

What really caught my eye about the Fellcross was the 6mm heel-toe drop advertised by Salomon and confirmed by runningwarehouse.com.  This shoe seems to maintain the solid build that Salomon shoes are known for, yet still carries very little weight (10.2oz).  It feels super durable, and while the lugged outsole is similar in appearance to the Speedcross, it seems to be made from a firmer rubber that seems to wear more slowly than the Speedcross.  To be honest, I only got these shoes yesterday, but I am already very impressed.  After signing up for Oil Creek this week I decided that I needed a more protective, cushioned shoe to use in a rugged 100 mile trail race, I still love my mt101s, but after getting knocked around a bit on some rocky descents last weekend I decided I wanted a little more shoe for rugged terrain.

I can't fold my Speedcross2 like this!

Yesterday I took the Fellcross to my local training grounds and ran 15 miles while jumping on top of roots I usually avoid and trying to find sharp rocks to step on.  A little masochistic I know, but I wanted to test the protective nature of these shoes.  I did the same 15 mile loop today and was again very impressed with the amount of protection afforded by the Fellcross.  They handled everything I could throw at them, but I will take them to the Potawatomi for the true test.  I hope to update this review once that is complete.  I can already tell this shoe EXCELS at providing excellent traction in sand as well steep climbs on rocky trail. 

***  I have put in just over 100 miles in the Fellcross now and I am still very happy with my purchase.  Longest run so far has been 27 miles and I never felt irritated.  I have even taken them climbing on the treadmill!  Much more comfy ride on the treadmill compared to the speedcross 2.  Only new complaint is that they quicklace system must be tucked tightly behind the tongue as the tongue is much more compact than the speedcross***

Compared to the Speedcross 2 the Fellcross is much much more flexible, and importantly for my gait, allows a much cleaner forefoot/midfoot landing to promote a quick cadence.  This is the shoe that the Speedcross 2 should have been.  Even with the low heel to toe drop these shoes still bomb downhills like the Speedcross 2, but due to the firmer rubber lugs, dont have quite the amount of cushion.  I think they might run a little large, but I am comfy with a small amount of room to spare in my normal size 10.5.

Crease forms that can rub the arch the wrong way.

My only complaints about this shoe is that if the Salomon quicklace system is pulled too tightly a crease develops between the midfoot overlays that caused me to blister slightly, this was remedied after loosening the shoes a little.  I always quicklace my Salomon shoes too tight :).  The biggest downside to the shoe is the pricetag.  Being in Salomon's S-LAB series, this shoe retails at 160$$$$.  I picked my pair up for 115$ using the runblogger discount from runningwarehouse.  I guess in the shoe business you can pick any 2 of the 3.  Light, Comfortable, and Cheap.  The Fellcross gets the first two!

*****  My Fellcrosses lasted all summer and all fall.  In total I think I put around 1200 miles on them.  The upper and outsole are still in great shape.  I did notice that the midsole became a little bit softer over the miles and the lack of a rockplate began to be noticed.  Sadly, after a supremely muddy woodstock 50 mile in them, one of the "eyelets" where the quicklace system pulls through began to tear which was followed by fraying in the quicklace kevler.  Suffice to say, these shoes are about done.  I have since duct taped them to me feet on days that I really want a mud specific shoe, which certainly works.   *****

Torn quicklace

Well over 1000 miles on this pair