Review of the La Sportiva Helios

Review of the Helios and a comparison to the Vertical K

I was a huge fan of the La Sportiva Vertical K, I was excited when I saw that the Helios was a similar shoe, but built with longer distances in mind.  Unfortunately, I don't wear my Vertical K's much anymore, as they either shrunk, or my feet grew, and all of a sudden they're too small.  I made sure to size up when ordering the Helios.

Usually I wear between an 11 and 11.5.  I have a pair of Vertical K's that are 45.0 - they're too small.  So I went with a 45.5 when I ordered the Helios, and they are just right, although if I wanted to wear big socks (Drymax Maxpro or Trail) I might find myself a little constricted.  I hope that helps anyone trying to figure out what size Helios to buy.

Helios foreground, Vertical K background

First Impressions

The Helios is heavier than the Vertical K.  I noticed it as soon as I took them out of the box.  I assume this is mostly due to the 2mm rockplate/eva layer that was added to the shoe in order to provide a little bit more protection.  La Sportiva also made some modifications to the upper.  Gone is the one-piece upper with built in scree guard.  Instead, La Sportiva has used a new "air mesh" upper, which I have to say is incredibly comfortable, although it doesn't look as sturdy as the scree guard upper.  

I've run about 100 miles in the Helios in the last 3 weeks, so I feel comfortable reviewing them.  I haven't noticed any hotspots or problems, which is a great start.  The local trails have oscillated between frozen mud and mucky mud, and the Helios handle both well.  

Upper

Speaking of the upper; the lacing system is much more traditional than most other La Sportiva shoes. Relatively thick laces with normal anchors provides a more customizable fit than can be achieved with laces that are hidden under a scree guard.  Also, a big bonus is the extra eyelet that can be used to tie the shoes in an ankle-lock down fashion, something I thought the Vertical K really would have benefited from.  While the Helios does not have a scree guard style upper, the tongue is gusseted, and I haven't noticed any problems when running through sand, so I'd say it works well.  The shoe also breathes very well with the air mesh that is used for the top of the upper.  I'm not big on sockless running, but even if I was, I don't think the Helios is built for it, there are exposed seems in several places.

The last difference in the upper between the Vertical K and the Helios is the overall stability provided by the upper.  The Helios has a substantial heel counter that probably adds a little weight, as well as thermoplastic overlays that are used to help secure the midfoot.  There has also been the addition of a pulltab on the heel of the Helios, which helps get them on and off quickly.

Gusseted Tongue

Thermoplastic overlays to secure the midfoot

Midsole/outsole

Morphodynamic.  Pretty sweet.  Light and cushioned.  Actually, the Helios feels a little firmer than the Vertical K does.  I am not sure if this is due to the rockplate or whether it is because they used a midsole foam with a higher density.  Along with the slighter firmer ride is perhaps a lesser degree of flexibility.  Don't get me wrong, the wave pattern still allows for good flexibility, but it is not quite as slipper-like as the Vertical K.  I also feel like the back heel of the helios is not quite as cut-out as the Vertical K.  This might be why runningwarehouse spec's the Helios as a 5mm drop and the Vertical K as a 4mm drop.  I agree, the Helios feels not quite as minimal in general as the Vertical K.  This could be good or bad, depends on your preferences and the type of race you're running.  I should also mention that both shoes use a sticky Sportiva (FriXion AT) rubber that seems to wear pretty well.

Pretty similar outsole?

Morphodynamic in both

Conclusions/overall feeling

I think the Helios is very much what I expected.  A more robust version of the Vertical K.  The protection on gravel roads and local trails seems pretty good, although its hard to test them fully without making a trip to somewhere rockier.  The overall fit is excellent, the Helios feels wider in the toe-box than the Vertical K, and less pointed up towards the toes.  At first I was a tad disappointed by the fact that the Helios felt firmer than the Vertical K, but I adjusted pretty quickly, and now enjoy the energy transfer that a slightly firmer midsole allows.  Overall, I rate this shoe very highly.  Excellent fit, good traction, adequate protection and cushion, low drop, and fairly lightweight (8.5oz size 9 men's).  I think anyone who likes the Vertical K, but wants a little bit more for longer runs would find the Helios to be a nice compromise.  Also I think someone looking to step down from more traditional shoes would find this is a nice intermediate shoe that combines lightweight with moderate drop, and makes for an aggressive and comfortable ride.  I don't mind a little extra weight on my shoes when I feel it is put used for practical purposes, and I think that the extra 1.5-2oz on the Helios serves a purpose, making them a well-rounded trail shoe.

Are they built for Ultras?  Yes, I think so, but to be honest I haven't run more than 15 miles in them yet.  Its winter, give me some time and I'll try to get a few longer runs in.  The roomy toe box and extra protection really make them a nice shoe, def my favorite La Sportiva offering in a long time.

Toecaps

With insoles removed

My friend Mark just ran the 2013 Rocky Raccoon in his Helios, here is what he had to say about them:  " I wore these for 100 miles at Rocky Raccoon over the weekend. It was a drier year than last, and then the challenge is the dust and sand that often gets into the shoes and grinds away at your feet. The Vertical K's have the gaiter built in, but the Helios does it a little different. The real question to me was, does the Helios work. In a word, yes. I changed socks at about mile 72, due to a blister forming on the outside of my little toe. There was no sand or anything else to be removed from my shoes the, and the same was true at the end. I wore them for the full 100 miles, and I never regretted the choice. I kicked a number of roots, but none of them bothered my toes a bit-- though there was a little loss of blood involved. The Helios fine mesh must be an adequate virtual gaiter, and they seem to give me more support than the Vertical K for the long run."

Hoka One One Stinson B Evo Low Review

By Jason Robertson

I had been considering getting a pair of Hokas.  While I couldn't find the correct size, Jason (who is also a shoe nerd) picked up a pair of the new Stinson B Evos, and I begged him for a review.  Enjoy!

Get the name right damnit!  Minimalist shoe label from the running store.

Fit

A little narrow in the toe box.  My left foot is larger than my right and pinky toe was slightly rubbing.  I was able to change out the standard-sized, left insole for the thinner one provided-no more rubbing and nice customization.  This was the only concern I had with the fit of this shoe.  The upper has great lock-down and provides day-long comfort.  It also has a taller (more volume) and slightly more narrow fit than, say, a MT110 or the Brooks Pure Grit.  I run a size 10 in those models and have found the 10.5 in Hokas very nice, in addition to the thinner insole in my left shoe.

Accessories:  Extra insoles and laces

Traction

Traction rocks on this shoe.  You can hear it grip on pavement and the dry hard pack we’ve experienced here in Northeast Indiana this summer.  It does lack the deep lugs of a Salomon Speedcross, but I’d say the rubber is on par with the MT110 for tackiness. I felt very secure on wet, downhill corners during my outings in the Smokies and no problems on wet rock (the Brooks Pure Grit really let me down on the slick rock during our last trip so I was very cautious and was pleasantly surprised with the Stinson B Evo).  This outsole also receives high marks for self-cleaning action.

Wear resistant, very tacky Hoka outsole, very nice!

Cushion

Goes without saying…this shoe has lots of cush.  Confidence inspiring, feels like cheating, unfair advantage cush.  This shoe has allowed me, over the past month, to become a downhill bomber.   I’ve also, at the same time, been able to handle an increase in mileage as I’ve had time off from work this summer.  My legs have not had that “beat down” feeling they usually receive from such an increase into the 100 mile per week range. 

Some might say, and mentioned by Marshall Ulrich in his review of Hokas, that having so much cushion could prevent or hinder the gains (i.e. muscle breakdown-healing, ligament, joint, tendon strengthening/changing) of running in a more minimally cushioned shoe.  I do wear and run in the Minimus 00, Kinvara and the Pure Grit a few times each week and know there is benefit in low slung shoes.  I recovered from an injury 2 years ago through a process of running barefoot and utilizing minimal shoes.  Not having a serious injury since, I want to maintain my form.  The Hokas have allowed for more vigorous miles to be put in each week and I believe they have allowed some strengthening in areas that lesser cushioned shoe might not.  For instance, pounding the down hills helped strengthen my quads.  I also noticed my ankles feeling a bit worked-similar to when I do barefoot speed work on the soccer fields.  The Hokas also allow for the same cadence and running stance that I have developed with my other lower shoes.  It is interesting to note that Playmakers have a minimalist label on the box as seen in my first picture.

Lots of cushion in these bad boys

Protection

Search out the sharpest stingers on the trail.  Nothing short of a 3” nail will hurt your foot.  I totally understand why Darcy Africa (a PI sponsored runner) would opt for the Hokas at Hard Rock, even when she has Isoseeks at her disposal.  4-4.5 hour run/hikes in the Smokies had my feet begging for more. Usually after the four hour mark of running trail, especially in the Smoky Mountains, my feet start letting me know that they’re feeling the rocks, roots and uneven terrain. No matter what I stepped on, I felt no pain.  I am very excited to try these out in some fall 50 milers and next year’s mountain 100’s.

Flexibility

Next to none.  This did make my left arch sing a little (same tightness I had with the MT100/101s).  After some foam rolling on the calf, all was well.  With such a well cushioned midsole, the Hoka is a stiff shoe.  You can’t roll it up like a Nike Free.  This is just fine with me.  The stiffness actually inspires quite a bit of confidence when rolling fast on the downs and the rockered shape of the shoe allows for a nice seamless foot strike to toe off.

Likes

·        Awesome cushion and protection.  I will never again have to choose what shoe I’ll wear on a run over 3 hours…or question whether or not to bomb a downhill.

·        Great drainage.  After the several crossings we did in the Smokies, I was very impressed.  This shoe, surprisingly, drained and dried as well as a pair of 101s, which in my opinion; earned the title for the quickest drain/dry shoe.

·        Nice alternate insole/lacing options (comes with quick lace intact-laces optional, but you have to cut the quick lace in order to remove).

·        Overall fit and wear.  I plan on wearing this shoe through next summer and have no concerns about this shoes making it to 1,500 miles-seems very durable at this point. Also, the fit and drop of the shoe does not interfere with wearing my other shoes.  I simply throw on the extra cushion, no worries about a large ramp angle when switching to a more cushioned shoe. 

Dislikes

·        Weight claims.  I read from several sources that these shoes weighed in anywhere between 9 and 10.5 ounces for a men’s size 9.  The shoes I purchased, a size 10.5, weighed in at 13 1/8 ounces on my extremely accurate food scale.  This is about the weight of a pair of Cascadia 6s in the same size.  Interestingly enough, I planned to buy a pair of Cascadia 7s.  I tried on the Hokas 1st, ran around the store, ran a 5k with Scott Jurek(! Stopped in on his book tour) in a trial pair then tried on the Cascadias.  They felt very flat and unresponsive comparatively.  I dropped the extra $60 for the Hokas. 

          The Hokas do a good job of feeling lighter than they really are.  Just        looking at them, you would think they are heavy clodders.  Upon picking        them up they feel uber light.  Same thing happens when running in      them.  They have such a good bounce and energy return, that they seem          to shrug off some ounces and feel about the same weight as a pair of Pure Grits.

·        Cost.  These are the most expensive in my shoe quiver and gave me the most wife feedback.  But, if they last as long as I think, cost will be a mute point.  Plus, they do come with extra laces and another set of insoles allowing a more customizable fit.

Writer Bio

 

My name is Jason Robertson (33 years old).  I’ve been married for 15 years, have 3 kids and teach middle school Language Arts.

I grew up riding/racing dirt bikes and fell in love with running in ’09 after finally getting the right pair of shoes on my feet, ridding myself of shin splints, and completing my first 50k. 

Jason why so modest?  Jason has run over 20 Ultras, including 3 100 mile races.  Always up for a long run,  he is a constant source of inspiration and enthusiasm.