Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Scarpa crux approach shoes any good? sizing?
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 1 of 2.  1  2   Next>   Last>>
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
 
By mountainhick
From Black Hawk, CO
Aug 25, 2013
Just wondering about Scarpa crux, currently have sportiva Boulder X in 43.5, not terribly fond of them, wondering about comparative weight, performance and sizing for the crux

FLAG
By justin dubois
From Estes Park
Aug 25, 2013
Lost Cities 5.12a,Black Canyon,CO
I can't speak to how they compare to the X, but I have a pair and they are amazing. They;'ve held up to multiple walls, and a trip to Patagonia, and I'm still wearing them! Im getting another pair!

FLAG
By mountainhick
From Black Hawk, CO
Aug 25, 2013
Thanks Justin, what're your crux, climbing shoe and street shoe sizes?

FLAG
By Paul-B
Aug 25, 2013
Flakes of Wrath
I wear size 13 street shoes, 47's in the cruxs. Never worn the Sportiva's to compare though

FLAG
By TDoyle
From Milford, MA
Aug 25, 2013
Photo by Andrew Frongillo.
I've had the crux since April 2012 and they held up pretty well. I love them as every day shoes and as approach shoes, but they don't edge very well. (I've heard the sportiva's edge better). I ordered a size 46 and they fit well out of the box (and i have a really wide foot).

FLAG
By mountainhick
From Black Hawk, CO
Aug 25, 2013
Thanks all,

TDoyle, size 46 for the crux, OK, but what is your street shoe and climbing shoe size? Give me some kind of frame of reference.

My own sizes are 10.5 street shoe, and generally sz 42.5 in Sportiva and scarpa climbing shoes. From Scarpa's sizing chart I suspect I should get 43.5 which is on the snugger end of 10.5. Just trying to confirm relative sizing for the crux.

FLAG
By Ryan Williams
Administrator
From London (sort of)
Aug 25, 2013
El Chorro
My wife wears street shoe size in hers and says any smaller wouldn't be comfy on approaches. She has the women's version... not sure if that really helps but I guess it's better than nothing.

FLAG
By Ryan Nevius
From The Range of Light
Aug 25, 2013
Mt. Agassiz
I am hooked on this shoe. Hands down the best all around approach shoe I have ever seen. I wear a 10.5 street shoe and wear the same size Crux (44). I find this size better for LONG, steep approaches. If you're going to be doing shorter approaches (i.e. within a couple miles) and are using this for a lot of 5th class stuff, you may want to go with a 43.5. That said, I recently used mine (size 44) for a car-to-car solo of Mt. Conness and they hiked and climbed fantastically.

FLAG
 
By mountainhick
From Black Hawk, CO
Aug 25, 2013
Thanks Ryan! do you have any extra room in the toe in the 44 or bumpin' the front??

FLAG
By TDoyle
From Milford, MA
Aug 25, 2013
Photo by Andrew Frongillo.
I bought mine planning to wear them as an everyday street shoe. at the moment i am wearing a pair of Merrels (trail runners that i wear as a street shoe) that are a 46. i climb in Evolv Bandits that are a 45.

of course, if you have the option go try them on (i believe REI carries them)

FLAG
By Ryan Nevius
From The Range of Light
Aug 25, 2013
Mt. Agassiz
Ben Hicks wrote:
Thanks Ryan! do you have any extra room in the toe in the 44 or bumpin' the front??


I chose the 44 so that I'd have a bit of room for those steep downhills. With the 43.5, the tip of my big toe just barely brushed the tip of the shoe. Not uncomfortable on flat ground, but something that would end up causing a blister or black toenails after a long day of downhill.

FLAG
By Ryan Nevius
From The Range of Light
Aug 25, 2013
Mt. Agassiz
I should add that I actually spent a full hour in REI switching back and forth between the 43.5 and 44...it was a close call. In the end, I'm glad I chose the 44. Your experience may differ.

FLAG
By mountainhick
From Black Hawk, CO
Aug 25, 2013
Ryan Nevius wrote:
I should add that I actually spent a full hour in REI switching back and forth between the 43.5 and 44...it was a close call. In the end, I'm glad I chose the 44. Your experience may differ.


Perfect info!!! Thanks. I want them for short approaches and descents so 43.5 it is.

FLAG
By Paul-B
Aug 25, 2013
Flakes of Wrath
Ben Hicks wrote:
Perfect info!!! Thanks. I want them for short approaches and descents so 43.5 it is.


Honestly, If you are looking for something for short approaches, I really prefer the Evolv Cruzers. I think they smear nicely, and soooo much lighter than the Scarpa's. My pair of Evolv's weight about the same as one shoe of the Scarpa. This is especially nice if I am just going to clip them to my harness for the climb. I HATE doing this with the cruxs, but don't even notice it when I clip the cruzers, much less weight and bulk. Of course, if I am doing a long approach or carrying a heavy pack, the Cruxs are my choice.

FLAG
By mountainhick
From Black Hawk, CO
Aug 28, 2013
Quick follow up, UPS dropped the 43.5 this morning. I am on the larger end of 10.5. These are close enough fit with socks without being tight. Exactly the right size for what I need!

Thanks all!

FLAG
By Ryan Nevius
From The Range of Light
Aug 28, 2013
Mt. Agassiz
Glad to hear it, Ben. I hope you like them as much as I have.

FLAG
 
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Aug 29, 2013
Free Solo up hitchcock gully WI3
gecko guide is like the crux but better

FLAG
By Nodin deSaillan
From Boulder
Aug 29, 2013
another day in RMNP
Salewa Wildfire is like the gecko guide but better ;)

FLAG
By Abram Herman
From Golden, CO
Aug 29, 2013
Viking helmet cover, yep.
Nodin deSaillan wrote:
Salewa Wildfire is like the gecko guide but better ;)


How do the Wildfires climb? I mostly use my Geckos for actual climbing, and was disappointed that they discontinued the shoe. I contacted them, though, and they're going to be coming out with two approach shoes in the spring that are supposed to be more technical shoes than the Crux.

FLAG
By Nodin deSaillan
From Boulder
Aug 29, 2013
another day in RMNP
The Wildfires climb really well. Precise edging and comfortable jamming with little slippage.
They remind me a bit of Gandas but with less bulk and weight.
They offer a lot of arch support and heel cushion which I didn't find as much with the gecko guide and certainly not with the crux.
They do fit quite narrowly, so that may be a deal-breaker for a lot of folks

FLAG
By Abram Herman
From Golden, CO
Aug 29, 2013
Viking helmet cover, yep.
Cool, thanks for the info.

FLAG
By brenta
From Boulder, CO
Sep 8, 2013
Cima Margherita and Cima Tosa in the Dolomiti di B...
Intrigued by the comments on the Salewa Wildfires, I got myself a pair. Here are my fist impressions.

While the Wildfires are better hiking shoes, when it comes to climbing, I find the Gecko Guide much better. (Too bad they still hurt my feet after one year.)

To some extent it depends on fit, and different climbers will accordingly have different opinions, but the Wildfires almost feel more like lightweight mountaineering boots than climbing shoes. Their toeboxes are too bulky for effective jamming, and the rubber isn't that sticky. They fit medium feet best. (In fact, I'm considering replacing the insole with one that takes out a bit more room.)

On the positive side, they are well made, they are comfortable out of the box, and they are light.

FLAG
By Abram Herman
From Golden, CO
Sep 9, 2013
Viking helmet cover, yep.
Thanks, brenta, good to know!

FLAG
By fossana
From Bishop, CA
Nov 6, 2013
West Overhang
Nodin deSaillan wrote:
Salewa Wildfire is like the gecko guide but better ;)


After trying 5-6 different pairs of approach shoes I settled on the Wildfires. I need a bit more cushioning in the forefoot, so that eliminates things like the Gandas. They look more like a hybrid running/approach shoe than something like the Boulder X's.

I soloed with the Wildfires on snowy, icy limestone in the Austrian Alps. They climbed well and were less sloppy than the La Sportiva Xplorers that I normally wear. Unlike Brenta I didn't have any complaints on stickiness and this was on wet rock. I can't speak to the men's shoe, but I have wide Asian feet and they were plenty roomy for me. We'll see how they hold up, but so far I wish I had found them in advance of last summer's alpine season.

FLAG
 
By Ray Pinpillage
From West Egg
Nov 6, 2013
Middle
Nodin deSaillan wrote:
The Wildfires climb really well. Precise edging and comfortable jamming with little slippage. They remind me a bit of Gandas but with less bulk and weight. They offer a lot of arch support and heel cushion which I didn't find as much with the gecko guide and certainly not with the crux. They do fit quite narrowly, so that may be a deal-breaker for a lot of folks


I have a pair of Wildfire and I think the Crux is probably a better shoe for climbing. The Wildfire are more comfortable and more padded but feels imprecise and soft. I walk funny so I usually only get a season out of my shoes before they get replaced. I probably will not buy another pair of the Wildfire. Not a bad shoe and they have held up great really, but they don't anything all that well besides hike and I can get hiking shoes cheaper.

FLAG
By Ryan Nevius
From The Range of Light
Nov 6, 2013
Mt. Agassiz
Hey, Ben. Have you had a chance to try the Scarpas? If so, what do you think?

FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 1 of 2.  1  2   Next>   Last>>