Best Approach Shoes
|
Vans skate shoes, specifically the Pro line. They have better insoles, but still have a ton of board/ground feel and the best sole, which was adapted from boat shoes. I find sticking to rock easier than sticking to a wet plastic boat hull. I've also climbed V4 in them, so they do work for that too. |
|
La Sportiva Mix |
|
Arc’teryx has designed a new trail runner, the norvan SL, that looks very appealing. Absolutely featherweight at 13 oz for the pair, Vibram megagrip, luggy but with good surface area, and a medial heel carabiner clip in point. Fits pretty well too, a tad on the narrow side, but would definitely inspire confidence on approaches requiring a mix of trail hiking and scrambling. They may be my next pair. |
|
Jaren Watson wrote: Obviously, one doesn’t wear trail runners for their climbing abilities. I don’t believe anyone advocating using them that way. I hear ya. Altras are just worse than the average trail runner at scrambling, specifically edging. Although they are quite good on loose dirt or even scree. Horses for course, right? I've worn everything from mountain boots to flip flops to get to climbs, depending on the specifics. |
|
Long Ranger wrote: Because heel lift is bad, period. The TX2 does indeed have a lower heel than the TX3/4 but it doesn't fit me. All my everyday shoes are zero-drop. Walking short distances in my TX4s is ok but doing long hikes in them fucks up my hips, knees, and feet. |
|
NorCalNomad wrote: Humans didn't evolve to walk on elevated heels, it's that simple. There is plenty of evidence to support the benefits of zero-drop shoes. |
|
Guide Tennies are still bomb. 5.10! |
|
Noah Yetter wrote: "Heel lift is bad for me", and "heel lift is bad, period" are two very different statements. I like zero and low drop shoes. I ran a lot of 40 to 60 mile weeks in zero or low drop shoes for a couple years, then injured my Achilles and now have trouble doing fast runs or high mileage in zero drop shoes. I still really like Altras for the wide toe box but I use a pad for some heel lift and it makes a world of difference for my Achilles. Interestingly the Vaporfly 4% has a 10mm drop. But what do Nike and Eliud Kipchoge know about running? |
|
Noah Yetter wrote: Find some that isn't anecdotal. Evolution and beneficial muscle/skeleton correction are very different things. Almost none of what we do today are things we evolved to do hence all the specialized equipment for doing anything but mill about. |
|
North face hedgehogs $35, lasted me 2 years |
|
Noah Yetter wrote: Yeah human's didn't evolve to hammer things with their hands either. But we sure as hell figured out that one. You are falling for an appeal to ancient wisdom logical fallacy. Karl said it well "Evolution and beneficial muscle/skeleton correction are very different things. Almost none of what we do today are things we evolved to do hence all the specialized equipment for doing anything but mill about."SHOES ARE TOOLS. You think Nike would be making 12mm drop shoes for some of the fastest people in the world if zero drop shoes were faster? I work with people who've worked at Nike and all over the performance footwear industry for decades. There has yet to be studies that conclusively says any amount of drop (with everything else constant) yields a performance benefit. Remember how Vibram got sued partly over their zero drop claims? The reason the Nike 4% pro shoes have such a high drop is for cushioning performance, cf plate encapsulation, and "stride enhancement" at a 26.6 mile distance. But those same athletes who get the one off shoes also train and are fast as fuck in 4-8mm drop shoes. There are very legitimate performance reasons to have a certainly level of heel to toe delta. /rant |
|
you're right there is a decades long global conspiracy to mess everyone up with shoes |
|
TX-3's I done long approaches with heavy loads and they climb well. I,m on my second pair. They dont carry in a pack well. I usually leave them at the bottom with my pack. I have a pair of Merrell trail gloves that pack in a small day pack and use those for walk offs. |
|
According to this, |
|
Depends on the approach. 5.10 guide tennies work well generally and the grip is excellent on dry rock (Evolv rubber works much better on wet rock), but for granite rock hopping they can get ripped up much quicker than most other shoes. (talking leather version). I've had multiple versions of them and the current pair is the first pair of 5.10ies I've almost worn the rubber through. So that tells me the quality is improving. |
|
For the people who really need a wide toe box, the tx3 and tx4 have a wider toe box than the tx2's. I love the tx4's for approach, hiking and bought a pair of tx2's and was expecting a similar fit and it is not. |
|
brianszero wrote: For the people who really need a wide toe box, the tx3 and tx4 have a wider toe box than the tx2's. I love the tx4's for approach, hiking and bought a pair of tx2's and was expecting a similar fit and it is not. Hey Brian, I noticed that too. I use the TX2 as more of a light climbing shoe than an approach shoe because the last is so snug. Great for short approaches/descents, but not really stable enough for talus with a pack. I have a pair of Zamberlan Intrepid RR for more involved hikes, without sacrificing grip. Very similar to the LS Boulder X. |
|
Def. a snugger fit - I'm sure the last itself is all different, but the volume of the toe box in the TX2 is visually smaller compared to the TX3. |
|
Long Ranger wrote: Def. a snugger fit - I'm sure the last itself is all different, but the volume of the toe box in the TX2 is visually smaller compared to the TX3. Same last, different upper materials and a stiffer midsole (on the tx3 and 4) make the toe area feel more voluminous. |
|
Evolv's approach flops (send-als?) are actually pretty good: |