The (Un)Official 2019 Five Ten Grandstone Thread

Since the Grandstones have been out for a whole week now, thought is was time they got their own thread. There is much anticipation, grinding of teeth, and a little useful info about them here and here but I hope to consolidate thoughts and opinions in this thread from climbers who have actually have climbed in them. I'll start, but my intro post should only be considered a "first look" or an "unboxing" review since I only have two days in them. I added a lot of pictures to compare them to other shoes.

Disclaimer - I am a long time Five Ten fanboy (they are the only shoes that really fit me well) but have no affiliation with Five Ten. I have worn through four pairs of TC Pros, each with one or two resoles; so will make some obvious comparisons to TCs and other similar Five Ten shoes.

The long story short, for me, is the Grandstones have been worth the wait and I have yet to find something I don't like about them, yet. They are a welcome and overdue additional to the trad shoe market.

The Grandstones toe shape is somewhere between an Anasazi and Quantum. I think I still prefer the Anasazi toe but the Grandstones are pretty close but feel a little more pointy like the Quantum, but are more asymmetrical than the TCs. Left to right from most to least asymmetrical, Grandstone is second from left:

Although the Grandstones do have a slight downturn, it climbs more like a high performance, edging trad shoe than a downturned sport shoe. Given how quickly the Quantums lost their shape, I would have assumed the Grandstones will be more or less a flat shoe soon. However, since the Grandstones do have a thermoplastic midsole maybe they will retain their downturn. The downturn they have is only a positive IMO. After years of thinking that a trad shoe should be dead nuts flat, I have come around to thinking a little downturn is good. In this regard, the Grandstone seems closer to an Evolv General (which I have not tried) than a TC Pro.  


One of the initial, speculative concerns with the Grandstone, based on pre-production pics, was that the toe height would be higher/bulkier than a TC Pro and not fit into thinner cracks. This turns out not to be the case. I would say that the Grandstone and TC Pros fit into cracks basically the same, which means down to a 0.75 crack max. Any thinner and you will definitely want a different shoe. But the Grandstone's toe is definitely slimmer than the comperable Scarpa Maestro. The surprising thing for me was, if anything, a brand new pair of Grandstones was slightly easier to wiggle into a 0.75-1.0 gym crack than an old pair of TCs. I like the additional toe rubber on top of the Grandstones too, which provides more coverage than the TCs but is not a huge rubber toe box like the old Grandstones (which I did not like).


Getting into the more subjective, early performance impressions - all I can say now is that the Grandstones edge and climb faces great. The shape of a shoe's toe compared to one's foot shape means everyone will have a different favorite edging shoe depending how your toes are positioned and powered. For me, from best to worse for edging performance = Boostic, Blanco, Grandstone, Anasazi Velcro, TC Pro (L to R below), but it really too early for me to know where the Grandstones will end up. I make this comparison well aware that for many, the TC is the best edging shoe they have every owned, but these people have obviously never climbed in a Boostic.

Heel shape: I have a large, "Five Ten" heel and really love the fit of the Grandstones. Relatively snug on my heels but with no extra space or heel rand tension. Similar to the Quantums but lower volume and snugger (note - the Quantums have a high volume heel, likely the largest heel of any shoe out). The lower volume TC Pro heels kill my heels and I have to do all sorts of heel rand massacres to wear TCs for a long time. But he Grandstones' heels are not "baggy" like older Anasazis but defintely higher volume than any Sportivas that I have owned.

Overall comfort - this is a comfy shoe! The liner is very plush, and very purple, love the purple. Out of the box in a tight, but multi-pitch fit, I wore for over an hour with no hot spots. I have never worn a new shoe for this long. I also much prefer the flat, barrel lacing compared to the gawd awful TC pro lace system; and the Grandstone tongue actually covers the top of my entirely lower foot. The bottom three eyelets mimic the TC's protective covering.


The Grandstone is more of a "real" hightop compared to a TC, which is more like a low top with ankle protection, or maybe a 3/4 top. It feels about the same stiffness out of the box as a TC. The Grandstones will definitely feel clunky to people used to softer shoes but I personally think they nailed it in the stiffness department (but Blancos and Boostics are my favorite shoes so I obviously have a bias towards stiff shoes).

Sizing:
I think street shoe size is the best starting place for Grandstone. I bought both a 1/2 size up and down too, but I have only climbed in street shoe so far.  I hesitate to offer sizing comparisons after only two days but know that is the first question people will want to know, so here it is for me:

Street shoe - 9.5
TC Pro - 8.0 (40.5) -  multipitch performance, need to remove after a few pitches (my first pair was 41.0 but they got too sloppy)
Boostics  - 9.5 (42.5) - single pitch sport
Anasazi Blancos and VCS (both circa 2012) - 9.0 (42.0) - multi pitch performance, need to remove after a few pitches
Pinks, new - 9.5 (42.5) multipitch comfort fit and 9.0s are comfortable enough after broken in
Quantums lace and VCS - 9.5 (42.5) multipitch comfort fit (very comfy, a little loose after 10 days)
Grandstones - 9.5, hard to get on at first but could wear for over an hour immediately.

Edit on 10/7/2019 - the 9.5s (street shoe size) have stretched enough to be all day comfy. I haven't climbed in them yet but think 9.0s (0.5 size down from street shoe) may be the ones I start using, even though they are super hard to get on/off. Still too early to know.  

Calling the Grandstone a "TC Pro Clone" is an obvious but misleading comparison. Likewise, the TC Pro could lazily be called a "Ballet Gold Clone" and the Ballet could be called a ... (insert name of favorite traddad hightop from the '70-80s)

Compared to a TC Pro, the Grandstone will fit a wider forefoot and bigger heel better, has higher and more substantial ankle coverage, a more comfortable liner, better rubber, and some downturn. Obviously the durability of the Grandstones is unknown, but IMO the TCs are not very durable at all and the Grandstones look and feel well designed and built (they should be, they have been in the works for at least five years, geez). I assume that TCs will remain the dominant trad shoe and probably fit the majority of feet better, and have a well-earned, loyal fan base. It took so long for Five Ten to bring this shoe to market (since they started working on it, Scarpa, Evolve, and Butora have all released a high top) so they will be fighting an uphill battle for customers. But the G-stones definitely are different and worth considering if TCs or the other high tops don't fit you.

Well, how do they climb? Great, so far... but I don't have enough time in them on different rock and climb types so anything I say now I will want to edit in a few weeks. Your turn...

I'd have to disagree with the fitting wider forefoot better than the TC pros part.
It feels much narrower than the TC pros. I have both shoes at the same size and the Granstone is much tighter.  We'll see how it'll stretch.

Igor Chained wrote: I'd have to disagree with the fitting wider forefoot better than the TC pros part.
It feels much narrower than the TC pros. I have both shoes at the same size and the Granstone is much tighter. 

Wow, I imagine the "much tighter" part is a huge understatement. I am 1.5 sizes larger in the Grandstone than my TC size. I couldn't get my foot into a pair 0.5 sizes down, I couldn't imagine wearing anywhere near my TC pro size.

The common convention for TCs is to size 1.0 to 1.5 down from street shoe. I assume the convention for Grandstones will become street shoe to 0.5 up.

Doug Hutchinson wrote:

Wow, I imagine the "much tighter" part is a huge understatement. I am 1.5 sizes larger in the Grandstone than my TC size. I couldn't get my foot into a pair 0.5 sizes down, I couldn't imagine wearing anywhere near my TC pro size.

The common convention for TCs is to size 1.0 to 1.5 down from street shoe. I assume the convention for Grandstones will become street shoe to 0.5 up.

I wear U.S. size 8.5-9(eu 42-43) street shoe, and normally between eu 40.5- 41.5 in climbing shoes. I went to Five Ten's sizing chart and it said their EU 42 was U.S. size 8.5. So i bought those in Grandstones. They fit like a glove. However, they're still kind of a bitch to put on. I totally agree with you, people should go with street shoe sizing or half a size up. check out this chart to help you with sizing

My first impression of the shoe after a day of climbing was less than impressed.  I felt the shoe was too stiff to be a good all day trad shoe.   Well I spent all day yesterday climbing in them again and I’m changing my tune and becoming more and more impressed with it.  It is breaking in very quick, hopefully not too quick but it edges great and is starting to smear more easily.  I’m still really impressed with the construction and how well made it is.   I think this shoe is quickly becoming my favorite. 

Hobo Greg wrote: How do they compare with the original Grandstones?

Construction is much better.  I had the tongue of an old Gstone rip out while pulling on the shoe.

Tongue and ankles are well padded.  Old Gstone had none.

Way more down turn but after several pitches they are becoming much more comfortable.  

They edge better than the old Gstone.

The concave sole is different than the old Gstone that was flat, but I am thinking that the new sole will end up flat sooner or later but it's pretty sweet while it lasts.

Would be nice to hear regarding longevity/how they hold up of the show once you guys get some mileage put into the show.

Thanks a bunch for writing this up, hope to hear back in a few weeks or months :D

Kevin Mokracek wrote:  It is breaking in very quick, hopefully not too quick but it edges great and is starting to smear more easily.  I’m still really impressed with the construction and how well made it is.   

This has been my experience too. With the break-in, I have had some stretch too. I am a little paranoid that they will get too sloppy with a lot of use, since that was my experience with Quantums and new Pinks. I agree about the quality of the construction and their comfort continues to impress me.

Still too early to know the right sizing, but I am beginning to think that my street shoe-sized pair will become all day comfy, and I may use 1/2 size down from street shoe for harder stuff. I really struggled to get my foot in 1/2 size down pair but finally did and I guessing they will stretch to be perfect.

The one thing that I confirmed this past weekend with some friends whose TC Pros fit them like gloves; is if TCs are your dream shoe, I doubt that Gstones will fit you anywhere near as well. These two shoes fit differently, especially in the heel. If your heel loves the fit of TCs, Gstones will probably be too roomy in the heel.

Recived a pair in 44 (eur) yesterday and tried them out in the gym.

Fit :  
I'm a street shoe 44,
5.10 verdon 43,
fairly normal foot, and I found the 44 Grandstone to fit quite perfektly as for lenght. But I really had to work a bit to get it on as it feels wery tight around the forefoot, not necessarily in the widht, but in the height of the forefoot. It really grips your foot and holds it in place. I don't see how anyone with a wide foot could fit them.
I want this to be an comfortable all day trad shoe, It definetely needs some braking in before I can take it to the mountains.

I bought a pair of pre-production sample Grandstones a while back and went with street size (9). I compared them to my size 9 new Blancos and the sole is basically the same shape if I remember correctly. But initially the Grandstones felt much tighter, which I believe is due to the uppers being less stretchy than my Blancos and Pinks. So what I did was use my shoe stretcher to widen out the uppers a bit and now they fit like a glove. Therefore, my guess would be to fit the Grandstones for length and assume they'll break in width-wise over time. For reference, Anasazi lasts are my perfect foot shape. I've not used Quantums so I can't compare to them.

I use Butora Altura wide 9.5 as my main offwidth shoe and compared to those the Grandstones edge better but are much more painful for wide cracks due to the downturn. Heel-toe cams and stacked feet that are easy in the Butoras are torture in the Grandstones. The Grandstones handle thin cracks better than the Butoras but I mostly use an old pair of Anasazi Verdes for thin cracks so I haven't done much thin stuff in the Grandstones. I'm mostly a gym climber so it's easy for me to switch shoes to the best one for the given crack, but I could see the Grandstones being my main all-round outdoor shoe after my Pinks wear out. I bouldered for quite a bit in the Grandstones as well just to test them out and they performed pretty well with the downturn and toe rubber.

Here's how my other shoes have sized in case it helps folks with sizing
- Street: 9
- Grandstones: 9. Comfy (after stretching uppers wider) toes mostly flat
- Blancos: 9. Toes mostly flat
- Pinks: 8.5 toes mostly flat
- Verdes: 9 toes completely flat
- Evolv Shaman 9.5 curled
- Butora Acro wide 9 toes curled and have to take off after every problem
- Butora Altura wide 9.5 toes flat
- Scarpa Techno X 8.5 toes mostly flat. A bit narrow for me.

Taking a bit of a risk, I first wore the Grandstones first out on Charlotte Dome this weekend to break them in.  They were sized a half sized up from my street shoe so I could wear sock liners.  My toes still had a slight curl.  They were very comfortable. The concave bottom flattened out immediately. It felt like a trad shoe.

This was a great review -- thank you.  I now feel that there is hope for life after the blanco.  

Conor Clarke wrote: This was a great review -- thank you.  I now feel that there is hope for life after the blanco.  

I would if possible buy two pair.  I have a pair of Gstones in my street shoe and they have fairly quickly broken in to a all day shoe.   For single pitch or shorter routes where you really want good edging I would size down so the downturn is maintained.  I plan on getting a size down in the future just for that reason. 

I tried these in the gym at a 5.10 event and liked them.  I don't have other hightops for comparison, but other folks mentioned that they actually feel less stiff laterally that TC Pros.

One complaint was that the rubber does not completely cover the toebox.  On one sizd rack, my buddy gave up almost immediately because when he cammed his foot over, the leather part of the shoe was what was taking the brunt of the force, which compressed the knuckle on his toe to a very uncomfortable degree.

Matt Himmelstein wrote: I tried these in the gym at a 5.10 event and liked them.  I don't have other hightops for comparison, but other folks mentioned that they actually feel less stiff laterally that TC Pros.

One complaint was that the rubber does not completely cover the toebox.  On one sizd rack, my buddy gave up almost immediately because when he cammed his foot over, the leather part of the shoe was what was taking the brunt of the force, which compressed the knuckle on his toe to a very uncomfortable degree.

I don't really think a full rubber toe box is needed for crack  climbing but it certainly wouldn't hurt, look at the Mocs and most any other shoes that are popular for crack and they have very little rubber covering the toes if any.  I do think it's odd that where manufacturers do place the rubber, over the big toe and I get that for hooking but most of the time you are crack climbing the orientation of toes in the crack are big toe up little toe down and much of the contact is over the little toe.  Why not have a full toe cap for that reason?  Seems it would add in the friction and help a little but the compromise is that it's a little thicker.   I think the Anasazi Pros are a full toe cap but there aren't too many others.

Kevin Mokracek wrote:

I don't really think a full rubber toe box is needed for crack  climbing but it certainly wouldn't hurt, look at the Mocs and most any other shoes that are popular for crack and they have very little rubber covering the toes if any.  I do think it's odd that where manufacturers do place the rubber, over the big toe and I get that for hooking but most of the time you are crack climbing the orientation of toes in the crack are big toe up little toe down and much of the contact is over the little toe.  Why not have a full toe cap for that reason?  Seems it would add in the friction and help a little but the compromise is that it's a little thicker.   I think the Anasazi Pros are a full toe cap but there aren't too many others.

That is why the gap on this shoe was a problem.  With the big toe up, the gap sits over the 3rd or 4th toe knuckle, so when he cammed his foot, the force was right there.  It looks like the shape of the rubber is a bit of a 5.10 signature, but the gap seems larger here than it does on the other shoes.  I climb outside in 5.10 Stonelands, and those seem to have a smaller gap over the toes.  The TC pros have only a tiny split over the toebox.  The friend in question normally climbs in a pair of Mythos, and those have full coverage over the toe box.  The Evolv General has more coverage with a supplemental bit of rubber, and the old Astromans also had more toe box coverage.

It seems to be more a stylistic choice than anything else, and it does not make a ton of sense in my mind for an all day trad oriented shoe.

The super Mocc had what I would Image was the perfect toe cap for crack climbing

Of course, it’s  a discontinued 5.10 shoe...

Olav Grøttveit wrote:  I don't see how anyone with a wide foot could fit them.

Thanks for this, I was really hoping that these would be good for my EU48 very wide square (hobbit) foot but I guess I'll look elsewhere

Matt Himmelstein wrote:
One complaint was that the rubber does not completely cover the toebox.  On one sizd rack, my buddy gave up almost immediately because when he cammed his foot over, the leather part of the shoe was what was taking the brunt of the force, which compressed the knuckle on his toe to a very uncomfortable degree.

Your local resoler can probably put a patch on it. Rubber Room does this all the time. I think Tony calls it a Moab patch (?). They did them on my gym crack shoes which take intense pressure there on the 90 degree crack edges. Sorry I can’t show you a picture. I’m climbing in Greece for the next 10 days and do not have those shoes with me. 

Jon Rhoderick wrote: The super Mocc had what I would Image was the perfect toe cap for crack climbing

Of course, it’s  a discontinued 5.10 shoe...

Really wish they’d bring those back.

I've always been a fan of Grandstones.
I have 2 pair still from the first production and 2 pair from the second.
They are still in good shape after about 2 resolings apiece.

My second favorite shoes are the 5.10 Altias.