New Evolv 2023 Shoes

I’m liking the look of the Shaman Pro. The Evo Wrap tech seems cool, but it also could be a bit gimmicky. Either way, I like the idea of companies working to design ways for shoes to perform as well as really downsized shoes, without actually having to downsize them that much. In terms of long-term foot health, it’s probably not a good idea to shove your feet into super tiny shoes all the time. So a shoe that can perform just as well without causing as much damage is intriguing.

Anyone know when these are supposed to be released?

Been in the new shaman for about 6 months now and love it! Was always a scarpa instinct guy and have fully switched now! Been holding up great to lots of training abuse and outside rock 

rock climbing wrote:

It is not a night top, it is the tongues that wraps around the sho.  A exaggerated version of Futura. The profile does look messed up. They want the shoe to be downsized a lot and have the toes to be really curled in the shoe.

Looks like all their new designs are a copy of La Sportiva with a different shape 

Probably try Evolv shoes before you rip them for copying La Sportiva. Evolv has a lot of distinctive technologies like variable thickness rand and the "love bump" and that makes their fit work for a lot of climbers for whom La Sportiva misses the mark. I've found my Evolv shoes, even fitted aggressively, to actually allow for a much more neutral and comfortable toe positioning.

Zenist Pro looks great. I like the addition of the "Evo Wrap", I like the more dialed in fit these systems give vs a simple single strap.

It's silly to call any of these a copy of Sportiva. Shoe designs have a lot of parallel elements are all the manufacturers are finding what works. The Zenist Pro looks a lot like the new Tenaya Indalo, in general appearance.  But I wouldn't call one a copy of the other.

The fit on the Evolvs is so different from Sportiva, that fit alone sets them apart. 

rock climbing wrote:

Like I said different shape, copying design features like the sole on Zenith Pro wrapping around the shoe. There are only toe shoes that does that Theory and now Zenith Pro.

The Five Ten Hiangle Pro and the Mad Rock Drone CS also do this. So it's not just the Theory. Not sure which came first - the Hiangle Pro or the Theory. They may be others out there also. In any case, it's a pretty small design feature to focus in on and say the whole shoe is a copy.

Climbing shoe manufacturers have been borrowing each other's ideas and remixing them basically forever.  For instance, the first shoe that had a big rubber toe hook patch was (if I recall correctly) the Mad Rock Hooker, something like 20 years ago. Is every shoe since then with a big rubber toe hook patch just a copy of the Hooker? Of course not. But it was a good idea that got introduced by one company, then widely adopted and further developed by others since it worked well. That's just how ideas develop. 

Which shoe company was the first to have the concave sole? I remember a pair of Mad Rocks having concave soles in the mid-late '00s, the Shaman and Mago/Stix in the 2010s, and now it seems every brand has several concave sole models. I'm not sure I could ever go back to flat soled shoes on anything but crack climbing - the concave is perfect for fitting cupped toes without leaving space behind them.

rock climbing wrote:

All those “technologies” like love bump or S-Heel are there just to make people think that they can only get something that they can not get from somewhere else. And it works. The s-heel does absolutely nothing

Strong disagree here. The S-heel is the only heel on a climbing shoe that I’ve tried (and I’ve tried a number of them) that never deforms on heel hooks. This is due to the stiff insert making the heel much less pliable. The S-heel tech is legit. Tenaya actually copied it with their Friction Lock tech, although I don’t think it’s as good as the S-heel. For my feet, the S-heel is the best go-to heel on any shoe. 

MattH wrote:

Which shoe company was the first to have the concave sole? I remember a pair of Mad Rocks having concave soles in the mid-late '00s, the Shaman and Mago/Stix in the 2010s, and now it seems every brand has several concave sole models. I'm not sure I could ever go back to flat soled shoes on anything but crack climbing - the concave is perfect for fitting cupped toes without leaving space behind them.

I feel like Boreal actually had the first concave sole. Was it the Stingma? If not, it may have been Madrock first. 

climbing00 wrote:

I feel like Boreal actually had the first concave sole. Was it the Stingma? If not, it may have been Madrock first. 

It was the Stinger. Boreal marketed it as that, but the 5.10 Rock Sock, 2nd gen UFO and the 2nd gen Razor also had mild downturns. They all came out in the mid 90s. 

I think there's a big difference between 'first downturned shoe' and 'first concave sole': I'm talking about shoes with a 'cup' under the midfoot so that when your toes are curled you still have a nice tight fit between the bottom of your foot and the shoe. The early downturned shoes had no side-to-side contour in the sole - the entire footbed curved from front to back but was equally curved at all points laterally. I'm specifically talking about shoes where the curvature is not uniform laterally - there's a sort of scooped out section behind where your toes curl. 5.10 is the only brand that I don't believe ever did a 'concave' sole - their aggressive shoes have severe downturned shoes and significant asymmetry, but the soles are generally flat laterally, even on the more extreme shoes like the dragon. Compare that to the solution, which first came out in '08, though I don't know if the severe concave footbed was present initially.

I wish I could remember the name, but there was a grey boreal lace up that came out around 2002 that had a deeply concaved sole. I remember there was speculation they'd be banned from competition climbing for an unfair advantage. I originally said the stingma, but that isn't right. Hard to keep it all straight from 20 years ago. 

WadeM wrote:

Been in the new shaman for about 6 months now and love it! Was always a scarpa instinct guy and have fully switched now! Been holding up great to lots of training abuse and outside rock 

Hey Wade, how has the new Shaman changed over time? I tried one on the other day and it felt LS Katana/Scarpa Vapor-level stiff. Did it soften up much? 

I’d equate them to an instinct, maybe slightly stiffer.

I’ve climbed in them a lot at Eldo/Splatte slabs and they stand on tiny bs just fine!

Wade, I meant to ask about the new Shaman. Sorry! How does that thing feel after you've been in it for a few months? Looks like it's basically held it's shape.

Colonel Sandbag wrote:

Wade, I meant to ask about the new Shaman. Sorry! How does that thing feel after you've been in it for a few months? Looks like it's basically held it's shape.

Got it, yah it’s held it’s shape quite well. Still say it’s in line with the instinct vs as far as stiffness. This is my go to moonboard and steep climbing shoe. Climbs crack pretty well also.

still holding onto my old boostics when I need something super stiff though.

Really want to love these, but the strap fixing to the inside bothers me aesthetically for some reason. Totally an OCD thing on my part, but I just wish they'd fix that.

Also curious if the "wrap around wings" on the Theory really do anything? I've handled a few and thought this might limit flexion to the point where the wrap starts, but it really doesn't.

rock climbing wrote:

It does with making the shoe stiffer. A 90-degree bend in any material will make it more rigid. Scarpa does that with the midsole on the Boostic and Vapor laces. The bends are where the ball of the foot is and it locks into place(side to side movement), most of the flexion in the climbing shoe is in the toe area.  

This is what I suspected yes, though curious I could not detect this handling the shoes in person. Still, handling is different than climbing!

Got my hands on some early YBs.  They're sick, but I definitely wouldn't use them in the gym.  I think they will perform really well on vert and crack climbs although I haven't taken them for a spin yet; just popped them on while sitting around the house. I sized them for a flat comfy foot (street size + 1).  The leather upper is super thin and supple, very comfortable. Toe box is definitely an improvement on the general.  Way less downturn than the general too.  I would say they're not just a General derivative.  Much closer to classic TCs.  

Actually on that note, just heard that Evolv has secretly updated the old Zenist to give a better heel fit. Anyone try it?

Elijah Benson wrote:

Probably try Evolv shoes before you rip them for copying La Sportiva. Evolv has a lot of distinctive technologies like variable thickness rand and the "love bump" and that makes their fit work for a lot of climbers for whom La Sportiva misses the mark. I've found my Evolv shoes, even fitted aggressively, to actually allow for a much more neutral and comfortable toe positioning.

You mean like the "love bump" solutions have had since years before evolv's inception...?