LaSpo Aequilibrium Speed GTX vs Aequilibrium Top GTX

Anyone gotten their hands on the Speed GTX? Looks very good, but the weight different from the Top to the Speed is only about 120g (less than 20% reduction).  There likely are other non-measurable benofits (more flexible, etc.) but without holding or direct comparison I don't think it's worth buying in the dark.

Looks like a very nice spring and snowy summer mountain boot, just not sure it's shifted close enough to a trail runner to justify another boot in the quiver.

Anyone got any experience?

Cheers,

Dave

My wife has used the Speed GTX basically since the week they launched.  She loves them.  They are noticeably more flexible than the rest of the Aequilibrium lineup.  They also also cut like a low-top shoe, but with a supergaiter.  A lot of the brands are talking about finding a blend between a trail runner and a mountain boot, these feel like they hit the mark.

They unfortunately don't fit me, so I cannot partake in the party.

Thanks Chris - enough for me!    Cheers,    Dave

Just got a pair (of the speed) for myself. For anyone considering them, they run true to size with the running shoes like Crossover GTX, Mutant, Raptor, etc... (Which is to say, they run pretty narrow, perhaps a little wider than the sneakers). Build quality seems really good, I'm excited to use them for winter hiking and possibly for some mountaineering plans next summer (Where I would've been trying to do the hike in trail runners + crampons). My only concern is the lacing toggle mechanism (versus just tying knots), but we'll see how that does for maintaining tension on sustained descents.

Took mine out for a quick jaunt up Cowles Mountain in SoCal, initial thoughts:

- Definitely slower on the up/down than just trail runners (duh?), ended up being about 10-20% slower (combination of boots and my dog slowing me down from my normal solo time, I'll re-post when I go without the dog for an apple-to-apple comparison for time)

- Definitely more flexible and "shoe" feel vs the Top GTX (as mentioned above, simply confirming my opinion)

- I was able to maintain a running gate for entirety of the circuit, I.E. good flexion, weight not terrible, did not weight me down prohibitively where I needed to break stride to recover

- They have a loop on the heel so you could technically clip and hang them from a harness (just like any other approach shoe/trail runner); the super gaiter essentially folds/flexes out of the way. In the alpine with snow, you'd have to stash crampons/axe in/on a pack - easily done with the follower.  I think this is a big deal because it avoids having to stow boots inside a pack while on route.  

BL:  Really impressed.  I think it really fits a fun niche of highly snow/winter capable yet enables full stride up/down if you lungs/body can manage it - the boots won't be a valid excuse anymore.   

Anyone else have any updated info on these boots? I’m pretty interested for times when wearing approach shoes or trail runners would get your feet soaked, but you don’t need a full ice/mtn boot. 

Iv'e worn these for my Monday-morning training hikes every week this winter (probably 15 days) where we do 1500ish of vert. They are fantastic in wet/muddy/snowy conditions. I have used them with snowshoes and microspikes. I haven't put crampons on yet, but I have dry-fit with some semi-auto crampons. Very happy, would buy a second pair in a heartbeat. I bought them for some "mountaineering" objectives (that have been climbed by folks in trail runners) (e.g. Gannett) and I think they'll be great for that.

I've not yet worn mine in anger in snow, etc.  But have put training miles on them and they continue to  trail run very well for a supremely sturdy and competent boot.

My buddy took them to Patagonia and said they were nowhere near stiff enough for use on any real snow travel despite the rear welt

Evan Gerry wrote:

My buddy took them to Patagonia and said they were nowhere near stiff enough for use on any real snow travel despite the rear welt

Interesting. I tried them on in the store, and that was my feeling. I guess they’re more like a waterproof trail runner than a mountain boot.

I have been eyeing the Speeds for a Bugaboo trip this summer and some Colorado scrambles with some light snow. Thoughts on these being a good fit for that? Seems pretty spot on.

Nikolaj wrote:

I have been eyeing the Speeds for a Bugaboo trip this summer and some Colorado scrambles with some light snow. Thoughts on these being a good fit for that? Seems pretty spot on.

My wife wore them on our trip into the Bugs this year. She thought they were optimal for this sort of thing. 

Chris C wrote:

My wife wore them on our trip into the Bugs this year. She thought they were optimal for this sort of thing. 

Hey Chris do you think the aequilibrium speed offers significantly more utility than the Sportiva crossover (discontinued but I've had a pair for a long time).

The crossover is basically a bushido with a gaiter: https://www.lasportiva.com/en/crossover-2.0-gtx-man-black-26t999999

I've used them for firm snow approaches and even put a pair of aluminum pons on them (doesn't work great but will get you across a glacier or big snowfield). 

drew A wrote:

Hey Chris do you think the aequilibrium speed offers significantly more utility than the Sportiva crossover (discontinued but I've had a pair for a long time).

The crossover is basically a bushido with a gaiter: https://www.lasportiva.com/en/crossover-2.0-gtx-man-black-26t999999

I've used them for firm snow approaches and even put a pair of aluminum pons on them (doesn't work great but will get you across a glacier or big snowfield). 

I don’t think I can really say. I’ve never seen the Bushido or Crossover irl. These are also my wife’s boots I’m talking about, so there would be a lot of layers of speculation for me at this point haha

I personally use the Ribelle Techs and really like them. 

I have both the Crossover GTX and the Aequilibrium Speed, I'd put them in totally different categories personally. As you noted, the Crossover is a legit running shoe

• Tread - The speed has deep widely spaced tread blocks like a mountaineering boot while the Crossover has a normal running shoe tread, albeit a bit more aggressive for winter
• Shank - The speed is far more supportive both length wise and laterally/torsionally. I do agree with the comment above they're probably too soft for any technical crampon work due to the flex in the shank which makes them hike/walk so well (i.e. if I had to do the DC on Rainier again, I would still use mountaineering boots and not these). I will say the speed are far more comfortable in snowshoes and microspikes than the crossover due to the more protective toe box
• Last - Totally different last, I had to size up my crossovers by maybe a full size, meanwhile I'm comfortable in the Speed a half size up (plus some aftermarket insoles since they're built more like a boot). The Crossover is super narrow, while the speed I'd say fits true to size 
• Gaiter - I'm pretty sure the Crossover gaiter isn't actually waterproof, and it's the shoe itself that is waterproof. Conversely, I think the speed's outer gaiter is waterproof (??). But regardless, the speed keeps my feet much drier and warmer. 
• Climbing - I haven't gotten on any scrambling with the Speed, but given how soft the Crossover is, I'm guessing that the speed scramble a bit better. 

Crossovers were my winter hiking shoe in the northeast for much of my winter 115 round, and had the Aequilibrium Speed existed 10 years ago, I would have picked it hands down as the better choice. W115 climbing involved a bunch of vert per day (3-5k) with mileage around 8-15 miles per day. The terrain on any given hike was a mixture of bare ground/mud, unconsolidated snow, deep or lightly packed snow (snowshoes), hard packed snow (microspikes), snow covered rock hopping (bare boot or microspikes), and ice/bare rock (contact strap crampons). 

I had personally switched to the Uragano (discontinued) which I had used before the Aequilibrium for winter hikes locally (and also for the Paradise to Muir approach). Rather than a zippered gaiter, they have an integrated bootie/sock which worked well enough to keep my feet dry. When I reached out to La Sportiva for a replacement they recommended the Cyklon Cross GTX ( https://www.lasportivausa.com/cyklon-cross-gtx.html) and there's also the Blizzard GTX (but I'm pretty sure that one has permanent metal studs)

(I don't work for Sportiva or anything haha, I just have too many pairs of shoes, except oddly enough Mountaineering Boots which run way too narrow, so there I have Scarpa Phantom Guides and ArcTeryx Arcrux)

Chris C, no worries!

Mike V, wow thanks for this response!!! Super detailed and I’m very appreciative. I hadn’t really heard of these boots until reading this thread and then immediately wrote them off as a new Crossover. But clearly they’re much closer to a mountaineering boot than a runner, which definitely can be useful. I don’t think I need a pair but I’ll keep an eye out for a deal. Could be handy for many different alpine routes in the PNW. Luckily for me, I fit really well into all La Sportiva shoes and boots so hopefully this will be the same.

My only reservation is that I do like the crossover for an approach shoe across snowy terrain because they are light and relatively easy to smash into my pack. Despite not being the best shoe for the job, they do just barely get me to the base of whatever climb, then get stowed away. The Speed’s seem like they will do the job much easier and more safely, but at the cost of weight and packability. 

Because I'm bored at work today. On my cheap luggage scale, the Crossovers are 0.8 lbs per shoe and the Speed are 1.76 lbs per shoe (with a decent amount of mud...) in size 12-13 street shoe. The speed definitely has a more substantial upper so it won't pack as small (in addition to just generally being a larger shoe) but that's where all the support comes from, so that's okay in my book. The gaiter on the Speed definitely appears to be waterproof/GTX so that explains why it's so much warmer in snow/sloppy conditions while also letting the foot breathe better.

Anybody feel like they can give some advice on this? I’m looking for something for summertime alpine rock routes that have snow on the approach. I don’t want to wear a normal approach shoe or trail runner cause I feel like they’ll get soaked. I’m definitely interested in the Speed, but I’m wondering if it sits in a weird niche.

Part of me thinks the Speed would be perfect, but also it seems like it’s heavier and warmer than a trail runner/approach shoe, and is too soft to do much on steeper snow or easy ice. It seems like it could be the best of both worlds between an approach shoe and a mountain boot, or the worst of both worlds, depending on how you use it.

If anyone who’s used the speed could chime in that’d be awesome!

I don’t understand the speed for approaching summer alpine rock routes. gtx boots are so warm you’ll sweat out the boot anyway, then they dry 10x slower than a non-gtx approach shoe or runner 

If you’re approaching a summer alpine rock route for an IAD ascent, you’ll probably be kicking up steps in the morning when snow is firm (meaning your feet won’t get wet bc you’re on top of the snow), then if you’re climbing in rock shoes your non-gtx approach shoe will dry while you’re climbing all day, then any postholing on the descent is relatively inconsequential bc you’re on the way back to your car (or tent if doing multi-day stuff which will have them mostly dry overnight)

seems like such a niche shoe that isn’t good at much of anything other than being expensive

cole C wrote:

I don’t understand the speed for approaching summer alpine rock routes. gtx boots are so warm you’ll sweat out the boot anyway, then they dry 10x slower than a non-gtx approach shoe or runner 

If you’re approaching a summer alpine rock route for an IAD ascent, you’ll probably be kicking up steps in the morning when snow is firm (meaning your feet won’t get wet bc you’re on top of the snow), then if you’re climbing in rock shoes your non-gtx approach shoe will dry while you’re climbing all day, then any postholing on the descent is relatively inconsequential bc you’re on the way back to your car (or tent if doing multi-day stuff which will have them mostly dry overnight)

seems like such a niche shoe that isn’t good at much of anything other than being expensive

That’s a great perspective, and kind of the direction I’m leaning towards as well. I feel like they’ll be too hot for the approach in summer, and my feet will sweat a ton. Then for firmer/steeper snow, they’re still too soft. Trail runners/approach shoes are too soft to climb firm snow/ice as well, but they’ll hike better and be cooler. 

Wow the pictures make it look massive compared to the Crossover. The pictures on La Sportiva's site make it look a lot smaller. 

I think I'll stick to my Crossovers for wet/snowy approaches. Much easier to pack.