Sunday, January 03, 2021

Multi Tester Review: Saucony Peregrine 11, Peregrine 11 GTX, and Peregrine 11 ST

Article by Jeff Valliere, Renee Krusemark, John Tribbia, and Jeff Beck

Saucony Peregrine 11 ($120),  Peregrine 11 GTX ($150)  Peregrine 11 ST ($130)


Jeff V: I have a long history with the Peregrine dating back to version 4.  I liked that they were light, low and stable, with a minimal, yet secure upper and had excellent traction. However,  I did not like  that versions 4 and 5 were stiff as a 2x4 underfoot and caused me extensive heel blistering that I just could not manage or mitigate.  Version 6 was much better, but still required about 50 miles of break in to manage the heel rub issues.  Version 7 was more padded in the heel and slightly more flexible/forgiving, but the upper  was a little less secure.  Versions 8 and ISO (technically the 9 I guess?) were in my opinion, completely different shoes and only really shared a name and perhaps tread with its predecessors, as they seemed to gain weight/bulk and cushion, making them good all terrain cruisers, but not no longer really an all mountain racer.  

The Peregrine 10, where, despite being similar weight and with 2mm more stack, felt more streamlined, to the point where the Peregrine had returned to its more speedy performance roots with vast improvements throughout.  

The Peregrine 11 carries over the same midsole and outsole as the 10, though with a newly refined upper.  In addition to the Peregrine 11, we’ll be adding to this review the Gore Tex version, as well as the ST version with its deeper lugs for softer terrain.

Renee: Unlike Jeff. V., I have no history with the Peregrine line of shoes, and I likely avoided buying and running them because of the weight. However, for quality trail shoes, overall weight can be misleading. Does that mean runners who dislike heavy shoes should now consider the Peregrine line? Maybe. Keep reading!

Jeff B: My Peregrine history splits the difference between Jeff and Renee - I reviewed and enjoyed the ISO (9) and the 10. And I saw the Peregrine completely differently than Renee, I avoided the shoe because it didn’t have enough cushioning/heft. That said, I thought the ISO and 10 were both top notch trail shoes with massive traction and enough cushioning, and right out of the box(es), the 11 and variants seem like they didn’t fix anything that wasn’t broken.

John: I have the pleasure of testing the ST this round. The first thing I noticed when I put this shoe on was the familiarity in comfort with the Peregrine 10, which I tested last year. I enjoy how bouncy and smooth it feels, even just walking around. The upgraded lacing system and debris cover are exciting additions to put to the test. 


Jeff/Renee/John: Fit and security

Jeff V/John: Response, 

Jeff V.: Light feel on foot, Underfoot protection, Upper protection, Stability, Traction

Renee: overall durability

Jeff B: Do-it-all trail ability with great hold , enough foot protection, decent cushioning, and monstrous levels of traction

John: Superior traction in the worst of elements


Jeff V:  Weight, gaining a bit more than half an ounce over the previous version, is not going in the direction I had hoped.  Cushioning can feel a bit firm on long descents primarily on hard surfaces.

Renee: Weight (for all three variants) 

Jeff B: Weight-to-squish ratio seems a little off

John: Traction on hard surfaces, especially ice

Tester Profiles

Jeff V.  runs mostly on very steep technical terrain above Boulder often challenging well known local FKT's. 

Jeff B. is the token slow runner of the RTR lineup as such his viewpoints on shoe and gear can differ from those who routinely finish marathons in three hours or less. Jeff runs 40 miles per week, both roads and desert trails in Phoenix, Arizona. He has a PR's of 4:07 marathon and 5K at 23:39. In December 2019 he raced his first 50 mile trail ultra. 

Renee is a former U. S. Marine journalist, which is when her enjoyment of running and writing started. She isn’t that awesome of a runner, but she tries really hard. Most of her weekly 50-60 miles take place on rural country roads in Nebraska, meaning mud, gravel, dirt, hills, and the occasional field. She has 2020 PR’s of 1:35:44 for the half marathon and 3:26:45 for the marathon.

John (5' 6", 130lbs) is a former sponsored mountain/trail runner who has run with La Sportiva, Brooks/Fleet Feet, Pearl Izumi, and Salomon. Even though he competes less frequently these days, you can still find John enjoying the daily grind of running on any surface, though his favorite terrain is 30-40% grade climbs. He has won races such as America's Uphill, Imogene Pass Run, and the US Skyrunner Vertical Kilometer Series; and he's held several FKTs on several iconic mountains in Boulder, Colorado and Salt Lake City, Utah. If you follow him on Strava, you'll notice he runs at varying paces between 5 minutes/mile to 12 minutes/mile before the break of dawn almost everyday.


Peregrine 11 ($120)

Official: men's 10.9 oz / 310g (US9), women's 9.5 oz / 270g (US8)

Sample men’s: 11.6 oz / 332 g  (US10), 11.9 oz / 338 g (US10.5)

Sample women’s: 9.63 oz/273g (US8)

Stack Height: PWRUN midsole. 27mm / 23mm, 4mm drop 

Lugs: 5mm

Peregrine 11 GTX ($150)


Official men's 11.5 oz / 326g  (US9), women's 10.3 oz / 288 g (US8)

Sample men’s: 12.9 oz / 365 g (US10), 13.3 oz / 375 g (US10.5)

Sample women’s 8: 10.44 oz/ 296 g (US8)

Stack Height:  PWRUN midsole. 27mm / 23mm, 4mm drop 

Gore-Tex Invisible Fit upper

Lugs: 5mm

Peregrine 11 ST ($130)


Official men's 11.5 oz /326g (US9), women's 10.1 oz / 28g  (US8)

Samples men’s: 11.6 oz / 331 g (US10), 12.2 oz / 345 g (US10.5)

Sample women’s: 10oz/285g (US8)

Stack Height: PWRUN midsole. 27mm / 23mm, 4mm drop 

Lugs: 6.5 mm

All available January 2021

First Impressions and Fit

Jeff V:   Out of the box, the Peregrine 11 looks awesome, my review pair black with day glow orange outsole, laces and accents, with some yellow and blue mixed in.  The upper looks notably refined and a bit more padded in the tongue and heel collar.

Fit is amazing for me, true to size, with great midfoot and heel hold and enough toe room to not feel constricting.  Even though my test pair of size 10 of the standard Peregrine 11 is now up to 11.6 oz up about 0..5 oz., they feel lighter on the foot and responsive.

The Peregrine 11 GTX looks nearly identical, with a different colorway. Of course it has the Gore Tex Invisible fit upper and weighs an ounce more due to the Gore Tex liner and at 12.9 oz. in my size 10 is a reasonable weight considering.

The Peregrine 11 ST looks notably different with the debris resistant upper, 3D printed overlays and mesh guard/lace garage over the tongue to accommodate the quick lace.  Additionally, the ST (soft terrain) has even deeper and more aggressive 6.5 mm lugs.

Renee: I agree with Jeff V. All three Peregrines are good looking shoes with an overall great fit right from the box. My first impression was that I had no excuses to not run quality miles during the winter months with these shoes now in my rotation. 

Of course, after weighing each shoe, I started to wonder if I would enjoy them and would continue to use them after review. All three are my heaviest trail shoes. As a runner who dislikes heavy shoes, and probably does not have the size and strength to carry such weight on my feet, I am happy to report that the Peregrines are solid choices for certain terrains and conditions despite the weight. In short, do not discount the Peregrines because of the weight.

Each runner is different, and I do think that the shoes function better on certain terrains as compared to others (read on for those details). I wore a women’s size 8, my typical Saucony trail shoe size. The length should be true-to-size for most runners. Occasionally, I can wear a women’s size 7.5, depending on the toe box. For runners between half sizes, I suggest the longer of the two. 

Jeff B: I was especially surprised to test these since I wasn’t signed up for them, but a size/shipping mixup meant my size was just sitting there waiting for me to test them, so I took one for the team (please read that as sarcastically as I wrote it). I was impressed with how they all looked, and especially the ST, which might be the best looking shoe I’ve ever seen. 

The standard and GTX are both solid lookers as well, offering both ends of the spectrum with the nearly monotone GTX in black and gray and the ultra colorful standard version making a number of Nikes look understated. There’s massive overlap in the various features of the shoes, so reviewing them all together makes a lot of sense, and even though the ST upper is quite the departure from the more typical versions, I found fit to be the same. In each case, definitely true-to-size, and the toebox presented zero issues. I am not always comfortable in a standard D width but was fine here. It might not give Topo a run for their money, but it’s a wide enough front to give plenty of space for toes to splay out.

John: The ST, the only version I tested, feels comfortable and I really like the upgraded lacing system. The heel fit is snug and deep; and the shoe cushion underfoot the perfect amount of soft + firm with an added layer of cushion from the deep lugs. I have a slightly narrow foot and the shoe fits true to size with enough width for those with less narrow feet. It goes without saying, the traction is what we are here for and I’ll tell you it is awesome, deep, and grippy.


Upper features and differences:

Peregrine 11: durable top layer over air mesh

Peregrine 11 GTX: Gore-Tex Invisible Fit bonded to outer upper so not a traditional Gore bootie

Peregrine ST:  debris resistant mesh with overlays and a mesh shield over tongue, quick lace

Jeff V:  The new durable ultralight exterior over air mesh is a slight improvement over the previous version, with the fit very similar, but with better breathability.

Some key differences are an added lace eyelet for a more custom and precise lacing with slightly better security, thicker padding in the tongue and thicker padding around the heel collar for added comfort.  These changes however have come with a ½ oz. weight penalty which I am having trouble making a case for.

Aside from not being thrilled over the ½ ounce weight gain, the upper is superb, exceptionally secure, comfortable, breathable, flexible, protective and thus far no signs of durability issues.  Heel hold is excellent, fit is true to size and while the toe box is not overly roomy, has enough wiggle room and room for swell without any excess movement.

While I have not reviewed the previous Gore Tex version, most of the changes I mention above are consistent best I can tell, except of course for breathability due to the Gore Tex layer.  

The Peregrine 11 GTX is very waterproof, as I have immersed them in snow, slush, puddles and creeks with no seepage for me. This said without a built in gaiter, care must be taken to not go too deep and also a gaiter is especially helpful in fresh snow or when conditions are sloppy.

The upper of the Peregrine 11 ST is completely different from the 11 and 11 GTX’s  with a debris resistant material and 3D printed overlays, a mesh covering over the laces to protect and shield the lace area, which also doubles as a lace garage for the quicklace. 

 I have long been a fan of Salomon’s quicklace, which has always worked very well for me which other brands have tried to duplicate with moderate success at best, but mostly not very well.  

Saucony however has really nailed it here and I can attest that the effectiveness/security is easily on par with Salomon.  

In fact, the upper on the Peregrine 11 ST is so sleek, elegant, sporty, secure and modern, combined with the amazing quicklace, I often peer at my feet and think Salomon. Fit is the same as the other two siblings, as is security, but I really favor this upper with the sleek look and feel, quicklace and mesh debris shield over the laces.  

It is one of my favorite uppers ever.  The only colorway listed is this teal/seafoam color pictured, which at first I had to double check to make sure they did not mistakenly send a women’s model.  The unique color soon grew on me and improves in look with trail dust and mud.

Renee: The Peregrine 11 and Peregrine 11GTX have similar fitting uppers. 

I found both the standard 11 and 11 GTX to be comfortable with great security and effective adjustments with the lacing. The toebox is not extremely roomy in the 11 or GTX version, but I had plenty of room and I like a roomy toebox. 

The GTX version seemed to have slightly less height in the toebox, probably because of the Gore-Tex Invisible Fit in the mix. 

The toebox is not narrow, but it does have a tapered shape. Unless a runner needs a very voluminous and wide toebox, the Peregrines should fit nicely. The 11 upper is breathable, and I noticed very little dirt enters the shoe. I wore white socks on dirt-only country roads, and I had no dirt on my socks save the area around the heel opening. 

The GTX version appears to be wider as compared to the non-GTX version, but it is just the upper material. I was able to achieve the same fit and security with the GTX as compared to the non-GTX 11 with a bit more pull of the laces (the material is not as flexible as the non-GTX version, which likely causes less height in the toebox). 

I ran several A/B runs using the GTX and non-GTX on each foot. Through snow, after only a 5K distance, I had moisture in the non-GTX while the GTX foot was totally dry. 

The Peregrine 11ST’s upper is unique. I found it just as comfortable and with similar fit as the other Peregrines. The quick lacing system is successful, as Jeff. V. wrote. I find that quick laces often do not secure or tighten across my midfoot area, but that is not the case for the ST. I did not have quite as good of security in the ST as I did with the other 11s, and I think that is because I have a low volume foot. Still, the quick laces are nice. As with the 11"s upper, I noticed very little dirt enters the shoe. Although not waterproof, the ST has resistance to debris and some moisture. I ran through snow, and the upper looked wet, but my socks were dry. 

Jeff B: My colleagues gave a very through breakdown so I won’t retread too much. Jeff is right, the 11 standard version vs the 10 standard upper is a subtle shift with a number of slight changes and they all seem to be improvements. The 11 upper feels a little more premium, likely a result of the slightly thicker tongue and the reworked overlays. The result is much like last year, solid toebox, great hold, breathable enough. It isn’t flashy - well, outside of the extremely flashy colors - it just does the job exceptionally well. 

The GTX upper has everything going for it the standard version has, plus waterproofing. A year ago in Phoenix that’d be wasted on me, but after moving to Denver, I’ve been experiencing all new things that fall from the sky from time to time. My initial run in the GTX was the morning following a snow storm, and nearly every step I took was in some level of snow or slush. Shockingly, my feet remained dry the entire time. Very impressed.

The ST upper is a big shift from the other two, incorporating speed laces and the most effective “lace garage” I’ve experienced. They were the shoe of choice a few days after the GTX snow run where mud was the prevailing surface, and while the upper got plenty muddy, nothing got through. Still plenty of hold and lots of toebox room, it looks different than the others but very much feels like a sibling. The other two might as well be twins, this is the brother or sister who is a year or two older/younger - you definitely get the resemblance. 

As for the lace garage, they went away from Salomon or ASICS design of stuffing the speed lace into the tongue (Salomon does it neatly, but makes it hard to access, ASICS is easy to work with but made the tongue comically large), and made the lace garage the entire lower half of the lace. Which both looks cool and is easy to work with. My gripe with it is likely to be unique - it makes it very hard to use my Stryd footpod. I ended up putting on slightly off-center at the top. Not a deal breaker by any means, but if you are a regular footpod user, it is a minor pain.

One of the little touches I appreciate, and this applies to all three versions, is the stretchy cord heel tab that has enough give to let your finger through, but then the stretch stops. There are a number of heel tabs around the running shoe industry that are functionally worthless, but these are about the best around.

John: As both Jeffs point out, the lace garage and quick lacing stand out as a top feature added to the ST this year. As someone who has run many years in Salomon and seen other shoe brands attempt to mimic what they have accomplished with their quick lace system, I can honestly attest that the ST’s stands to the test as highly effective and (dare I say) easier to use than the Salomons. Having the ability to quickly lace and then tuck the excess lace into the debris cover is easy and it looks sleek + stylish. As everyone has mentioned, the upper is secure, comfortably fitting, and I felt like there was enough protection for my toes in case of the occasional toe smash against rocks or hard things on the trail.


All have same PWRUN midsole ( a TPU EVA blend) and stack height of 27mm/23mm, 4mm drop 

Jeff V:  The PWRUN midsole is firm, responsive, stable and performance oriented.  The firmer PWRUN foam is appropriate for pushing fast through technical terrain where predictability is more important than plush cushioning.  The only real drawback is that I feel that the PWRUN is a bit firm for road use and long descents on hard surfaces where I might prefer a more plush cushioned midsole as in the Xodus 10 (all TPU PWRUN+ vs. EVA/TPU blend in the Peregrines) for less technical terrain with the Peregrine for more dedicated trail type of running (not that the Xodus 10 can’t handle that terrain well either).  That said, while the Peregrine 11/GTX/ST never really feels harsh and I could easily run in them for a full day.

Renee: I think some runners will find the midsole too firm. I did not. I agree with Jeff V., that a firmer midsole is appropriate for technical or even semi-technical trails. The midsole is not hard or harsh, it's just not plush or soft. I do not like running single track trails with a soft midsole because it is too hard to maintain balance and pace. For buffed out trails or rolling country hills, softer might be better. 

I ran about 2 hours and 45 minutes in the ST during my first run in them. I had fun, never tired, and never had sore feet. Runner preferences will determine how “firm” the midsole feels, but for anything remotely technical, the midsole works great. Even on gravel/dirt country roads, the midsole worked for me at slower paces (slower because of the weight, not the midsole). 

Jeff B: Just like last year, I think this midsole is enough. Enough cushioning, without being my go-to for long days. I’m a big enough runner that I’d likely not pick any of the Peregrines for a run going much over 2-3 hours, especially since the Xodus 10 exists. But that isn’t to say it’s bad, and I really feel like this is a great fast shoe for runners like me, or even all novice trail runners. If you like to completely mute ground feel, none of these Peregrines are for you. They do a nice job of reducing ground feel some, just not completely removing it.

John: When on the appropriate sloppy surface, the midsole of the ST runs like a comfortable road trainer with ample cushion in the heel, midfoot, and forefoot. I forgot about the terrain I was running because the shoe engages so well (more on this below). I think the added lug height gives a more cushioned feel through that sloppiness. That said, I would be remiss to mention that when I ran the STs on pavement or harder surfaces, I found the midsole felt a bit harsh and too firm. 


Right to Left: Peregrine 11, 11 GTX, ST

11 GTX and 11 have 5mm lugs, ST 6.5mm

Jeff V:  The PWRTRAC outsole on the Peregrine 11 and 11 GTX is the same as version 10 and provides excellent traction over a wide variety of terrain and is notable for its exceptional versatility.  

The 5mm lugs are sharp, pronounced and aggressive, while still maintaining good ground contact for rock slab and they provide amazing bite on snow, ice, mud, off trail, while rolling along more smoothly on hard surfaces.  Additionally, as with the Mad River TR 2, the outsole is designed to easily accommodate sheet metal screws for ice traction, or can be drilled out for water drainage.

The woven rock guard can be seen when looking at the forefoot outsole, which provides excellent protection, yet allowing for good flexibility making for a not overly stiff shoe such was the case with some of the earlier versions or the Peregrine (4,5 and 6 most notably).  Contouring over rocks is excellent, with no tippyness. Wet traction is very good, as is traction on rocks/slab, wet or dry.

Thus far durability is proving to be excellent and I expect the same longevity as I have seen with the Peregrine 10.

The Peregrine 11 ST features 6.5 mm lugs that are even more pronounced and aggressive than the 11 and 11 GTX, providing superior traction in loose off trail conditions, soft snow or any other surface where a deeper lug might be helpful, however they do not shed mud easily.  


The rubber compound feels a bit hard, which can be felt underfoot on rocky, hard surfaces and the taller lugs affect performance somewhat on rocky trails, though this is very manageable, not bad, just not as good as the 11 and 11 GTX.  

The ST with the deeper lugs and less ground contact area, as well as hard compound, are dangerous on icy surfaces, so I advise extra caution if negotiating any short patches of ice. Deeper lugs while great on soft surfaces don't translate that traction over to ice

Top to Bottom: women’s Peregrine 11, 11 GTX, ST

11 GTX and 11 have 5mm lugs, ST 6.5mm

Renee: All three have great outsoles, with the uniqueness being more present in the ST outsole (black above) with its higher lugs, greater spacing and with more angles to its chevrons. The GTX and 11 non-GTX outsoles are versatile for loose or packed dirt, some mud, some slush, snow, or ice, basically everything. 


For icy surfaces, drilling in screws is a great idea, and Saucony has drill locations as well as locations for drilling drain holes ready and marked on the 11 and 11 GTX.

The flexible woven rock plate helps with protection and balance, but it does not compromise flexibility. I was able to run on my toes going up steep inclines.The ST outsole is fantastic for non-buffed surfaces. I found myself “off trail” during my 2 hours 45 minutes run with the ST and it grips woodland debris just as well as it does actual trail. As Jeff. V. wrote, the ST is not ice friendly but can work on packed snow if there is some texture is underneath (leaves, gravel, clomped dirt, twigs, etc.). 

The lug length and firm outsole prevented me from running on my toes up inclines, but that is hardly an issue if I’m running really soft terrain. From mud to loose dirt to piled woodland debris, the ST outsole was a real treat. 

Jeff B: I continued to be amazed by how much grip the Peregrine brings to the table. I’ve yet to install screws into any of the outsoles, but mostly because I haven’t felt the need yet - they already have so much grip on their own. It was nice to see Saucony hadn’t made any changes from the 10 for the standard and GTX, because that outsole is grippy and versatile in a really good way. The ST is my first shoe designed for sloppy terrain, and I wasn’t sure what to expect. After the inaugural mud run it became clear that it is a monster in wet dirt, and Jeff is absolutely correct - it’s full on scary when ice is present. While the lugs are tall enough the contact area just isn’t there for ice. That said, it handles mud very well, both chunky mud and the slippery gooey mud, slides in the slick stuff were very short. 

The outsole did accumulate a lot of mud, but I think that’s just the way it works, but even when the lugs were full of mud there was still plenty of grip. Just a testament to how much they have.

John: Jeff V summarizes the ST outsole perfectly. The 6.5mm lugs are deeper than the other two models and they are also spaced slightly farther apart.  I ran the ST on rocky trail, road, ice, snow, gravel pack trail, and mud.

The ST traction was exceptional in the deeper snow, sloppy slush, and mud, but not very good in anything else. I also experienced a lackluster mud and snow shedding when it accumulates in the deeper lugs, but as Jeff B observed the shoe still gets plenty of grip because there is so much lug height. Be aware! (as Jeff V and Renee mention), try to avoid ice at all costs. The reduced surface area contact on ice can be hazardous.


Jeff V:  The Peregrine 11 ride is very predictable and smooth through the shoe's intended technical terrain as it is firm, stable and responsive, and with great response and agility.  The ride is a touch harsh at higher speeds on roads/hard surfaces and very long descents on hard surfaces, but is a small price to pay for the amazing performance in rough terrain and is easy to get used to the ride.  I can easily run in this shoe all day.

Renee: I ran all shoes on country dirt/gravel roads, woodland semi-technical single track trails, through mud, slush, dirt, and snow. The ride is a bit heavier than I would prefer, but the shoes perform well in conditions and on surfaces that some lighter weighted shoes would not. The GTX feels heavier than the non-GTX version while A/B running with them, but otherwise they ride the same: smooth and comfortable for short or long distances at easier paces. 

The ST ride is less flexible than the other two, but provides great traction on sloppy or off-trail surfaces. All three are all-day cruisers if desired. None of them were very nimble for me, mostly because of the weight and because the heel counter and collar were a bit high-sitting on my feet. 

Jeff B: I like the ride as much as my much more nimble colleagues, but there isn’t enough cushioning for me to entertain them as my all day shoe. 

Jeff sums up the ride very well, “firm, stable, and responsive” and for that reason, along with the impressive outsole, makes this one of the easiest trail shoes to recommend runners who are getting into the dirt for the first time. Not that it’s just a beginner’s shoe, but this is a shoe that has no surprises - and that’s not a bad thing. I also agree with Renee, the added weight of the GTX is only noticeable if you have one on each foot.

John: Transition from heel-to-toe in the ST is very smooth and stable. The shoe offers decent firmness, it is stable and responsive, and when in the muck it is still quite agile.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Jeff V:  The Peregrine 11 is every bit as good as the 10, which was my favorite all mountain shoe of 2020, as it is responsive, firmer and predictable with a secure, comfortable, more breathable upper, with insanely effective and versatile traction.  

I reach for the Peregrine 11 for faster runs (or slower) on technical terrain where I am looking for the utmost traction, protection, security and predictability.  I would not hesitate to race in the Peregrine 11, but would love to see it drop yet a bit more in weight, while retaining all of the excellent performance characteristics and protection.  Ironically, my wish for a weight drop for the Peregrine 10 was answered with a half ounce increase, which is not thrilling.  Is it worth it to upgrade to the 11, or find a closeout on the Peregrine 10?  The new upper is a little bit better and the added cushioning in the tongue and heel collar is nice, but honestly for the intended purpose of this shoe, I would likely look to save money (and weight) and go with version 10, which is of course is no knock on the 11, you really can not go wrong either way.

Jeff V’s Score:  9.5 / 10

Ride: 8.5 Fit: 10 Value: 9.5 Style: 9.5 Traction: 10 Rock Protection: 10 Weight: 8


Renee: For their weight, all three Peregrines ride and run very nicely. The security and comfort of the uppers balance the weight well. For technical trails, these are a far better option compared to soft midsole, rocker road-to-trail shoes. The firm midsole provides all-day comfort, and it will provide a more balanced ride as compared to those softer shoes.

In short, the Peregrines work better for technical or semi-technical trails with elevation gain and loss as opposed to buffed out trails with rolling or zero elevation change. 

The weight is a lot, however, but the ride and upper balance this as well as they can. Despite really disliking heavy shoes, I will continue to run with the GTX in the snow , and when I want to run off-trail or through fields (especially in the mud), I will continue to run with the ST.

Renee’s score: 8.65/10 

(-1.0 weight, -.35 lack of nimble ride)


Jeff B: Saucony smartly didn’t nitpick their winner last year, making few changes here and there to put out an incredibly versatile trail shoe. While my faster and lighter colleagues see it as enough for all day, heavier and slower runners like myself might only want to wear them for a few hours, but the Peregrine, any version, is one of those shoes that makes every step seem planted. Different versions for different runners’ terrain is a nice touch, and the ST is going to be the shoe that I’m wearing anytime mud is likely to be the predominant terrain.

Jeff B’s Score 9.55/10

Ride: 9 (30%) Fit: 10 (30%) Value: 10 (10%) Style: 9 (5%) Traction: 10 (15%) Rock Protection: 9 (10%)


John: If you are looking to add a shoe that can bring confidence and superior traction in the sloppiest of elements to your quiver, the Peregrine 11 ST is perfect. The shoe is comfortable, feels secure and predictable when running through nasty terrain, provides a smooth and stable ride, requires very little break-in out of the box, and has an amazingly easy to use quick lacing system. This is a go-to shoe for the worst sloppy trail running conditions you can imagine. 

John’s Score:  9.5 / 10

Ride: 8.5 Fit: 10 Value: 9.5 Style: 9.5 Traction: 10 Rock Protection: 10 Weight: 8



Index to all RTR reviews: HERE

Peregrine 10 (RTR Review)

Jeff B: The 11 could be considered the 10.1 with a virtually identical midsole and outsole and a very similar upper. The 11 upper brings a little more in the way of creature comforts, but also brings a little more weight too. If money is tight, see if you can find the 10 on a last year’s model discount. But if you liked the 10 and wanted a subtle upper shift, you are in luck.

Saucony Xodus 10 (RTR Review)

Jeff V:  The Xodus 10 has dropped a lot of weight over previous iterations, though still weighs about a half ounce more than the Peregrine.  The Xodus hardly feels heavier though and its cushioning is softer, although the shoe is still very responsive and agile, has amazing road manners and can also rip steep and technical terrain every bit as well as the Peregrine.

Jeff B: Jeff is 100% right, though I’ll go farther to say, I prefer the slightly heavier but better cushioned Xodus. No longer built like an absolute tank, just a chunky one, the thinner Peregrine is my choice for faster or shorter runs.

Saucony Mad River TR 2 (RTR Review)

Jeff V:  The Mad River TR 2 is another great trail option from Saucony, with a very secure and comfortable upper, versatile and grippy outsole (perhaps better for wet terrain), is a little over a half ounce lighter and a bit more cushion, softer feel and more flexible.  Peregrine 11 is better for more rocky, all mountain terrain with its lugs more appropriate for steep and loose terrain.  MR TR 2 is also $20 less expensive

John: The Peregrine 11 ST digs into the sloppiness where the Mad River TR 2 would probably slip and slide. If I were running on snow/ice, I would opt for the Mad River especially since you can add screws  or other traction  to the outsole for added traction. 

Saucony Canyon TR (RTR Review)

Renee: The Saucony Canyon TR is lighter than the Peregrines, but it’s still a heavy shoe. With a higher drop and tamer outsole, the Canyon TR is what it is: a better road-to-trail or buffed trail option. Overall, I do “like” the Canyon TR better because it is lighter, but it will not perform as well on technical trails or in sloppy surfaces as compared to any of the Peregrines. Both shoes are stable and balance their weight well with secure uppers. I wore a women’s size 8 in both. 

Hoka One One Torrent 2 (RTR Review)

Jeff V:  The Torrent 2 is lighter and has more forgiving cushion and is more responsive too (but some of that related to the lighter weight).  Peregrine has superior traction, protection and upper fit/security.

Renee: The Torrent 2 is a great trail shoe for a variety of surfaces. The Peregrine outsole will be more appropriate for technical trails, but the Torrent is not a bad option either. I found the Torrent just a tad narrow in the toe box on the lateral side, but nothing like other Hoka shoes. I prefer the Torrent 2 because of the much, much lighter weight, but for slow, long runs the Peregrines are a nice option. The Torrent 2 is awesome, one of my favorite trail shoes from 2020 and is also much more nimble than Peregrine. I wore a women’s size 7.5 in the Torrent 2 and a women’s size 8 in the Peregrines. 

John: For me, it is hard to beat what the Torrent 2 offers, but the Peregrine ST gives better traction and a much more stable + smooth ride. The Torrent 2 has more ground feel and is a more nimble and quick shoe for most terrain.

Salomon Speedcross 5 (RTR Review)

Jeff:  The Speedcross 5 is heavier, less responsive and bulkier, though it has more forgiving cushioning and more comfort for longer days.  The SC 5 tread is very aggressive, better in mud or snow, while the Peregrine's 11 and 11 GTX outsole is more versatile overall.  I also find the SC 5 to be a bit tippy in technical terrain due to the big blocky heel and the Peregrine outshines it by far in technical terrain stability and performance.  The Peregrine 11 ST is more closely aligned with the SC5.

Salomon WildCross (RTR Review)

Jeff V:  Close in weight with WildCross being a tad lighter, but both have very aggressive tread for amazing loose condition performance.  The WildCross is more flexible and less protected underfoot, with a bit more stack height and slightly softer cushioning.  Both have superb fit although upper advantage goes to the Peregrines for fit and its security.  Priced the same at $130.

Salomon Cross Pro (RTR Review)

Jeff V:  Essentially the same comparative comments as the WildCross, however the Cross Pro is over about an ounce lighter than the Peregrine 11 and has a unique Matryx upper that gives very good security with a bit of stretch and is completely sock like with no true tongue.  Cross Pro is also $30 more.

Brooks Cascadia 15 (RTR Review)

Jeff V:  The Cascadia 15 is a touch lighter, at the same price and has a comparably secure and comfortable upper.  The Cascadia tread is not as aggressive, however is still very good in just about all situations.  Protection, response and overall performance are comparable and even though the Cascadia has less stack, the cushion is more compliant and less hard for bits of road running or on hard pack and rock.

Topo Ultraventure Pro (RTR Review)

Renee: The Ultraventure Pro is lighter, more nimble, yet still has a rock plate and durable outsole. Everything about the Pro should make it a better option for me than any of the Peregrines. However, the fit of the Pro did not work for me because the heel felt loose and I had forefoot pain after running, which I think was caused by the poor-fitting heel and the lower stack height coupled with the rock plate. If a runner can get a good fit with the Pro, it would be a great option because it is lighter and more nimble than the Peregrines. For me, the Peregrines fit so much better and the ride worked well despite the weight. 

Jeff B: I’m with Renee, on paper the Ultraventure Pro should be one of my favorite trail shoes of all time, but it just didn’t work for me either. I didn’t experience foot pain as she did, but the lack of solid hold made a few trail runs precarious at best, while the Peregrine holds onto your foot - and the earth - better than Michael Rooker in Cliffhanger. There’s no letting go with the Sauconys.

The Peregrines are available January 2021

Products reviewed were provided at no charge for testing. The opinions herein are the authors'

RTR Team's Best of 2020 Articles
Road Running Shoes HERE
Trail Running Shoes HERE
RTR Contributors Best of Run 2020, Year in Review Articles

Comments and Questions Welcome Below!
Please let us know mileage, paces, race distances, and current preferred shoes

RoadTrailRun receives a commission on purchases at the stores below.
Your purchases help support RoadTrailRun. Thanks!

Available Now!
USA  Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
FREE 2 Day Shipping EASY No Sweat Returns
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

Available Now!
Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
Join VIP Family, Get Free Shipping and 15% in VIP Benefits on every order, Details here

Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
FREE Shipping on most orders over $40

Men's & Women's  SHOP HERE

Men's & Women's SHOP HERE


Please Like and Follow RoadTrailRun
Facebook:  Instagram: @roadtrailrun
Twitter: @RoadTrailRun You Tube: @RoadTrailRun


Jeff Valliere said...


Dean said...

Thanks for the review, detailed as usual. If I wear a US Men's 12 in the Topo Ultraventure (original), would you suggest the same size in the Peregrine 11? I am unable to try any shoes on as I am an expat in South Korea and no shoe comes any larger than 10.5. I will be ordering blind. Thanks, Dean

Jeff Valliere said...

Hi Dean, fit is true to size, so I do believe you would be fine ordering the same size in the Peregrine 11 as the Ultraventure (I wear 10 in both and works great for me).

Dean said...

Thank you, Jeff. I have the 10 in a half size bigger than my Ultraventure, but don't really feel like it fits securely at all. I'm hoping the increased heel cushion and the same size as my Ultraventure will improve the fit. I'm stockpiling ill fitting shoes here, and it's really starting to hurt financially.

Unknown said...

Would the Peregrine 11 be a good replacement for the Salomon Sense pro 4 (which I can't seem to find anymore?)

Jeff Valliere said...

Sort of, but they are much heavier and not as quick or agile. Hoka Torrent 2 maybe a better pick, or upcoming Hoka Zinal or Skechers Razor Trail (if lightweight speed is paramount over traction). Scott RC is one to look at as well.

Unknown said...

Thanks for the review on these, good comprehensive breakdown as ever!

I'm looking for a road to trail shoe that still has enough grip for muddy, wet trails in the UK, and preferably gore-tex for the wetter sections, along with enough cushion for the roads with my larger 95kg frame and delicate knees!

Been eyeing up the peregrine gtx, but may not be the best for the road.

Any advice must appreciated!


Jeff Valliere said...

Thanks Ben. I think the Peregrine would be too harsh for the road. I would suggest the Xodus 10 or 11, which I think would check your boxes and I think they have good grip, but some others (depending on region) have complained of poor grip, so depends on surface. Of course there is the Hoka Speedgoat, the upcoming Brooks Cascadia 16 and the Topo Mt. Racer 2 which I think would all be very good candidates.

Unknown said...

Thanks Jeff, will check those out. It’s tough finding ones that come in the gtx!


Jeff Valliere said...

I was certain Xodus 10 and 11 had gtx versions, but cannot find. Nor can I find evidence that the upcoming Topo Mountain Racer 2 has a gtx version (though I have run in a lot of spring sloppy snow and mud and miraculously, my feet have never gotten that soaked or cold). The Speedgoat 4 definitely has a gtx version though.

Unknown said...

Yeah, I can’t find it in the Xodus. Brooks cascadia comes in it, could be a good option. I have fairly wide feet and have always liked brooks. Had the ghost and more recently catamount which have been really good.


Anonymous said...

I'm confused every site I check says they are only 11.5oz which is very light compared to most trail shoes. Generally, Salomons, Hoka's and Altra's run between 18-24oz/pair. Is this weight per shoe or the pair?

Sam Winebaum said...

We always list per single shoe in reviews. Not sure what site you are looking at but brands and on line run stores list per shoe most of the time. Divide what you see by 2

Dasha said...


Could you please tell me, how to install screws into the outsole? Is there supposed to be some special metal screws? and what length or diameter do they have to be? Thanks!

Sam Winebaum said...

Hi Dasha,
See our traction round up for suggestions. The screw kits are at the end of the article.
Also sheet metal screws can be used bought at a hardware store. See here: for article by famous sky runner Matt Carpenter
Sam, Editor

Jeff Valliere said...

Sam beat me to it, as I was about to post the exact same links (thanks Sam!). I will note that when Matt wrote that how to guide, that was about the best option available at the time. I can still recommend screws in shoes as a cheap traction option, but I will note that depending on the terrain that you frequent, they can require a good bit of work to keep them snugged into your shoe (I hand snug them with appropriate socket driver after each run) and sometimes they pop out and need replacement. They also dull relatively quickly and need to be replaced regularly for optimal grip on ice. That said, I have come to prefer wearing either studded shoes or EXOspikes for most icy days, as they provided more effective grip and require no maintenance. I find the added expense (especially for the EXOspikes) to be very much worth it and is really the best choice out there right now.

JB said...


which shoes according to you better prevent ankle sprain/rolling in trail - Nike Terra Kiger 8 or Saucony Peregrine 11. Which of them are more suitable for concrete?

And which of your tested trail shoes also suitable for concrete (at least short sections) have the best ankle support ("anti-rolling")?

Thank you very much.