Article by Mike Postaski, Jeff Valliere, John Tribbia, and Renee Krusemark
Salomon Sense Ride 5 ($140)
Pros:
Impeccable upper hold for technical terrain: Sam/Jeff/John/Renee
Tight, secure upper, may need to size up though: Mike P/Jeff/John
Well cushioned and stable for purpose: Sam/Jeff/John
4mm more cushion/protection than previous version with no weight penalty: Jeff
Improved traction: Jeff
Great ground feel: John/Renee
Cons:
Rigid (stable) flat platform could use longer flex and more decoupling. Where is R.Camber here? Sam/Mike P
Very thin under the forefoot Mike P
Thin feeling overly flexible very front of shoe with further back overly stiff Sam/Mike P
Low toe box may call for sizing up a half, upper hold will not suffer Sam/Mike P/JeffRenee
Lace garage is nearly impossible to get into (covered by 2 lace rows) Mike P. Renee
Stats
Weight: men's 9.91 oz / 281g (US9) / women's oz / g (US8)
Ride 3 Approx.Weight: men's 10.2 oz / 289g (US9)
Samples: men’s 9.91 oz / 281g (US9), 10.6 oz / 301g (US10)
women’s 9.14 oz / 259g (US8)
Stack Height: men’s 31mm heel / 23mm forefoot ( 8mm drop spec)
$140 Available now.
Mike Postaski currently focuses on long mountainous ultras - anywhere from 50K up to his favorite - 100M. 5'10", 138 lbs, midfoot/forefoot striker - he typically averages 70 mpw (mostly on trails), ramping up to nearly 100 mpw during race buildups. A recent 2:39 road marathoner, his easy running pace ranges from 7:30 - 9:00/mi. In 2022 Mike won both the Standhope 100M and IMTUF 100M trail ultras within a 7 week period - both extremely rugged Idaho mountain races. Mike's shoe preferences lean towards firmer, dense cushioning, and shoes with narrower profiles. He prefers extra forefoot space, especially for long ultras, and he strongly dislikes pointy toe boxes.
Jeff Valliere loves to run and explore the mountains of Colorado, the steeper and more technical the better. He has summited all of the 14ers in the state and can be found on mountain trails daily, no matter the weather, season, conditions or whether there is daylight or not. On the side he loves to ski (all forms) bike and hike, often with his family, as he introduces his 12 year old daughters to the outdoors. Jeff was born and raised in New Hampshire, but has called Colorado home for over 25 years. He is 5’9” and 145 lbs.
John Tribbia (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 every day.
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 PR’s of 1:30:59 for the half marathon and 3:26:45 for the marathon.
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Mike P: I received the Sense Ride 5 along with the Ultra Glide 2 and the Pulsar Trail Pro 2 - all in my normal US 9.5. The Sense Ride 5 was immediately, visually, noticeably narrow and low volume up front. Trying them on confirmed this - there was no way I could run in a 9.5, whereas the other 2 shoes were just fine. Luckily I was able to exchange it for a US 10. The 10 works well for my foot - there’s no issue in forefoot width.
It’s the taper at the very front plus the low volume over the top that causes the tightness at the toes at true-to-size.
[Very difficult to use the lace garage]
The quick laces extend pretty far down into the toebox, so I’m able to get nice solid tension throughout the foot. One issue is that of the 3 shoes I received, as well as any other quicklace shoe I can remember - the lace garage extends really far down the tongue. When laced up, it’s covered by 2 rows of laces, so it’s difficult to have to pull it up while you’re lacing and stuff the laces in. I don’t understand how this keeps being a recurring issue when quicklaces have been used for so long.
Other than the fit and sizing, there are 2 big impressions when first trying on the shoe. 1. The forefoot feel is very thin, and 2. The flex point of the shoe is very far forward - pretty much ahead of the ball of the foot and under the front of the toes. As a forefoot striker, I’m not optimistic about the very thin-feeling forefoot, especially in combination with the high-ish 8mm drop. Also, with the flex point being so far forward, it really seems to accentuate the thinness and flatness of the area under the balls of the feet. We’ll have to see on the run.
Jeff V: Out of the box, the SR5 seems beefier than the SR4 at first glance and especially when putting them on. They feel more maximal underfoot and perhaps a touch softer in the heel, noting the elastomer heel insert of the 3 and 4 is now gone.
The upper feels a little less flexible, with more padding around the heel collar, but I think some of that is due to the fact that I have worn the SR4 a lot and are more broken in (but I still think that the SR5 upper is more stiff out of the box). This stiffness however has not been a problem on the run and if anything, makes them more secure fitting and adds to their stable feel in technical terrain.
Fit is true to size, though there is a noticeable difference in the toe box, where the SR5 is a bit less roomy in both width and height. While I did not have the sizing issue that Mike had, I do notice when wearing side by side with the 4, the 5 is just a touch bit shorter in the toe which could be a factor if you are right on the line, as Mike seems to be.
Performance on the trail is excellent, as I have pushed the SR5 fairly hard on technical terrain and find security and stability to be rock solid when hopping rocks, sidehilling or pushing straight down the fall line.
John: My last run in the Sense Ride was version 2. The SR5 is definitely a more substantial shoe now, with a more cushioned underfoot feel and a softer heel but not overly so. The upper is less flexible and has more padding around the heel collar, but this does not make the shoe uncomfortable. The fit is true to size, but the toe box seems slightly narrower than what I remember. With a slightly narrow foot, I like that for an improved foothold.
The SR5 performs really well on varied technical terrain as a stable and reliably secure shoe to take in and out of rocky and messy places. The upper construction is comfortable and the mesh provides breathability. I prefer a thinner forefoot, especially for a technical shoe, and in contrast to Mike I appreciated the enhanced ground feel of the SR5. The padded tongue feels a little more exaggerated in size compared to other Salomon’s, leaving more room to pad the upper front ankle.
Renee: My first Sense Ride, and I liked it. Not to repeat the others, but I had a similar experience with fit. The Martina LTD edition is unisex sizing only. My men’s 7/women’s 8 feels long, but the toebox is narrow and shallow and the sizing worked well for me. I initially thought the toebox would be too shallow, especially when I pulled the lacing tight and the material bunched. That said, I had a 4.5-hour trail run in them with no issues.
Like Mike, I struggled to tuck the lacing into the garage.
Midsole
Mike P: The midsole now switches to Salomon’s new Energy Foam, essentially a re naming of Energy Surge foam, an EVA /Olefin polymer block blend but now without the heel elastomer Optivibe insert of v3 and v4.
I haven’t run in a Sense Ride since V2, so I have to leave it to Jeff to compare differences in foam. But I do have a pair of V4 GTX which I use as an everyday shoe in cold/wet weather. I’ve run them only once or twice - not enough to get a real feel for them. Also being a GTX version, the upper can have an effect on the feel and ride of the shoe.
As far as the V4 Optivibe foam compares to the new Energy Foam, I don’t notice a drastic difference. Perhaps they’re a little bit softer in the heel due to eliminating the insert, but it’s hard for me to compare the foams themselves as V5 just feels so extremely thin up front. I will say that for my V4 GTX - while the foam does still lean on the firm side, they still feel noticeably more cushioned than V5 for my midfoot/forefoot strike.
[Red insole is my V4 Ortholite insole. The black one is the V5 insole which seems like regular EVA foam]
Also of note - My Sense Ride 5’s had an Ortholite tag attached to them. But it doesn’t seem to be an Ortholite insole inside (at least not one of the regular open cell foam ones that I’m accustomed to). It seems to be a standard, thin foam insole. I’m pretty sure this insole change also contributes to the thinner, far less cushioned feel under the forefoot.
Jeff V: The midsole has gained 4 mm of cushioning and lost the Optivibe insert, which, combined with the new insole, provides a softer, better cushioned ride overall. Previously in the SR4, I found cushioning to be firm, but never harsh. That said, I really found myself preferring the SR4 for a casual shoe because I just love their overall comfort, step in ease (basically walk into them and snug up on the go). Now with the SR5, I find that with the added cushion and protection, they feel much more protective and substantial underfoot for longer distances and rough, technical trails.
While I still do not consider the SR5 to be a quick, responsive speed demon, I have found that when I am feeling good, they can rise to the occasion and perform. I had one particularly fast technical (rocky) downhill, perhaps my fastest time on that 1.3 mile/1,300 vert drop segment in several years in the SR5. I think much of this was due to the improvement in cushion/protection, upper security/stability and improved traction.
John: Jeff points out a lot of what I noticed. The SR5 has a soft and well cushioned midsole thanks to that 4mm of additional cushioning. Moreover, the SR5 is protective and boasts a comfortable cushioned underfoot that would do well on longer technical outings.
I love ascending steep trails in the SR5 thanks to the agility and ground feel. Even though there is more cushion, it doesn’t take away from the performance and stability required for faster technical ascents.
Also, like Jeff, this shoe can bomb downhill and I’m okay with the added weight compared to other race lightweight shoes because it keeps the soreness and fatigue at bay.
Outsole
Mike P: There is some change to the outsole in V5. The majority of the lugs under the forefoot have been combined in a “double diamond” style.
Lug depth remains the same at 3.5mm. The Contagrip rubber grips well and also gives good traction in loose dirt and sand. I got to test in wet sand and they performed well, but I suspect they may track mud if it was more of a sticky, dirt mix.
[V5 - left, V4 - right]
The rubber formula feels similar and is likely the same as in Ultra Glide 2 which I am concurrently testing. One thing to mention is that the shoe overall feels a bit “flat” underfoot. This seems to hurt traction a bit as the shoe doesn’t contour well over uneven ground. In the picture above - notice the lack of front outsole cutouts which were in V4. Perhaps the lack of outsole cutouts contributes to the flatter, stiffer feel of V4.
Jeff V: Mike sums up the outsole well. While not drastically different, I have found that there is a notable improvement here in SR5 with the modified design/configuration, such that they have better hold in more loose dirt or off trail type situations. I have found grip to be OK in the wet, but with the low 3.5mm lugs, they struggle a bit in the snow, slush or hard packed icy snow where I took a few slip/slides that I had wrongly predicted they would hold a little better. Overall though, I think the outsole is great for moderate terrain, door to trail and leaning toward the dry (not snowy/icy) end of the spectrum.
John: Mike has a good point about the outsole. I would err to say there’s nothing super unique about it other than the fact that it works well on a variety of surfaces - loose, wet, muddy, some icy, rock - so as most Salomon outsoles do. The lugs are low to mid deep and well-spaced, which helps to grip the ground and prevent slipping. Like Jeff, I find these great for moderate terrain and door-to-trail, and I find myself enjoying them on a quick lap up Mt. Sanitas in Boulder where terrain can vary from dry dirt to low level scrambling.
Renee: I’m in agreement with everyone else. The 3.5 mm lugs are good for a mix of terrain. During hill repeats on clumpy gravel, I didn’t have the best grip, but on dry dirt, the lugs are perfect.
Ride
Mike P: If you’ve run in previous Sense Ride versions, I’m sure you’re aware of the general characteristics of the model. Salomon should be credited for maintaining the feel & character of the shoe over different iterations. They don’t stray from the Sense Ride formula, which is a good thing - if you’re a fan.
So - lots of ground feel, some level of protection (Profeel flexible protection plate), high-ish 8mm drop w/ more cushion in the heel. The 8mm drop is apparent - I do notice my heel being elevated, which is generally not something I prefer in a trail shoe. Again, if you’re a fan of the model, you likely appreciate and favor the high drop.
I found the ride to be a bit less agile than I’d expect for a shoe with so much ground feel. The forefoot feels flat under the ball of the foot with not too much lateral flexibility.
As mentioned earlier - the flex point is very far forward - really at the toes. V4 (at least my GTX version) has a more gradual flex from the ball of the foot through the toes. So that factor also contributes to the flat-feeling ride.
That sort of flat feeling continues through the rear of the shoe. Aside from a bit of soft feeling in the heel on descents, I generally find them a bit stiff on level ground. For me this limits their technical range as well. I find a lack of mobility in my ankles which makes me uncomfortable on rocky and uneven surfaces. For me they are limited to moderate technicality, but perhaps they could handle more - if you’re comfortable with the feel of the shoe.
Jeff V: I find the SR5 to strike a good balance between ground feel and protection, as well as improved cushion over the previous versions. While I notice ground feel/flex when flexing forward at the toe while I am walking on smooth surfaces and paying attention to it, I do not think about it or even notice any issues when running on the trail.
The ride in my opinion is smooth, secure, stable, predictable and well protected. I think the outsole limits the SR5 to favor more moderate to less technical terrain and door to trail, however I have found them to be surprisingly good on technical descents. As I mentioned before, the SR5 is no speedster, but I think they can hold up for a while when pushed.
John: Like Jeff, I think the SR5 provides a good balance between ground feel and cushioning, as I can feel the ground beneath my feet but it's not too much cushioning that it feels like I'm walking on a cloud. Jeff uses all of the adjectives I would include when describing the ride: smooth, secure, stable, predictable, and well-protected. I feel confident running on a variety of terrain, including moderate to less technical trails. Although the SR5 is not the fastest shoe on the market, I think they are worthy for a wide array of running. I've been able to run long distances in them without any discomfort.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Mike P: Salomon’s Sense Ride model is not my type of shoe. I put a lot of miles in V2 years ago, but over time I found its thin forefoot to be problematic, especially on rockier East Coast terrain. Also, I do prefer a more level drop, or at least a shoe that doesn’t “feel” or ride like a high drop. Unfortunately for me, the thin forefoot seems to be exacerbated in this version, which also makes the 8mm drop more noticeable.
It’s a decent all-around shoe, but I think it’s limited in technical terrain, and in my opinion, there are better options out there. For me it’s a miss.
Mike P’s Score: 7.75 / 10
Ride: 7 - Really not much distinguishing
Fit: 8 - TIght and low volume up front at TTS, but still secure at ½ size up
Value: 7 - There are better value options out there
Style: 9 - I love a clean light colored trail shoe
Traction: 9 - Solid grip and traction for most trails
Rock Protection: 7.5 - There’s a thin plate to blunt sharp stuff, but very thin under forefoot
Smiles 😊😊😊
Jeff V: I have run in every version of the Sense Ride and have always appreciated the model because of the level of performance to value ratio. I still feel that way somewhat, despite the jump in price from $120 to $140.
While the SR5 has gone up in price, it now has better cushioning, better protection, better foothold and slightly better traction, while even shedding a few grams (losing 4 grams in my US Men’s 10).
I find the SR5 to be a great door to trail option and a good every day trainer for just about any terrain, though not necessarily ideal for prolonged use on very rough, technical mountain terrain (although it can still handle that fine in small doses, just not all day). Quality and durability are thus far proving to be top notch. I would recommend the SR5 for door to trail, an all arounder daily trainer and a great shoe for travel (can handle about anything when you get there, is easy on/off for the airport, is comfortable and has a good look to it).
Jeff V’s Score: 9 /10
Ride: 8.5 - Not a lively or exciting ride, but is solidly predictable and can get up and go when pushed
Fit: 9.5 - Fits my low volume fit really well, but is a bit more performance oriented than previous versions which some may find issue with. Some might also find a touch short as Mike noted, but true to size works for me.
Value: 9 - I used to score higher here, but the bump to $140 is a bit of a hit and then one must consider the competition at ~$140 a bit closer.
Style: 9 - the seafoam green colorway has grown on me, classy and stylish I think and the other colorways are at least as good, if not better.
Traction: 9 - Solid grip and traction for most trails.
Rock Protection: 9 - While a bit flexible, I have had no trouble with rock protection, even on hard rocky tech descents.
😊😊😊😊
Renee: I have a good fit with the Sense Ride 5 lacing system: secure in the heel/midfoot and just enough room in the toebox. I couldn’t easily tuck the laces in the garage though.
While I don’t often like 8mm trail shoes, I had good ankle rotation in SR5 and the ride worked well on my non-mountain terrain single track trails. The shoe is heavy and the midsole is firm, so it works best only in a particular type of terrain for me. It’s not my top choice for gravel/dirt roads (too heavy), but it works great on dry dirt trails with a decent amount of ups, downs, and turns.
I’d suggest the SR5 for narrow footed runners who frequent moderate trails or roads, who like ground feel, and who don’t need a soft cushion underfoot. I also think the Martina LTD edition is a good looking shoe!
Renee’s Score: 8.9/10 (-.75 heavy, .-35 limited to specific terrain)
😊😊😊😊
John: I think the Sense Ride 5 is my favorite shoe of 2023 so far. It may be because I’m a big door-to-trail fan and the shoe covers all of my needs as a stable, reasonably cushioned, good ground feel, and all-terrain shoe. Moreover, the fit on my slightly narrow foot is secure and really comfortable. While this shoe is probably not race worthy and you probably won’t see it atop the podium, it is a high performing choice with decent cushion and great ground feel on the full spectrum of terrain. Without a doubt, this is my shoe choice for an everyday long or short run in the trails and on the road to get there.
John’s Score: 9.5 / 10
Ride: 9.5 (stable, smooth, and great at uphills)
Fit: 9.75 (nearly no break in period for me and my slightly narrow width foot fits perfectly)
Value: 9.5 (I haven’t tested durability, but this is a do everything shoe in my collection)
Style: 10 (I’m here for Salomon bringing the white with yellow + red accent)
Traction: 9 (Solid Salomon tried and true traction)
Rock Protection: 9 (decent protection with great ground feel)
Smiles 😊😊😊😊😊
9 Comparisons
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
Salomon Sense Ride 4 (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0 - GTX): Compared a lot throughout the review. Sizing wise they are similar, both at ½ size up for me. V5 feels narrower at the toes and also shallower in the toebox. V4 has a more even longer flex up front, while V5 feels flat under the forefoot with the flex point far forward at the toes. For me V4 feels a bit smoother, while V5 is a bit stiffer and more rigid. I prefer V4.
Jeff V: Compared throughout, V5 has more cushion, better traction, better foothold and better protection and is even a bit lighter, but those with wider feet or prefer more room might have trouble with the toe box being a bit more performance fit than the V4. Then there is the $20 increase, which I think will be a factor here when jumping into that price range.
Salomon Ultra Glide 2 (RTR Review soon)
Mike P (9.5 V2): V2 currently in test for me. Plenty of space up front in a US 9.5. So far the Ultra Glide seems to hit its target better than the Sense Ride. Designed with longer distances over moderate terrain in mind - it’s much more cushioned, especially up front, with a softer feeling (and softer) foam. The ride is also much smoother with a seemingly steady roll from the midfoot forward. Not quite as stable or quick as the Sense Ride, I still find them more useful for easy, long, rolling runs.
Jeff V: Agreed with Mike on the above
Salomon Pulsar Pro Trail 2 (RTR Review soon)
Mike P (9.5): V2 also currently in test for me. Again, plenty of space up front in a US 9.5 - it’s very broad across the forefoot in fact. It has a much more streamlined and secure, race-ready upper. The Pro is a faster shoe (with its Energy Blade) than the Sense Ride. Perhaps more unstable in a “sense” due to its being rigid by design. But I feel I can manage the ride better with its very secure fit and also given the broad, comfortable forefoot. Sense Ride feels far less dynamic.
Jeff V: If you want lighter, faster, more responsive and are a toe striker, the Pulsar Pro Trail is your shoe, but if you want more stability, cushion, protection, then go with the SR5.
Peregrine 12 or 13 (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): I would pick either of the last two Peregrine versions over the Sense Ride 5. If you like a firmer ride, try to find V12 at a discount. If you want more of a cushioned feel, go with the new V13. Both Sauconys are more protective as their woven rock plate is more substantial. I also find them both to be more flexible and more generally more fun to run in. All 3 uppers are nice and secure, but the Sauconys are a bit more comfortable.
Jeff V: For most trail running, especially if more technical, I will prefer the Peregrine 12 or the 13, but the SR5 is great for more casual trail running, less technical terrain, door to trail or everyday use.
John: Mike and Jeff both provide solid comparisons of the Peregrine and SR5. Out of preference, I find myself appreciating the subtle protection of the SR5 compared to the woven rock plate of the Peregrine, especially because I have a better sense of the terrain underneath me and yet I still get some decent protection from jabbing rocks/scree.
Renee: The Peregrine 12 or 13 are tough to beat in terms of price and uses. As Mike P. wrote, a discount v12 is a good buy and it has a bit firmer/better ground feel than the v13. While the SR5 might seem better for moderate terrain, I prefer the Peregrine 13 on my rolling gravel roads. Its midsole is softer and the shoe is considerably lighter.
Nike Pegasus Trail 4 (RTR Review)
Jeff V: The SR5 is a comfortable shoe, but nothing IMHO matches the Peg Trail 4 for comfort. The SR5 however has more cushion and substance underfoot and for sure much better traction.
Renee: The Peg Trail 4 is comfortable. Jeff V is right about the SR5 having more substance underfoot. While it is a 8mm drop shoe, it has better control for me as compared to the Peg Trail 4, which feels like a much higher drop in comparison. The SR5 is much heavier.
Brooks Divide 3 (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): The Divide is a spectacular $100 shoe, and that’s where I’d put my money if you’re looking for a budget trail shoe that punches above its weight. It has somewhat of a flat feel underfoot, similar to the Sense Ride and also its cushioning leans firm, but there’s more of it under the forefoot. The Divide’s ride doesn’t give much back to you, but it’s flexible and doesn’t get in the way. The Brooks has a much wider forefoot and overall has more volume, but is slightly less secure. I find them secure enough though for the price - I’d pocket the $40 and go with the Brooks.
Jeff V: Agreed with Mike on all points. I liked the Divide 3 so much and they are such a good retail price I bought pairs for my wife and daughters. They wear them much more than I have and while I think they wear well over time but I do think the SR5 is a bit higher quality and more durable.
Renee: Mike and Jeff said it all. My only issue with the Divide 3 was the fit of the upper. I could not get good security, which is the opposite of the SR5 security. Runners with narrow/low volume feet might prefer the SG5.
Brooks Catamount 2 (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): If you’re getting out of the budget range, and really want a do-it-all trail shoe that’s also race ready - Catamount 2 is my pick of the year so far. Every bit as secure of an upper as the Sense Ride, but a much more comfortable one. It is also more cushioned underfoot, with a dynamic ride, and is still very stable for fast running. Spend the extra $30 and go with the Brooks.
Jeff V: The Catamount 2 is for sure much more lively and performance oriented, a much better race shoe and for sure a competent daily trainer. For more casual running though, I think the SR5 fits the bill.
Hoka Torrent 3 (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5, V2): Probably one of the closest comps. I typically think of the Torrent as feeling a little bit thin under the forefoot, but not in comparison to the Sense Ride. I’m not a fan of the Torrent upper (haven’t run in V3 though) - I’d give the edge in security to the Sense Ride, although the Torrent’s upper feels a bit more plush in comparison. IMO, the Torrent can handle moderate-technical terrain better, and is also more cushioned to keep you comfortable. Although not a Torrent fan myself, I’d pick it over the Sense Ride, unless you really, really prefer the Sense Ride’s ground feel.
Jeff V: The Torrent is more lively, but the upper is not as secure and I don’t think traction is as good as the SR5. I find the SR5 to be more protective and more appropriate for everyday running and versatility.
Hoka Speedgoat 5 (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): These shoes aren’t really in the same class, so I don’t see much overlap here. Speedgoats are max cushion, built for long distances on any terrain. Sense Ride is more of a daily trainer, on the opposite end of the cushion spectrum.
Jeff V: Agreed with Mike, SG is totally max cush, more aggressive terrain and traction is superior, where the SR5 better for less tech, more casual, more versatile and a bit more relaxed.
Samples were provided at no charge for review purposes. RoadTrail Run has affiliate partnerships and may earn commission on products purchased via shopping links in this article. These partnerships do not influence our editorial content. The opinions herein are entirely the authors'.
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
Europe only: use RTR code RTR5ALL for 5% off all products, even sale products
- 10% Savings Every Day* 5% Back in Rewards Cash
- Test Run Shoes 90 Days Worry Free
- Crazy Fast, FREE Shipping
- NONSTOP PERKS
AMAZON
9 comments:
I got the Ultra Glide 2 and the Glide Max TR, the latter just a day ago, but could already run 24 km in them. Today it's a bit rainy over here, unfortunately.
I see little point for people that don't have a history with the Sense Ride series to even bother with it. Even as daily trainer the Ultra Glide 2 leaves it in the dust. While it looks longish it's really wonderfully cushioned and fits perfectly. The Glide Max TR is a road shoe with lugs and it does wonderfully on the road. But even on a moderate forest trail I was really longing for the Ultra Glide 2. I might give the pulsar trail pro 2 a try, the pulsar trail is a wonderful shoe, it just looks a bit dated kinda, unfortunately. I hope the Pro isn't too narrow for me.
Anon-
I agree, if you just want to cruise some miles, i.e. daily training, the Ultra Glide 2 is a better pick and value.
Pulsar Trail Pro 2 definitely won't be narrow in the forefoot/toebox. For me it's the best toebox of any Salomon I've run in. It's a bit more streamlined around the midfoot though.
Ultra Glide has poor forefoot lockdown, high toebox, laces don't come close enough to the forefoot. Important for technical terrain. I really like the feel of the Ultra Glide but until they fix the forefoot its a no go for me. For this reason the Sense Ride would still be my pick for technical terrain.
But I would also say the Genesis seems to be the most underrated and underhyped shoe in their line. All of the cush of the Glide, with better lockdown, better durability in the upper and better outsole.
Just a comment on some typos (I think...). Mike's comments on the outsole are rather confusing, as it seems like some references to v4 are probably for v5?
TH - I think it's correct. Which part is unclear?
How would the Sense Ride 5 compare with the Pulsar Trail (non-pro)?
On paper they seem quite similar, is the Pulsar trail maybe more propulsive with it's plate?
My favourite shoe right now is the Pulsar Trail Pro 2, but I save that for races and it's an ankle breaker in rough terrain if you lose concentration for 0.1 sec.
Bobcat-
I haven't run in the non-pro version, and I'm not sure if others have. I did do 10M in the Pulsar Trail Pro 2 yesterday. The review for that one should be coming up shortly. I'm really liking them, but yes, I'm finding you need to be careful with them.
Back to the non-pro Trail - I would imagine they have more cushion under the forefoot for one thing. Probably a more dynamic ride than the flatter feeling Sense Ride 5. It also has some flavor of an Energy Blade plate, so I would expect similar instability as in the Pro version - maybe somewhat less if the plate is not as stiff? Hard to say without trying them. I would guess they'd be more of an everyday trail shoe, with the SR5 being more technically-oriented.
I've just purchased these Salomon Sense ride for my summer trails... these looks dope, but something is bothering me. as the toe box is very low, and at the beginning of the tongue I feel a little pressure on the flex of the toes. I'm afraid this could rub my toes during long runs.
I have narrow feet and I don't think going up half a size would be good for me. Does anyone here has experience the same thing with this shoe ?does it breaks in with time, or should I send these back and consider another shoe option ?
Thanks in advance for your help !
Francis- Sorry to hear that, seems like you had similar issues to me. I also found the toe box quite shallow, and I think the very far forward flex point near the toes makes that area prone to pressure. I'd also be curious to see what others think about the shoe and if it works better for some.
As usual, I recommend the Catamount 2. It's somewhat in the same class, but much more versatile, better fitting, and overall a much better shoe. Hoka Torrent may also be comparable, and good for narrow feet.
Post a Comment