Article by Jeff Valliere, Mike Postaksi and Sam Winebaum
Salomon Ultra Glide 2 ($150)
Introduction
The Ultra Glide 2 is Salomon's mid range highly cushioned trail runner focused on daily training on moderate terrain and Ultra distances. . It features a soft and energetic Energy Foam midsole. R.Camber rocker geometry and a new upper.
Pros:
Very comfortable, reasonably secure, roomy ultra focused upper: Sam W./ Jeff V
Broad platform, outsole, and Energy Foam deliver an energetic, soft long distance ride with decent stability: Sam W./ Jeff V Mike P
More longitudinal and front stiffness (a stouter rock plate?) deliver improved front stability, more propulsion, and a more effective R.Camber rocker than in v1 yet also still with a front climbing flex point: Sam W./ Jeff V
Cons:
Voluminous upper may challenge low volume feet. Do not size up: Sam
Not a more narrow technical trails fit for me due to upper volume: Sam
Toebox taper was noticed at true-to-size, but wide version is offered Mike P
Best fit, most efficient for heel strikers (not necessarily a con) Mike P
Stats
Approx. Weight: men's 10.15 oz / 289g (US9) / women's oz / g (US8)
Samples: men’s 10.15 oz / 289g US9, 10.9 oz / 308g US10, 10.2 oz / 288g US 9.5
Ultra Glide 1: men’s 9.7 oz / 275 g (US8.5), 10.5 oz / 297g (US10)
Stack Height: men’s 30 mm heel / 22 mm forefoot ( 8mm drop spec)
$150 Available now and also in wide.
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Jeff V: I really enjoyed running in the first version of the UltraGlide, excited that Salomon had finally released a shoe that is more geared for longer distances with more cushioning that is overall softer and more comfortable. The UltraGlide 2 out of the box feels very reminiscent of the original, but feels a touch heavier and the upper a bit more sturdy. The upper has indeed been refined such that it feels a bit more stiff at first, but became more flexible after several runs in them.
Fit is true to size and the length is the same as the first version, but the upper has been dialed in to be a bit more precise. I wouldn’t say that foothold was bad on the first version, but it was just enough more voluminous that I had to really yank the quick laces to achieve a snug enough fit for technical terrain. In doing so, the upper lace grommets would dig into my foot and I would have to back off the lace tension, thus not getting as good of foothold as I prefer for technical terrain. With the UG 2 however, with the excess room being a bit more dialed in, I do not need to snug the laces as much and no longer have to contend with any pressure points.
The heel counter is constructed very similarly, as is the padding of the collar and tongue.
The toe bumper is ever so slightly different in look, but is effectively the same.
Overlays are a bit more plentiful and substantial over the midfoot, contributing to the improved foothold.
The mesh is comparably breathable and while I have not yet run in temps over 70 F, I think the UG2 will be adequately ventilated on hot days.
I am impressed overall with fit, foothold and comfort, having put in up to 6 hours in them and my feet felt fresh and comfortable the entire time. Foothold is excellent in technical terrain and I had no trepidation at any speed, no matter how rough.
Sam: Clearly the big room and more volume shoe in the Salomon trail range, the Ultra Glide 2 basically appears to have the same volume as v1 but has a slightly more secure fit. I think the more secure fit and related more stable ride has as much to do with changes to the underfoot platform as it does to the upper changes with its more extensive overlays that reach down as opposed to along the length of the shoe as shown below.
The UG2 is clearly more torsionally stiff with a slightly firmer flex which helps stabilize the foot in the roomy upper. More in midsole/outsole of what I think Salomon did
No one will mistake this for the super snug precise Salomon uppers of old or the Matryx uppers such as in the Pulsar Trail 2 Pro or S/Lab Genesis. Comfy and soft. it is more than adequately supportive for me for moderate trails and road use with a broad toe box and plenty of overall room for foot swelling.
My sample is a half size up from my usual as that is what Salomon had available. I would sure go true to size here, unlike the more precise fitting Sense Ride 5 and Pulsar Trail 2 Pro where at a half size up (again samples provided) hold is superior if not as roomy.
Mike P: My first impression when trying on the Ultra Glide 2 was that it was noticeably softer than any Salomon trail shoe that I’ve run in the past. (I did not try V1, so I’ll leave all comparisons to Sam and Jeff V). I was concurrently testing the Sense Ride 5, and there is a stark difference in cushion and softness - especially under the forefoot.
Fit-wise, they feel ok at true-to-size, with a slight taper towards the front of the toebox (although not as much as the taper in the Sense Ride 5). I didn’t find this problematic on any of my runs - up to the 1.5 - 2 hour range. But If I wanted to take them out to a true “Ultra” distance, I’d likely go ½ size up or try out the wide version. There’s enough width across the forefoot - no issues there. But at TTS, I detect some big toe & pinky toe pressure due to the slight taper.
[Comfort-oriented ankle/heel collar]
With a wide lace throat & nice, soft, padded tongue - the Quicklace is able to secure the foot very well. Sometimes with other Quicklaces, I’m not able to get enough lockdown without introducing too much pressure over the top of the foot - mainly across the top eyelets. Not so with the Ultra Glide 2 - I’m able to easily get a secure & comfortable fit.
Midsole
Jeff V: The midsole is the same as the previous version, featuring a dual density Energy Foam (just a name change from prior Energy Surge) midsole that has a top layer that is a bit firmer than the lower layer, sandwiching the softer material between the firm top layer and outsole, providing excellent response, a light, lively feel and an energetic return.
This midsole foam stands in stark contrast to the more dense midsoles I am accustomed to in many other Salomon models, such as The Energy Cell+ in S/Lab Ultra. I find the Energy Foam here (renamed from Energy Surge of last few years but the same foam as in v1) to be much more forgiving, with less pounding than Energy Cell+. It is more suitable for longer days, distances and fast sustained downhills. Salomon tells us it is a blend of Olefin and EVA, as Optivibe was, but with a greater proportion of Olefin in the mix. While soft feeling, cushioned and forgiving, the midsole is supportive and predictable which, when combined with the wider platform, provides excellent stability.
In place of the customary ProFeel film, rock protection is provided by a denser (than Energy Foam) foam insert. The foam insert does a great job dulling impact on pointy rocks and such, while retaining great flexibility and ground feel, combined with the maximal cushion. I do however get the occasional zinger in the heel despite the deep cushion.
While the midsole is the same, I do notice a bit of a difference in that the more refined upper and reconfigured outsole slightly altering the ride and reducing flexibility some.
Sam: Deep relatively soft cushion here with a pleasing energetic rebound. With a 32/26 stack height and the relatively broad platform there is plenty of underfoot stability, protection and cushion for long days on more moderate trails and also roads where they were excellent and especially so on steep downhills. The platform is definitely torsionally stiffer than v1’s where the broad upper and twisting of the foot in it made more technical trails use limited for me. It retains a nice easy front climbing flex point and one longer and a bit easier to roll than the Sense Ride 5’s or Pulsar Trail 2 Pros. Compared to the Ultra Glide 1 the flex is a bit stiffer and this is a good thing as it makes the R.Camber rocker more noticeable and effective.
Mike P: Sam and Jeff V. cover the technical details of the midsole. I’ll just reiterate that it feels noticeably cushier than other Salomons I’ve run in the past. The 8mm drop does feel pretty noticeable to me - my heel definitely feels elevated. There’s full support underfoot through the midfoot, so I can see why they named the shoe “Glide”.
I find a smooth easy flex from the midfoot through the ball of the foot through the toes. There is no distinct or noticeable flex point. In comparison, the Sense Ride 5 which distinctly flexes at the toes. For me, the Ultra Glide 2’s smooth flex makes it ideal for cruising along on easy-moderate grades.
Outsole
Jeff V: If the improved fit of the upper was not enough to convince you, the improvements to the outsole should be reason enough to be more excited about the 2nd iteration of the UltraGlide. I noticed an accelerated rate of treadwear for the first version that was very concerning, but Salomon has reconfigured their rubber compound for the 2nd version to be even more sticky and much more durable. With approximately 50 miles on both the original version and the 2nd version, the lugs on the original are notably worn, appearing as though they have triple the mileage, where the 2nd version looks nearly new with no real noticeable wear.
The lug shape, pattern and depth are all the same as the previous version. The outsole gets surprisingly good grip on a wide variety of surfaces and the new rubber makes them even more sticky, so great on rock, slab and in the wet.
Sam: A fine multi purpose outsole here. The front cut throughs to the midsole help deliver that nice easy front flex.
Mike P: Salomon’s standard Contagrip / chevron pattern is used here. I heard about durability issues with V1, but like Jeff, I’ve barely noticed any wear, even at the tips of the chevrons. It seems like that issue has been addressed.
I found great traction in loose dirt and sand, as well as mixed wet dirt/sand conditions. Contagrip typically is a great all-around formula, versatile for most terrain. You’d likely be more limited in terms of terrain by the nature of the shoe itself (moderate cruiser) than the outsole.
Ride
Jeff V: The UltraGlide 2 provides a very smooth, compliant, comfortable and enjoyable ride, more than any Salomon I have run in to date and rivals just about any trail shoe I have run. The sum of all its parts, from the new and improved ContaGrip outsole, integrating with the Energy Foam midsole and the flexible, yet now more refined upper, all integrate together very well.
The UltraGlide 2 is flexible, yet protective, well cushioned and very soft, though not at all mushy, unpredictable, or unstable. Response is excellent, with a very welcome and noticeable energy return on uphills, flats and downhills. On long downhills in particular, the UltraGlide really shines, just eating up the impact.
Sam: I agree with Jeff that the ride is the most enjoyable in a Salomon trail shoe to date. Soft, nicely rebounding, stable and all around friendly. There are subtle but noticeable improvements in the flow of the shoe due to its getting a bit stiffer all around. I do think the upper volume contributes to less overall stability than the platform can now deliver as on our rocky rooty New England trails I was still swimming around a bit more than I like at midfoot, affecting stability and confidence which I do not think is entirely due to my sample being a half size up from my normal. On smoother terrain, snow, and road the ride was a delight with the Energy Foam well named!
Mike P: The sweet spot for the ride is easy miles at moderate paces over easy/moderate terrain. Landing squarely on the midfoot produces a smooth, easy roll forward which feels quite efficient. The shoe’s weight is also relatively low (for the stack height), which helps with the impression of efficiency.
I did notice big, soft, cushy heel landings when I took the Ultra Glide 2 down some steeper descents. On more moderate grades and rollers, the heel cushion is also noticed, although the shoe still feels balanced and not back-weighted as some other higher drop shoes can tend to be.
I would say the Ultra Glide 2 would work best for heel strikers, or rear/midfoot strikers. With that landing/stride pattern, you get the most from the heel cushion and also the full effect of the smooth easy flex through each footstrike. As more of a front/midfoot striker myself, the ride still felt good, but it just seemed like I wasn’t getting the full effect of the “Glide” design.
One other detail I noticed was that the forefoot platform felt a bit narrow to me. Perhaps this is one of the reasons I feel the shoe is more ideal for heel-strikers. It just feels like a few mm’s of ground platform width under the forefoot would open up the range of the shoe into more moderate/moderate+ terrain. A wide version is also offered, but I’m not sure if only the upper itself is wider, or if the ground platform is wider as well.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Jeff V: I would recommend the UltraGlide 2 for just about any trail running outside of the most steep/technical trails as it is not necessarily designed for off trail high mountain terrain, but they can handle short periods of technical terrain where I found that they performed quite well. The improved fitting secure upper and more durable, sticky outsole helps add to their versatility over the previous version.
I find their sweet spot to be moderate to less technical trails, but I have also used them on technical rocky trails, talus hopping, etc….While this is not their intended terrain, they have provided adequate stability, security, protection and traction, so they have proved quite versatile.
Going forward, I will use the UltraGlide 2 as a daily trainer on my normal technical trails in Boulder, for door to trail, or if I was going to spend all day on my feet running, the UltraGlide 2 will be a top pick.
Jeff V’s Score: 9.6/10
Ride: 9.5 Fit: 9.5 Value: 9.5 Style: 9 Traction: 9.5 Rock Protection: 9.5
😊😊😊😊😊
Sam: The Ultra Glide 2 tunes up with a bit more upper security, a still easy going rebounding ride with a bit more pop and rocker action and with all around comfort and smiles. This is not the aggressive, snug fitting Salomon of old but a modern all round cruiser (and for those going long a clear Ultra choice) that for me is a near ideal door to trail shoe assuming the trails are not too technical. While the upper is super comfortable it just isn’t quite as locked down as I would prefer. It has too much midfoot volume and Ultra swelling feet give for my lowish volume feet and my shorter trail runs when combined with the stable if soft and friendly underfoot platform.
Sam’s Score: 9.19 /10
Ride: 9.3 Fit: 8.7 Value: 9.4 Style: 9.3 Traction: 9.4 Rock Protection: 9.4
😊😊😊😊
Mike P: If you haven’t run in the Ultra Glide yet, it’s definitely a departure from the type of trail shoe you’d expect from Salomon. A bit more forgiving underfoot, more comfort focused, and a bit less mountain & technical trails oriented. As Sam describes - it’s a solid all arounder, easy to rack up miles and training hours in.
Mike P’s Score: 9 / 10
Ride: 9 - Smooth & easy
Fit: 9 - Possible narrow toebox at TTS, but wide version or ½ size up should be no problem
Value: 9 - Quality construction and updated outsole rubber should handle lots of miles
Style: 9 - Love a light colored shoe to get trail-dirty
Traction: 9 - Grips and wears well
Rock Protection: 9 - Enough for intended terrain
Smiles 😊😊😊😊😊
10 Comparisons
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
Salomon Ultra Glide 1 vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2 (RTR Review)
Jeff V: The most notable differences are the improved upper with a more dialed in fit and an outsole that is more sticky and durable, though the 2 has gained (an unnoticeable) 11 grams.
Sam: A bit more dialed in upper, a bit stiffer, more stable and rockered the UltraGlide 2 has subtle improvements. Both versions are true to size for me
Salomon Pulsar Trail Pro 2 vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2 (RTR Review soon)
Jeff V: Despite a similar stack height, the UG2 feels much more cushioned, compliant and comfortable, whereas the TPU plated Pulsar Trail Pro 2 is lighter, narrower, more responsive and nimble. I would pick the UG2 for most runs, but the Pulsar for faster running over shorter distances.
Sam: Agree with Jeff. I would also note the Trail Pro has a considerably more secure performance oriented upper with an equally roomy toe box. It is considerably stiffer due to its plate and a very firm layer of foam just above the outsole as well as being 15mm narrower underfoot at the heel and 10mm narrower at midfoot, which as a result makes it a bit tippier underfoot than the UltraGlide 2 even if its upper is clearly more secure and superior. I was a half size up in my Trail Pro 2 sample and fine whereas I would for sure go true to size in the Ultra Glide
Mike P (9.5): Agree with Jeff regarding the character of the shoes. I’ll add that the PTP2 is wider in the forefoot with less taper - it feels great and works better for my foot shape. I’m still working out how much distance they can handle though. They do feel stiff, but with varied terrain, I think it shouldn’t be an issue. The Ultra Glide 2 is surely better for pure cruising on mellower stuff.Salomon Sense Ride 5 vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2 (RTR Review)
Sam: The Sense Ride 5 while it has a similar heel stack height is a 6mm drop shoe so is less cushioned upfront with the toe off thin in feel if more agile than the UG 2. Its Energy Foam is a bit firmer, its geometry flatter (no R.Camber) and its upper more precise with less volume and a lower toe box. It can be thought of as a more technical trails compliment to the Ultra Glide 2. I was a half size up in Sense Ride 5 and just fine there and true to size in the Ultra Glide 2.
Mike P (10.0): The Sense Ride 5 is much thinner under the forefoot and rides much flatter. It has a distinctive flex point at the toes, whereas as the UG2 has a smoother, even flex. The toebox is also tighter in the Sense Ride 5 - I actually had to size up to a 10, whereas 9.5 works for me in the UG2. As I don’t like the thin forefoot feel of the SR5, I get much more usage out of the UG2. I think it’s a much better shoe overall, unless you prefer the ground feel that the SR5 gives.
Salomon S/Lab Ultra 3 vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2 (RTR Review)
Jeff V: The Ultra 3, despite the name, for me would not work for an ultra as the UG2 would. The UG2 is much more plush, well cushioned, better protected and I think now has a superior outsole with better grip and more durability. The Ultra 3 is firmer and comparatively has somewhat of a dull and uninspiring ride.
Sam: I would pick the Ultra 3 any day for more technical terrain and the UltraGlide 2 for longer distances on more mellow terrain. That said Courtney Dewalter and Francois d’ Haene both rock the Ultra 3 for their ultra exploits. For sure as Jeff says, the Ultra 3 has a duller ride but an impeccably stable and reliable one, far more so than the more fun Ultra Glide 2.My Ultra 3 sample is,as with the Ultra Glide a half size up from my normal and I would stay there whereas with the UltraGlide 2 I would go true to size.
Salomon S/Lab Genesis vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2 (RTR Review)
Sam: Along with the Ultra 3, Salomon’s other elite distance shoe the new Genesis even though appearances might indicate otherwise is the lowest stack height of the current Salomon longer distance shoes with a 30/ 22 stack height and 8mm drop to the UltraGlide 2 6mm, so 2mm less at the heel and 4mm less at the forefoot. It has deeper 4.5 mm lugs to the UG2’s 3.5mm. It weighs 23g less and has a more performance oriented, if also quite roomy at midfoot Matryx upper. My first pair was a half size up and a bit loose, my second is true to size as I would also go with the UG2. Overall I prefer the somewhat more responsive and slightly firmer ride due to its lower stack and thicker outsole as its Energy Foam seems identical in firmness but there is less of it and more outsole.
Hoka Speedgoat vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2(RTR Review)
Jeff V: Both are great shoes, but I would pick the Speedgoat for more rugged mountain terrain due to the superior outsole and more secure fit, where the UG2 would be better for longer distances on less technical terrain.
Mike P (9.5): I don’t quite get along with the Speedgoat line, I always prefer the Mafate Speed line. The Speedgoat is easily more technically oriented than the UG2. The main thing is that it has a much broader platform on the ground, giving it more stability. UG2 has a narrower platform, making it more efficient and smoother in mellow terrain, but a bit tall and unstable when you get into Speedgoat territory.
Saucony Xodus Ultra 1 (RTR Review) Ultra 2 (RTR Review) vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2
Jeff V: The Xodus Ultra is much lighter, more responsive and geared toward performance, but is limited to less technical terrain. I do hear the Xodus Ultra 2 has better foothold.
Sam: Indeed the Ultra 2 has a better foothold than v1 due to changes to its upper including new underlays solving some issues there with v1 and making it more versatile to lead it now also to for more technical trails . At our measured 36mm heel with a 6mm drop, it has considerably more cushion stack than the Ultra Glide 2 on a slightly narrower platform. Its combination of firmer outer EVA/TPU and inner PEBA core also help it get to a weight 28g lower than the Ultra Glide.
Mike P (9.5): (Comparing to Xodus Ultra 2 here). I think the XU2 is a great shoe, and do prefer it over the UG2. For me, the upper feels just as secure as the UG2 - but it has a more stable platform underfoot and handles moderate - technical “real” trails better. I wouldn’t take truly technical terrain at extreme speeds in them, but for must terrain over long ultra distances, they’re great. These shoe are very comparable, but the XU2 feels like it can handle more “trails”. For me, the lower 6mm drop is also more comfortable and less noticeable than the UG2’s 8mm.
Scarpa Spin Infinity (RTR Review) vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2
Jeff V: The Spin Infinity is heavier, but runs lighter and feels similar on the foot. I would say the UG2 has a slightly more accommodating fit, where the Scarpa is a bit more narrow and performance oriented and for technical terrain. The Scarpa also has a superior outsole and overall is a better shoe for technical terrain over longer distances, whereas the UG2 is better for even longer distances with more roomy fit and for less technical terrain.
Sam: For sure the UG2 has a more accommodating fit all around with the Scarpa having an X shaped toe box areas overlay that while delivering far superior front hold makes the fit narrow at the bunions. I agree with Jeff on the best uses of each. I do find the Scarpa a more versatile shoe overall.
Brooks Caldera 6 (RTR Review) vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2
Jeff V: The Caldera 6 feels more cushioned and perhaps better suited for longer distances and while a larger shoe that weighs over a whole ounce more, I found them to run surprisingly light and fast. Caldera 6 is a bit more accommodating in fit, traction is comparable. I would pick the Caldera 6 for longer, faster runs and perhaps the UG2 for slightly more technical terrain.
Sam: Direct competitors, the supercritical midsole of the Brooks delivers a more energetic ride but is a bit hampered by its sheer mass and broad broad platform results in lesser agility in comparison to the Salomon. Both are great door to trail shoes and fine ultra options with the Brooks having a more secure upper. Both true to size.
Mike P (9.5): Fit-wise I had the same feelings about the upper - secure enough at TTS, but perhaps just a touch too much taper at the toes. I noticed some side pressure at the front of the toeboxes of both shoes. I didn’t get along with the Caldera 6 - it was just too much shoe for me. As a lighter runner, I’ve come to the realization that I don’t need that much stack height. Also the extremely wide ground platform was throwing me off and giving me some trouble with foot placements. The UG2 having a narrower platform, feels more runnable to me and less unwieldy out on the trails.
Brooks Catamount 2 (RTR Review) vs. Salomon Ultra Glide 2
Jeff: The Catamount 2 is lighter, faster, more responsive, yet some are using them for 100 miles. Catamount is definitely better for racing, whereas UG2 better for day to day training of any distance.
Sam: Given I don’t do Ultras I would pick the Catamount 2 as it is more nimble, quicker, more stable, has a more secure upper and has a more reactive midsole plate combination. It’s a better all arounder. True to size in both. Our contributor Mike Postaski just won a 24 hour race in his and didn't think about changing shoes.
Mike P (10.0): My favorite shoe right now - Cat 2 as Jeff says, is lighter, faster, and more responsive. I took them for 123 miles over 24 hours, so cushion-wise, there’s enough for lighter weight runners. I know many runners expect a bit more squish underfoot though, so I could see that as a downside for some. As I mentioned in the Ride section - I think the UG2 would do well to add a bit of width to the forefoot platform - similar to how the Cat 2 is set up. It just feels so stable for me, making it so versatile across terrains and distances.
Topo Ultraventure 3 (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0): Explicitly billed as a moderate terrain trail shoe - the Ultraventure 3 is one of the best options out there for logging ultra mileage on easy-moderate terrain. The UG2 perhaps feels just a touch faster than the Topo, but I find the Topo’s wide platform in conjunction with its big toe rocker to be just as smooth on the run. I feel a bit more stable and comfortable in moderate terrain with the Topo. The Topo upper also feels much more comfortable for me - the wider toebox is great and unnoticeable over any duration, whereas as I notice some side pressure at the front of the Salomon toebox. For easy cruising, the Ultraventure 3 is my pick.
Tester Profiles
Sam is the Editor and Founder of Road Trail Run. He is 65 with a 2018 3:40 Boston qualifier. 2022 was Sam’s 50th year of running. He has a decades old 2:28 marathon PR. These days he runs halves in the just sub 1:40 range if he gets lucky,, training 30-40 miles per week mostly at moderate paces on the roads and trails of New Hampshire and Utah be it on the run or nordic skis. He is 5’9” tall and weighs about 164 lbs, if he is not enjoying too many fine New England IPA’s.
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.
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.
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
12 comments:
Great review! I am considering either the speedgoat 5 or the Ultra Glide 2. Which one has better fit and lockdown for rather technical terrain in your opinion? I want the shoe for a 50k race in the Pyrenees (rocky terrain, big downhills, technical sections). I've read several reviews of the SG5 that claim the upper stretches too much and is difficult to get a proper lockdown.
Thanks in advance
(My portion will be added to the review shortly)
Even though I don't personally get along with the Speedgoat, if you're choosing between those two - the SG would be a better pick. I don't think the Ultra Glide is stable enough in that type of very technical terrain.
Perhaps Sam or Jeff V might recommend the S/LAB Ultra 3 or the Genesis instead. I haven't run in either.
50K is kind of short though, if you don't need big cushion, maybe something from VJ - Ultra 2 or even XTRM 2? Another option is the Scott Supertrac varieties - they're designed for Alpine conditions.
I know it's not a long ultra by today's standards, but I am at 1,85 m and 80kg, so I need a bit of cushioning underfoot, otherwise my feet get painful after 5-6 hours of running in that type of terrain. Thanks for the advice though!
Bonjour, je suis aussi dans les hautes Pyrénées. J'ai fait 2 courses de 80km dans nos Pyrénées techniques en ultraglide. Aucun souci pour moi. Je trouve que la hoka speedgoat manque de verrouillage au niveau du talon pour ma part. Après clairement la Genesis apporte une stabilité non négligeable
Anonymous-
Yes that's definitely enough to beat up your feet if very rocky. VJ Ultra 2 does have a rock plate and also a good amount of cushion. Some of the beefier Scott's are protective too, although not as soft as Hokas.
The Nike Zegama compares quite favourably to the UG2.
Superior upper and a bit more fun and bouncy to run in, but the wet grip is of course worse.
Good comp, here's my take-
Zegama has a bit more (dry) trail range than the UG2. With its heavier weight, it still rides like more of a cruiser, although as mentioned, you can take it into a bit more trail type terrain. The UG2 feels more balanced underfoot - I felt the Zegama was quite back-weighted with a lot of heft under the heel. I like the shape of the Zegama's upper better - there's not as much taper at the toes, but the toebox is a little shallow. The UG2's quicklaces give a tighter fit and feel a bit more secure though.
If I had to choose, I'd likely pick the Zegama. The toebox is just a bit more comfortable for me, and it feels a bit more stable under the forefoot with a wider platform.
Please test the GTX version and comment if you would recommend sizing up. Thank you.
I bought this shoe at this review's recommendation, and I have to say I disagree with the review's assessment that this shoe is good for hot weather. I have run in a wide variety of trail running shoes from a variety of brands including Nike, Hoka, Topo, Salomon, Altra, etc, and currently have 6 running shoes in my rotation. The Ultra Glide is the hottest shoe out of all of these, and completely fails in humid and wet conditions (it becomes like a wet bucket, with no water draining out). On dry cool days, it's just fine. Wanted to share this assessment for any readers who may be wondering about hot weather. It is the hottest and least draining trail shoe I've worn so far.
Hi there! I recently bought my first Salomon shoes –the Sense Ride 4– (mainly bc The Asics FujiLyte midsole wont' last over 500km and the Saucony Peregrine will tear its heel appart in amost no time. Oh and also bc they were on sale over the more recent SR5). Having said that, I suspect the SR4 to be the culprits of my recent calves pain due to the mix of a firmer midsole and 8mm drop.
I think the Ultra Glide 2 will suit me just fine (less drop, more plush) but still have two questions floating around I'd be happy if you can make clear for me:
1. I have read the midsole tends to meet its "end of plush" when hard heel striking (long down hills or tech terrain). Haven't noticed that at the store but I'm aware it's not the same that out in the trails...
2. How does this UG2 fit in relation to the SR4? Can I chose the same number or do I have to go maybe half size up?
Thanks so much! :)
1. I don't think there's too much noticeable firmness during descents. If you're running in SR4, it will definitely feel softer. It does have more of a rocker oriented ride, so it's not really the best for tackling very steep descents anyway. Moderate downhill grades should be an easy cruise in the UG 2
2. I'd say sizing is the same between the two, no need to size up. For me the UG2 is very slightly more tapered by the front of the toes then SR4, but lengthwise the same. SR4 has a nice toebox.
***Note- I found the new Sense Ride V5 to be much pointier in the front, and for me, I did need to go up 1/2 size in those. Depends on foot shape though - if you're narrower up front and have no issues with space by the toes, you can still go true to size in those.
Thanks a lot Mike, really appreciate your input. Now I'm confident I'll be doing a right choice then with them UG2. Not a minor issue: wifey sure is gonna get (a little) mad at me when I tell her I'm buying yet another running shoes after after such a short time since the SR4 ;)
Post a Comment