Article by Mike Postaski and Jeff Valliere
ASICS Metafuji Trail ($250)
Introduction
Mike P: Asics enters the carbon-plated, high-stack superfoamed trail super-shoe fray with a brand new model - the Metafuji Trail. If you’ve happened across the specs already - yes, you read them right. The stack is absolutely MASSIVE - at 44/39mm underfoot, the highest of any trail super shoe that I’m aware of. Yes, they do feel that high.
As an entry in the trail super shoe market, you have the requisite carbon fiber plate - this one being full-length, with no mention of any splits or forks. The midsole is also the requisite mix of superfoams - FF Turbo and FF Blast+, which enables the super low weight (9.5 oz, 270g in my US 10.0). This combination of carbon fiber, superfoams, stack, and weight puts the Metafuji Trail in the arena with the top ultra trail racers on the market today. But the question is - do they really play in the same “arena”?
Pros:
Massive stack - no lack of cushion/protection Mike P/Jeff V
Unparalleled forefoot cushion Mike P/Jeff V
Well fitted, secure upper, nice forefoot width Mike P/Jeff V
Incredible light weight given the huge stack Mike P/Jeff V
Cons:
Unstable under the heel, likely not for heel-strikers Mike P/Jeff V
Not for slower paces Mike P/Jeff V
Big stack requires break-in Mike P/Jeff V
Lace rail setup is not ideal Mike P
Lugs seem to be too spaced out for great traction Mike P
Most comparable shoes
Hoka Tection X 3 Mike P
Adidas TERREX Agravic Speed Ultra Mike P
Nike Ultrafly Trail Mike P
Please find the testers full run bios at the end of the article after Comparisons.
Stats
Estimated Weight: men's 9 oz / 255g US9
Sample Weight: men’s 9.5 oz / 270g US 10.0,
Stack Height: men’s 44mm heel / 39 mm forefoot ( 5mm drop)
measure Platform Width: mm heel / mm midfoot / mm forefoot
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Mike P: The huge slab of foam gives quite a striking first impression, especially with the dynamic graphic design up front. The foam under the forefoot, just by looks alone - seems impressive, and in fact the shoe visually looks almost like it’s reverse-rockered. That’s due to the aforementioned slab of foam under the forefoot, the visual design (thick, yellow FF Turbo-labeled area), plus the slim platform under the heel.
Upon first step-in, the very slim heel is immediately noticeable. In fact - don’t lean back right away without caution! The lateral heel especially is so squishy, that the slightest outer lean may leave you needing to take a backward stabilization step. The effect is quite dramatic, and quite reminiscent of the new Adidas Terrex Speed Ultra. The Speed Ultra’s heel is unstable due to its extreme rocker, whereas with the Asics it's the softness of the foam. Note to self - need to see how this rear setup plays out on the trail.
The fit and feel of the upper is quite positive for me. I knew from experience to go a half size up with Asics for my typical ultra-sizing. For one thing, Asics seems to run a bit small, and normally big toe rockers tend to eat up toe space on toe-off. Forefoot width is good, and even with the (huge) toe rocker, I have enough space in front of the toes in my US 10.0.
The engineered mesh upper is airy and breathable, does not stretch, and holds the foot well. The rear of the shoe is also well done - a ring of standard padding along the interior of the collar works just fine with no rigid spots.
[Nicely designed padding, but yet another short tongue]
A few details about the lacing and tongue.. A lace rail setup is used here, as opposed to eyelets. I’m not a big fan of this, as the laces tend to slide too easily on the rails and you can’t tension specific areas if you need to. The good news is that the upper fits just fine for me, with no need to fiddle around with tension. The tongue has well-placed bolsters which mitigate any lace bite - this is a great design and works perfectly.
On the other hand, again we have another just-on-the-edge-of-being-short tongue. This element of shoe design (across many brands) continues to puzzle me. My lace knot (without using a runner’s loop) hits just at the very top edge of the tongue. I haven’t had an issue yet with the tongue moving too much, but something to be aware of if you’re sensitive to lace bite. You can see the tongue length in the picture below (from Asics own website!).
[Short tongue, as seen even on Asics’ own website - not ideal]
Jeff V: I had similar impressions as Mike, as out of the box, it is evident that this is a unique and impressive shoe, impressive stack and a very racy supershoe looks. I run my road races in the Asics Metaspeed Sky Tokyo and most recently, Sky Paris and they are so so fast, a very special shoe and unique experience to run in a shoe that is so light, super stacked and responsively propulsive. For years, I have often wondered what it would be like to convert that shoe to trail use with a treaded outsole. Would it be effective? A liability? Could I even find a little bit of that magic? The MetaFuji Trail at first glance looks as though my wishes are granted, with a similar stack, shape, look and vibe, but with a nice luggy outsole.
Same as for Mike, upon initial step in, it is apparent that the heel is on the narrow side and the foam is quite soft and I find them to be unstable just walking in the kitchen. I am a heel striker and I was immediately nervous about this, but naively hoped that they will behave differently on the trail.
The upper is very minimal, light, flexible and breathable, to the point where the upper is essentially see through. As Mike describes, the tongue is a bit on the short side, but has not been a problem for me and I find the lacing to be effective and easy to tighten. The heel counter is minimal, but is well padded, secure and effective.
Fit for me is true to size, with a secure heel, midfoot and just enough room in the forefoot for wiggle room over long distances. I worried that this upper would be too minimal to be secure on trails and be a liability and unable to keep your foot sufficiently connected to control such a huge stack. I am impressed though at how well the upper holds and controls this shoe, even in technical terrain.
Midsole & Platform
Mike P: Midsole is a combination of FF Turbo and FF Blast+. Unlike Jeff, I have no experience with Asics road supershoes, so I really have nothing to compare the feeling to. I’ve also never tested anything beyond “regular” Flyte Foam in any of Asics’ shoes, as far as I know.
FF Turbo is Asics’ top of the line super foam. It’s oriented here more under the forefoot with a layer of FF Blast+ below and under the heel. Whatever the combination of foam is under the forefoot - it is quite distinctive, unlike anything I’ve ever felt underfoot in any shoe, road or trail. Initially, and on the first run, the feeling of foam under the ball of the foot is quite bulbous, and I felt, mostly unstable. On subsequent runs, the foam seemed to mold or break in slightly to accommodate my foot, and it felt much better than the first impression. I do think with this much foam, it takes a little time to break in.
Despite that massive stack underfoot, the feeling is still somewhat firm. I take that to be the presence of the full length carbon plate. It seems like the plate tends to firm up the layer of foam that is closest underfoot, with the softer, bouncier layer being below the plate and closer to the ground. It’s somewhat opposite of the feeling from other trail supershoes such as the Tecton X 3 and the Adidas Speed Ultra. Those have a distinctive soft feeling up against the bottom of the foot.
This does give the Metafuji Trail a very fast “feel” - there’s no feeling of losing anything to the “squish” of the superfoam. On the flip side, with the direct underfoot feel being so firm, its comfort over the long haul comes into question. Typically most ultra runners look for cushion - that real “feeling” of softness underfoot for longer distances. The market speaks for itself in that regard with the explosion of superfoams and higher and higher stacks. This midsole/plate setup is not that.
Jeff V: I share all of the same observations as Mike here. The FF Turbo and Blast+ combo is quite effective, with the full length plate giving it a firm feel underfoot and is quite fast when you are running with power and speed on smoother terrain AND you need to be a mid/forefoot striker.
Similar to the Metaspeed Sky Paris road racer, the heel is relatively narrow, but not quite as narrow. I found the heel of the Paris to be quite narrow and it is clearly not a shoe for a heel striker like myself, but I was able to get by OK on the roads with them.
The Metafuji trail was was not as forgiving to my heel strike, in part because I am running them on trails, but also because the foam in the heel feels softer and has less support, such that, upon each landing, I am constantly trying to compensate and correct. This leads to stability issues and fatigue for me. They felt better as I focused on a mid to forefoot landing, but that only helps some and for a short time, as that is not my running style.
I tested on a wide range of terrain, from road to steep technical trail and I actually was not overly troubled by the high stack per se, but I think with a wider, more stable heel, they would actually get through the technical terrain much better. For that much height, you really need more width and a more supportive heel foam.
Outsole
Mike P: My experience with AsicsGrip on the trails has been very positive. I’ve tested varieties of Asics Grip on the Trabuco Max 1, Trabuco, and Fuji Lite. Typically I’ve found their outsoles to be durable, yet also grippy, and typically pretty lugged out.
This outsole is quite different - the lugs are very widely spaced, perhaps with the widest gaps I’ve seen in a trail shoe. Across the forefoot at the widest point, there’s max 4 lugs across, and at points 3 or less! I’m assuming the main factor here is to save weight. So this is clearly not a shoe designed for loose terrain, and most definitely not mud.
I’ll have to generally defer to Jeff V on this one, as I haven’t had sufficient time to test in varied conditions. Generally speaking, the outsole should hold up just fine in most conditions, especially dry, which they have for me. I don’t see the outsole as being the determining factor when deciding whether or not to choose this shoe.
Jeff V: I was surprised at how good the traction is on the Metafuji Trail, where tread is more than adequate for the purpose and range of this shoe. I personally found the limitations of the unstable heel to be the primary limiter, where I would back off long before reaching any traction limits. I even encountered rain on my first run and the tread was sticky on the wet rock and wet dirt, which was confidence inspiring. The spacing of the lugs for me were not an issue, but this is not a shoe I would take on steep, loose off trail terrain and I did not get into any mud (or frozen surfaces this time of year).
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Mike P: Full disclosure- I have to defer to Jeff V for his perspectives on taking these out in more varied and especially more technical terrain. I received these shoes at the tail end of training for a backyard ultra, so I’ve been running slow loops for some time, while also recovering from my last 100M. I plan to test them out further after this upcoming race. I have been able to test on smoother, rolling terrain and also at moderate/fast paces.
My initial test run was a bit concerning, mainly due to perceived instability at the rear of the shoe. Even though the shoe seems so forefoot-focused, I felt that lack of stability on heel touchdown, even on flat terrain. Of course when trail running, your footstrikes tend to run the full spectrum front-to-rear, even in moderate terrain. Throughout that first run, the rear of the shoe felt “squirrely” on each step. I had the feeling in my mind of a car losing traction out of a curve and fish tailing.
My next test runs felt better though as the foam seemed to break in a little bit and adapt around my foot. I felt more stable overall, and much better than that very first run. On level ground, with some twists and turns in fact, I was surprised that the shoe felt relatively stable. I haven’t been able to take them out on really rocky ground yet, but I suspect the high stack would work against you in that terrain. Again, I defer to Jeff V’s analysis at this point.
Due to the factors of the extreme stack height and the soft/narrow rear - I spent much of my test runs wondering what type of race I would actually use these shoes for (they’re clearly not a training shoe). The speed is certainly there - light weight, massive stack, but with a firm feel and great propulsion from the carbon plate. Something like a road marathon-type race/pace event would probably be best. But of course in mostly runnable terrain, so you’d feel comfortable in that high of a stack. In that case, there’s the question of why not just go with a road super shoe and shave even more weight? I’ve definitely seen Vaporflys out on the trail for shorter, “easy trail” races.
Long ultras would seem to be out of the question due to the instability - which is more evident at slower paces - the paces you’d be doing during longer events. In long ultras you can’t be worrying about footstrikes, foot placements etc. for many hours. Ultimately, I’ve yet to figure out the right race scenario where these would be a good pick. Is a supershoe really a supershoe if it doesn’t have a race to run in?
Mike P’s Score: 8.8 / 10
Ride: 8.5 - Bulbous forefoot feel is different. Lack of rear stability can be tricky to handle at anything other than fast paces
Fit: 9.5 - Excellent fit and foothold. Please can we have a longer tongue.. anyone?
Value: 7 - Yes, a legit super shoe, but struggling to find the right race scenario for these
Style: 10 - Love the flashy looks and light color
Traction: 8 - Lugs are somewhat limiting
Rock Protection: 10 - Protection great, but stability a concern if running over rocks
Smiles 😊😊😊😊
Jeff V: I REALLY wanted to like this shoe and there is a lot to like. They are incredibly light, have an impressive midsole foam combination and stack, a minimal, yet secure breathable race ready upper and overall design, even surprisingly good traction. Like many trail supershoes, it takes a very powerful and skilled trail runner, on less technical trails to possibly gain any advantage and in this case, it is best to be a mid to forefoot striker.
When writing my reviews, I do my best to identify and focus on the intended use of a shoe and not be overly critical if it does not hold up to my expectations or requirements for fast running on steep and technical trails. But, I do try to balance that with the fact that this is a trail shoe and in my lifetime of experience on trails, more often than not, one is going to find, whether it is your preference or not, rocks, roots, steep ups/downs, off camber sidehilling, etc…. And a “trail” shoe should be able to handle most, if not all of what you may encounter on trails.
With all that said and taken into consideration, I tried my best to run on mellow to moderate trails or roads and in a way that best suits this shoe, but was still unable to find them to be an advantage. Unlike the Metaspeed Sky, I unfortunately did not find the magic here. I think it is a good start though and I hope the next version can offer a bit more heel stability and support underfoot, which would make them much more effective and versatile for a wider range of runners.
Jeff V’s Score: 8.8 / 10
Ride: 8 - Heel stability due to soft foam and narrowness.
Fit: 9.5 - Very good fit and secure, especially considering minimal nature.
Value: 7 - Expensive and not very versatile, I can’t imagine a scenario on the trails where they will be an advantage.
Style: 10 - Very sharp and fast looking
Traction: 9 - surprisingly good, but the stability of the shoe becomes an issue before traction comes into play.
Rock Protection: 10 - great rock protection underfoot
Smiles 😊😊😊😊
6 Comparisons
Adidas Terrex Agravic Speed Ultra (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0): The Adidas shares a similar narrow mid/rear platform underfoot - with the Adidas “instability” coming from its extreme heel rocker. I find this to be more manageable than the Asics’ instability due to the softness of foam under its heel. The Adidas has a smoother rocker up front - less sudden than the Asics’ more extreme toe spring. Both uppers have similar materials and feel, but I do like the heel area of the Asics upper much better. The Speed Ultra’s heel is its weak point. The ride of the Speed Ultra is smoother, and more stable for real ultra distances, and it’s a legit pick for fast ultras of any length/duration up to moderate terrain.
Asics Trabuco Max 2 (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0): Take the Metafuji Trail, lose the carbon plate, swap in more FF Blast+ instead of FF Turbo, and widen the midfoot/rear platform. Yes, you get a much heavier, cruiser shoe, but a shoe that’s much more generally useful - and at a much lower price. The Max 2 upper is also a bit more relaxed up front - with a similar foot shape, but more relaxed and less of a race-fit snugness. It’s perhaps the ultimate cruiser shoe if you value protection and a stable, smooth ride.
Hoka Tecton X 2 and 3 (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0): Tecton X 3 feels much, much softer underfoot in comparison to the Asics. Hoka puts the softer PEBA layer closer to the foot, and its parallel plates feel a lot less intrusive than the full length Asics plate. It’s much more comfortable underfoot, and I’m sure 99% of runners would prefer that feel for a long ultra. Much more volume in the X 3 upper as well - I’d say the Asics upper fits similarly snug to the prior X 2’s upper. The X 3 is not the most stable shoe - due to the PEBA foam - but it has a wide on-the-ground platform, so you can manage it. With the Asics super-narrow rear, it’s very difficult to manage. Either Tecton is a great and much more versatile trail running/racing shoe.
Nike Ultrafly Trail (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0): The Nike plate feels just as stiff/firm as the Asics plate, but it’s couched in more ZoomX foam closer to the foot, so the feel is softer. The Asics is a much lighter shoe, and is also clearly faster.The Nike’s softness works better for longer stuff. It’s also a more standard, wider shoe, so it is more stable overall. I did not like the weight and stiffness of the Ultrafly, but it’s objectively a more versatile shoe. That said I would go with the Metafuji though in a shorter, pure speed race.
Salomon S/LAB Genesis (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): The S/LAB Genesis is the most agile and technically-oriented of the trail supershoes - although it doesn’t have a carbon plate. I still put it with the super shoes due to its proven results in big races. The Genesis is completely different in that it’s a flexible shoe, with a solid, but not super-stack level of cushion. There’s a flexible plate for protection, but it’s not oriented for propulsion. The Genesis upper is superior in that it gives great, flexible foothold, no hot spots, with lightweight materials and even has a built in gaiter. I find it to be the ultimate versatile trail shoe for training and racing - although I like a bit more cushion/protection and the longer end of the race spectrum. The only edge the Asics gets is in pure speed in runnable terrain.
Saucony Endorphin Edge (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): Specs say the Edge is a “high” stack shoe, but it’s really not in the same class as the main high-stack trail shoe players on the market now. This is really the shoe that calls into question the Metafuji Trail’s existence. If you’re going to run a shorter, fast trail race - there’s not much reason (including price) to choose the Asics over the Edge. The Edge is somewhat wild due to its bouncy foam and plate, but it’s much closer to the ground than the Asics and has a normal, more stable ground platform (relative to the Asics). You get more volume of foam and protection from the Metafuji, but for a shorter race, that’s less of a concern.
Tester Profiles
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 100+ mpw during race buildups. A recent 2:39 road marathoner, his easy running pace ranges from 7:30 - 9:00/mi. From 2022-23 Mike has won the Standhope 100M, IMTUF 100M, and Scout Mountain 100M trail ultras, winning the Scout 50M in 2024. He also set a CR of 123.74M at the Pulse Endurance Runs 24H and completed the Boise Trails Challenge on foot in 3 days 13 hours, besting the previous record by 7 hours. 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, many 13ers and other peaks in Colorado and beyond, plus, he has summited his local Green Mountain over 2,100 times in the past 20 years. He 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 twin 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.
3 comments:
Hi! Thanks for the review!
@mike since the advent of the supershoes, do you keep a place in your rotation for the catamount 3?
Because ride is so great in vectiv pro 2 or tecton X³ that i have some difficulties to return to "classic" shoes. Thanks
That's a really good question and observation. I think it's not the full supershoe package that's making the difference - it's really the new superfoams. They have essentially eliminated the weight penalty that you'd normally get if you want or need more cushion and protection.
Cat 3 is a good example - it's essentially mid-stack in today's market and also on the firmer side, which is really noticeable compared to all the soft superfoams that have come out. That kind of appeal is becoming more of a niche segment.
Personally, I haven't raced my Cat 3's yet, partly due to these considerations, but also partly to the fact that I haven't done short/mid distance races recently. For a fast and twisty 50K I still think they'd be a good option, and a better pick than some of the more expensive supershoes, depending on the terrain.
Thanks very much for the answer!!
Post a Comment