Article by Sam Winebaum, Mike Postaski, and Jeff Valliere
S/Lab Ultra Glide ($250)
Introduction
Sam: Salomon introduced the 2025 S/Lab Ultra Glide at UTMB positioning their most max cushion (41mm heel / 35mm forefoot) to date trail runner as a shoe for long hours on the trail at more moderate paces. Salomon’s goal was to create “run in comfort from mile 1”.
Sam, Mike and Jeff have now put it to the test and share their findings!
It is not so much an elite ultra racer, as S/Lab shoes traditionally have been often specifically inspired by the needs of certain athletes, but is intended as a shoe for those out for 30 to 40 hours during a hundred miler. It follows the similar mid pack focused S/Lab Spectur 2 for road as a state of the art racer/trainer for the not so fast, although some Salomon elites raced it a UTMB.
The geometry is unique and for sure innovative. We have a layer of supercritical Energy Foam+ below the foot as a central core with Energy Foam (as found in the Genesis) surrounding and below This is a softer midsole for sure with great energy return.
The high rear midsole side walls provide stability and are so high Salomon had to mold the outer Energy Foam in two sides/pieces.
They then discovered that the glue joining the 2 sides plus the rocker creates a mild propulsive effect, without any plate which is something I clearly discovered on the run.
The showpiece of the geometry is a new technology called Relieve Sphere. It is made up of concave strategically placed circular elements located at underfoot pressure points front to back.
I found they not only work as intended but also provides ground feel, relief from shock pressures and, a very natural ride but one that had some limits in more technical terrain due to the softness of the foam and constraints they create for outsole lug coverage,
Sitting on a broad platform to help stabilize the soft foam, with a roomy comfort focused fit the upper is made of a combination of a stretch knit toe box mono mesh and knit to the rear and overlays, No Matryx here.
The Ultra Glide weighs a very commendable 10.05 oz / 285g in my US8 /EU 41 1/3 sample.
I am usually a US8.5 with the size down at least in US size here correct for my narrow to medium feet.
The S/Lab Ultra Glide follows in the footsteps and purpose of the lower stack about the same weight Ultra Glide (RTR Review), one of our favorite long run shoes of 2023 with an all new geometry, the dual foams and Relieve Sphere technology.
I received my pair at Salomon’s introduction event on the slopes of Le Brevent where participants ran varying distances on steep terrain with stations presenting the shoe and other 2025 Salomon gear along the way.
My testing so far shows it sits in their ultra lineup as less technical trails focused than the S/Lab Ultra FDH and as a yet more cushioned if not quite as tech trails alternative to the S/Lab Genesis and Genesis. It is also a sensational road shoe as a non plated super trainer with grip for gravel if need be.
Pros:
Remarkably lightweight at about 10.2 oz / 289g (US 9 equivalent) for a max cushion, high stack, broad platform trail shoe Sam/Jeff
Relieve Sphere geometry underfoot provides a pressure free ride and great ground feel Sam/Jeff
Very versatile from more mellow trails to road Sam/Jeff
Smooth and comfortable ride Mike P/Jeff
Effective plateless rocker geometry Sam/Jeff
Comfortable broad fitting upper Sam/Jeff
Relieve Spheres do give a somewhat unique incongruous feel underfoot Mike P/Jeff
Pressure around the ball of the foot near big toe is relieved - perhaps? Mike P
Better than expected performance in technical terrain Jeff
Traction Jeff
Cons:
Furthest forward medial Relieve Sphere‘s compression creates an overly thin toe off on that side Sam
Outsole lug coverage (and front grip) is constrained by Relieve Sphere Sam
Premature wear of front lugs: Sam
Potential achilles rubbing due to high heel collar Mike P
No features jump out at you to justify the price Mike P
This quicklace setup doesn’t seem to be the most secure Mike P
Price - doesn’t feel like a $250 shoe Mike P
Most comparable shoes
Salomon Ultra Glide
La Sportiva Prodigio Pro (2025)
Hoka Mafate Speed
New Balance Fresh Foam More Trail
Merrell MTL Adapt Matryx
Stats
Sample Weight: men’s 10.05 oz / 285g US8, 11.35 oz / 322g US10
Stack Height: men’s 41 mm heel / 35mm forefoot ( 6mm drop)
Platform Width: mm 90 heel / 85 mm midfoot / 115 mm forefoot
$250. Available 2025
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Sam: The upper is a combination of non-stretch mono mesh with minimal knit to the rear and midfoot with increasing amounts of knit and less mono mesh over the top of the toes.
Very elaborate, it appears Salomon has combined two very different materials: a somewhat stretchy knit with a non stretch mono mesh in one continuous knitting process with the softer knit against the foot.
The heel area is semi rigid with support at its sides from the very high rising foam side walls (Active Chassis) which reach almost to the top edge of the collars. These foam walls extend forward seating the foot down into the shoe allowing the upper to be thin and pliable yet supportive at the same time.
The tongue is gusseted its entire length to create a sleeve. Not a leatherette type tongue it is a slightly stretchy, very lightly padded mesh material.
Of course we have Salomon’s Quicklaces with a “garage” which is easy to access,
The toe box area over the toes has the most knit material in the upper and is broad and quite unstructured if a bit low as others note in the review A moderately soft and pliable toe bumper keeps the foot in place and provides front protection.
This toe box is among the broadest and most accommodating of any Salomon I can recall and should accommodate broader higher volume feet and swelling during long runs and races. I think it goes a touch too far in the “comfort” department and could have a bit more structure and front lockdown especially considering the high stack height and soft foam.
It was perfectly fine on moderate trails, at hike paces everywhere and on road but when things got rougher it was a bit shakier.
Understanding the product brief as a shoe for the 30-40 hour 100 mile racer Salomon had to balance many hours of comfort on foot with performance and they did get close. It turns out some Salomon elites also wished for some more front structure and their prototypes have it.
I found the Ultra Glide breathable and debris resistant.
As previously said, the fit is about correct in my test pair in terms of sizing but not shoe marking. I am usually a US8.5 and here the sample is US8 / EU 41 ⅓. The sizing I received ended up correct after some break in.
Mike P: I’ll focus on the fit and sizing aspects first of all - I received my sample in a US 9.5, and I typically go either 9.5-10 depending on the brand/shoe. Straight out of the box, they felt very snug and I was quite worried that I should have gone with a larger 10.0. The toebox felt a little bit squished from side-to-side and also vertical height felt low.
Towards the latter half of my first run and definitely by my second run, they seemed to break in a bit though - perhaps the upper loosened up and also the top layer of Energy Foam+ bedded down a little bit. It became quite comfortable in my US 9.5, so I would suggest going true to size in these. If you are in between sizes, definitely go with your lower size for a more secure fit.
I’ve noticed some comments about them feeling roomy for some, but I just don’t think that is the case. I noticed that the tongue does tend to slide down a bit and bunch up near the lower eyelets. This doesn’t bother me at all, but perhaps could be more of an issue if you have a lower volume foot or choose a larger size.
I found the foothold and security to be decent, but not amazing. Again - the tongue seems to migrate a bit, indicating that the inside of the shoe does not “grab” the foot particularly well. The materials inside are soft and smooth, giving a comfortable feel, and perhaps sacrificing a bit of security. The gussets that Sam mentioned are large - running lengthwise along the sides of the foot and made of a smooth fabric material. Again, it feels nice, but does not deliver the best foot hold.
The rear heel collar is an area of concern for me. To me, it extends unnecessarily high, and angles back forward the achilles. I noticed a bit of a “warm” spot in this area, but no blisters so far. Luckily that area is somewhat soft and there seem to be no hard edges, so hopefully it won’t become an issue down the road. Check out a closer look in my Quick Take video HERE.
Jeff V: Out of the box, I was very impressed with the look of the S/Lab Ultraglide in the red/white colorway, the classic Salomon sporty look. They are quite large looking, with a very generous foam midsole and a quite unique outsole.
Sam sums up the mechanics of the upper very well, so, like Mike, I will focus on fit and my experience with performance. I received my usual size 10 and I find the fit to be true to size, with a secure heel, midfoot, and with a somewhat performance fit in the forefoot, kind of narrow and a low ceiling as Mike notes. While the shoe is maximal and designed for long distances, the lack of extra wiggle room in the toe box would give me pause, even with my somewhat narrow, low volume foot.
The quick laces are effective in achieving a secure lockdown and I was actually surprised and quite impressed with how well my foot stays in place in technical terrain. While this shoe is not necessarily intended for technical terrain and I can think of better shoes for dedicated running in there, if you find yourself in the rough stuff though, the Ultraglide can handle it with confidence.
The upper is very comfortable and I have not found any issues with pressure points, nor do I find the heel collar to be high as Mike has noted, it feels to be a good height for my physiology.
Midsole & Platform
Sam: The midsole has a central core (at the foot top layer of supercritical Energy Foam + with a soft 42A Shore firmness rating. This is the same foam as found in Salomon’s S/Lab Spectur 2 and S/Lab Phantasm 2 road racers
The outer carrier and at the ground bottom layer is Energy Foam with a 45A Shore firmness rating, the same firmness and foam as in the Genesis and S/Lab Genesis and I believe also non S/Lab Ultra Glide.
With its 41mm heel and 35mm forefoot, we have lots of deep, deep yet also energetic cushioning here. This is the “softest” Salomon trail shoe yet for me and by far the most cushioned. It is also among the softest and most deeply cushioned trail shoes that can actually move along on trails I can recall.
To make the big stack of soft foam “functional” for trail running, and to enhance long hours of trail comfort, Salomon incorporates three elements:
The platform is broad at 90 heel / 85 mm midfoot / 115 mm forefoot. When those high sidewalls are also brought into the picture with the 90mm wide heel we have great heel stability here and they were clearly essential to stabilize the rear of the shoe and does so.
Salomon tells us the high sidewalls presented a manufacturing challenge and then an opportunity as the whole bottom carrier which includes them couldn’t be molded in one piece. So it was molded in two sides and glued together down the center.
Salomon tested various versions, some with carbon plates but found that the glue line down the center plus the rocker geometry provided enough stiffness and rolling motion that a plate was not required for the shoe’s purpose and, leaving it out, would save weight. I generally agree but wonder what a thin woven plate might do up front to stabilize and provide a touch more propulsion.
The third key element, and the most innovative are the Relieve Spheres underfoot geometry,
The concave elements are designed to relieve foot pressures at key points and were designed using lab data. They include the toe off area, metatarsals, just ahead of the midfoot arch and heel.
On the run and especially on firm smooth terrain, there is a sensation of pressure relief while on more uneven terrain of a natural ground conforming feel.
Given the huge stack of foam, I am not sure the heel Sphere is really required. The arch and midfoot to metatarsal Spheres are highly effective.
The very front ones are a miss for me as they create an overly thin very front of the shoe compressing too far. I think they could be eliminated or reduced in depth. This would also allow for a more extensive outsole lug coverage up front as steep loose gravel toe offs had more slip than I would like and by increasing contact improve front outsole durability, an issue for me.
Mike P: I really like the feel of the new Energy Foam+ core. Looking at Sam’s component shots - you can see that it covers the entire bottom of the foot, not just the center or one specific area. I find this gives a very consistent feel underfoot - I don’t notice one particular soft area which can sometimes be the case when an insert is located typically under the ball of the foot.
It’s a nice visual marketing touch that they extend a tab of the softer foam to the exterior at the heel so you can really feel the difference there.
Again - the feel underfoot in terms of softness is just consistent - so much so that honestly I have a hard time distinguishing any effect from the Relieve Spheres. I discuss in detail on-the-run on my channel HERE. Perhaps the sensation may vary depending on your foot strike pattern, but for me, the only one I did notice is the one under the ball of the foot ahead of the big toe as Sam did. That spot seems to noticeably compress a bit more, but I’m still not certain if that has any positive effect.
I do sense a vague, incongruous feeling underfoot at times, but only if I really pay attention and focus on it. In fact, I was focused on the general feelings and impressions of the shoe over the first 20 miles, and not until my 3rd run did I really try to focus on the “spheres” underfoot. The fact that I can’t really tell if they are helpful or not - is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Jeff V: I too really like the Energy Foam+ core and find them to be very well cushioned, yet provides good stability and control over varied terrain. I notice the spheres underfoot when I am deliberately trying to detect them on a flat surface, but I do not really notice them when I am on the trail. I do think that they help roll and contour over varied terrain underfoot, aiding in control and stability, as well as traction (addressed below).
At 11.35oz., these shoes are not all that light, but the foam has a light and responsive feel to it and overall the S/Lab UltraGlide feels lighter on the foot than the overall weight would imply. I find that the softer foam is very forgiving on the downhill and really absorbs the impact well, leaving my legs feeling quite fresh. For such a highly stacked shoe, they have a surprisingly good level of flexibility.
Outsole
Sam: Note I received my pair in August 2024 and for final production the outsole rubber may have been modified as my fellow testers do not see the accelerated front lugs wear or the relatively soft ride from the outsole on hard surfaces I found.
The outsole is Salomon’s excellent Contagrip rubber with 4mm lugs. Given the Spheres cavities upfront and at the heel the density of lug coverage is somewhat lighter there than I might prefer but for moderate trail terrain and paces the tradeoff for the Spheres tech, lighter weight and smooth non slappy ride on any firm terrain is worth it.
This flavor of Contragrip appears to be on the soft side which enhances the ride but which so far in my early non-final production pair showed below average wear up front at 40 plus miles of running and hiking on often rough rocky terrain as well as hard smoother surfaces including road. I think the relatively low number of front lugs, given the Spheres, is putting additional pressure on those lugs on toe off.
I would add that at 40 miles the Ultra Glide despite the giant 35mm front stack height has a snappy flex point located where the laces end. Good.
Mike P: The slab - “slab” not S/LAB - of Contagrip rubber underfoot is certainly impressive. In my Quick Take video I ran into a friend who was unimpressed with the rubber coverage on his Speedgoats - and he was quite taken with the full rubber outsole.
At first look, the lugs seem quite spread out with seemingly less on-the-ground coverage. But during my testing, mostly in soft ground conditions, I found traction to be very good. I didn’t notice any loss due to perceived or actual lack of lug coverage. Is it possible that those Relieve Spheres allow the lugs to flex and bite a bit as ground contact is made? This certainly could be the case. The shoe grips much better than I expected.
Sam mentions perhaps some early lug wear due to the isolated nature of individual lugs. I wouldn’t rule this out, but this would likely be dependent on your foot strike pattern and typical outsole wear pattern for most shoes. I would say - take a look at where your typical outsole wear spots would land and decide if lugs in that area look particularly “isolated”? For me it hasn’t been an issue at all. Everything looks fine around the 50 mile mark for me.
Jeff V: I was able to really put traction to the test on varied terrain and conditions and am quite impressed with how well the S/Lab UltraGlide grips in mud, snow, frozen granular, wet rock, dry slab, loose off trail and everything in between. The rubber compound is quite sticky with impressive wet grip and the lugs being spaced out do a good job at not collecting mud.
The lugs are aggressive and pronounced enough to give good grip in loose terrain, though border on being a bit intrusive for road running. I feel like the flexibility of the shoe, the foam and the pods contribute to the outsole flexing and contouring nicely over rocks, roots and other obstacles to help provide even better traction. Durability thus far seems to be good, but I have admittedly not run too many miles on rocky terrain yet (a fair bit of snow this time of year).
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Sam: The UltraGlide has a friendly, energetic and deeply cushioned ride. This is one versatile shoe with a focus, as intended on the ultra runner who is mid pack to back of pack. Salomon clearly saw that a large segment of trail runners were moving to highly cushioned forgiving shoes such as Hoka’s Speedgoat and Mafate Speed While their Genesis and S/Lab Ultra FDH were fine options, a softer more energetic ride and more comfort focused upper was in order and thus the Ultra Glide.
I have very much enjoyed all my runs and hikes in the Ultra Glide. Its strengths are at hike paces on any terrain, any uphills and interestingly on the road where they easily compete with any of the max cushion unplated super foam cushioned trainers such as Hoka’s new Bondi 9, Nike’s Vomero 18, for sure the ponderous Fresh Foam More, and 361 Eleos.
The comfort focused upper and deep cushion softness starts to make things shakier on more technical terrain at faster paces for me . I think it could be perfected by dialing in the toe box hold a bit more, eliminating the very front Spheres and increasing the front outsole lug coverage there somewhat.
All in all the S/Lab Ultra Glide is one fun shoe. Thoroughly modern in construction, innovative via its Relieve Spheres, if long hours of comfort on the trail (and even road where I found them superb) with a lively high energy big smiles ride is your thing it will be worth considering in 2025. I just wish it was priced around $200 or less.
Sam’s Score: 9.3/10
Deductions for pricing, for a bit more front hold and structure, more very front outsole coverage and big toe off area cushion depth. Deductions for premature front outsole wear (noting my pair was a late prototype/early production pair)..
😊😊😊😊😊
Mike P: For me, the S/LAB Ultra Glide lands solidly in the cruiser category. I’ve done an A/B/C test already featuring The North Face Enduris 4, Merrel MTL Adapt Matryx, and the Brooks Caldera 8. This is a shoe that is comparable with those shoes (see comps below). Sam calls the ride “friendly” and I think that’s the perfect single word to describe it.
The Energy Foam+ core is soft, and slightly energetic directly underfoot - the firmer carrier “regular” Energy Foam does a good job stabilizing the ride and of course the sidewalls also help in that regard. Stability in most terrain is almost an afterthought - the foot feels well cradled and I never had any particular worry about side rolls, especially given the fact that this is indeed a high stack shoe. The ride and feel can almost make you forget that.
Sam mentions that he enjoyed the ride on the road, but I think the outsole is a bit too much for that. The feel is nice, but the lugs feel too cleat-like to give me the feeling of a smooth ride. Pulling that thread a bit further - I get the sense that the outsole itself is working at odds against the energy within the midsole. It feels like there’s more energy in there, and I somewhat sense it underfoot, but I think the full outsole and perhaps the Relieve Spheres themselves dampen the ride and take away some of the “pep” from the ride.
This leads me back to the general agreement with Sam that the ride feels “friendly”. This will work well for some runners, but from a performance standpoint, personally I feel like something is missing. One thing that absolutely cannot be ignored is the $250 price point. Honestly, that just feels way too high for this shoe.
If you told me the shoe was $160 - for a smooth, friendly ride, with a mostly secure fit and comfortable upper, I’d say ok, that works. But where is the extra $90 going? Personally, I don’t feel the Relieve Spheres are game-changing technology, and it’s not a crazy fast and/or light race option. $250 is a lot to swallow in a market saturated with very performant shoes at that price point.
Mike P’s Score: 8.3 / 10
Ride: 8.5 - Smooth, “friendly” cruiser
Fit: 8.5 - Not as dialed as expected from S/LAB
Value: 5 - I just don’t see it
Style: 8 - Classic S/LAB. The sidewalls are striking. I wonder if they’ll do different colors?
Traction: 9 - Really worked well for me
Rock Protection: 9.5 - No plate, no problem
Smiles 😊😊😊
Jeff V: I really like the S/Lab Ultraglide and find it to be a very soft, smooth and compliant ride and while not a fast and light shoe per se, they are reasonably quick and fun.
For such a high stack, they are quite stable and predictable, ideal for less technical to moderate terrain, but can handle technical terrain in small doses without trepidation. Mike’s points are fair about the cost of the shoe vs. any true or perceived performance gains. It is a great shoe, don’t get me wrong, but $250 is a lot of money for a shoe that is not necessarily on the cutting edge of technology and performance. If it is within your budget h, you cannot go wrong and will not be disappointed in the cushion, comfort, style, quality, versatility and traction that they provide. I would say they function best as a daily trainer and a shoe for long distances, but only if you do not have a particularly wide foot or insist on some extra wiggle room.
Jeff V’s Score: 9.2 / 10
Ride: 9.5 - Smooth, comfortable and well cushioned
Fit: 9 - I find they fit my foot really well and are secure, even in technical terrain, but for long distances, would prefer a bit more wiggle room.
Value: 8 - Quality and all around performance and versatility is great, but $250 is a lot ($180 would seem to be more in line).
Style: 10 - The red/white colorway is striking and classic Salomon S/Lab, some of the best looking out there IMHO.
Traction: 9.5 - great wet grip and all around traction
Rock Protection: 9.5
Smiles 😊😊😊😊
9 Comparisons
Salomon Ultra Glide (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): I tested V2 - that one was much narrower underfoot and had a more apparent rounded rocker feel underfoot. The foam feel was ok, but kind of dull, but the rockered ride really didn’t work for me. This S/LAB version’s foam feels much more energetic and also comfortable underfoot for a better long miles experience. Of course the S/LAB upper has better more streamlined materials, while UltraGlide V2 relied on gobs of interior soft foam - especially in the heel. The S/Labis a much better shoe all around.
Jeff V: The non S/Lab UG is lighter and because of that, I think a bit quicker and they also have a bit more relaxed fit, though the S/Lab is more stable, secure and supportive, plus has superior traction.
La Sportiva Prodigio Pro (2025) (RTR Video Review)
Mike P (10.5): Already a leader in the clubhouse for top shoe of 2025 - the Prodigio Pro is also non-plated, relying on a dynamic nitrogen-infused TPU foam and flexible ride. The La Sportiva upper is also superior with a roomy toebox, dialed in fit, and nothing sliding around. A well designed, comfortable heel, and bonus ankle collar/gaiter round out one of the best trail uppers. Note the sizing difference - I’m a full size up in the LS for an equivalent fit. The Prodigio Pro feels like a borderline supershoe at a discount price, while the UG feels like an overpriced daily trainer.
Hoka Mafate Speed (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): I have V4 in a 9.5 which is a bit snug on me. Ideally I’d be in a 10.0 which would be equivalent to the S/LAB UG in 9.5. The MS4 has a burly, mountain outsole, which, having a bunch of cutouts, somewhat emulates the feel of the Relieve Spheres. Not necessarily in underfoot feel, but in contouring over the ground. The MS4 does ride a bit “flatter” though with less forward impulse, and I find the ride to be a bit sluggish. The UG’s 6mm drop is a difference here as it seems to keep the ride moving forward. The MS4 is better in technical terrain for sure, but otherwise, the UG ride is smoother everywhere else.
Jeff V: The Mafate Speed feels a bit flat in performance and even while it is a little lighter, does not run as light or energetically as the S/Lab UG. The S/Lab UG is much more stable and especially in technical terrain. Both have very good traction.
Hoka Tecton X 3 (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0): When you fork over $275 for a shoe, you expect some features to jump off the page at you like say, massive PEBA slab, multiple carbon plates, Vibram Megagrip, Matryx upper, integrated ankle gaiter, extremely low weight (9.7 oz). Say what you will about the price (no one forces you to pay), but those are top-of-the-line features. I just don’t get that sense from the $250 Salomon here. The Tecton is softer, faster, lighter, upper is debatable - probably depends on your foot but it works for me, and a proven ultra distance winner. It feels like these shoes should be in different classes, but unfortunately (for the Salomon) they need to be compared.
Jeff V: Agreed with Mike 100%
Hoka Speedgoat 6 (RTR Review)
Jeff V: IMHO, the Speedgoat is one of the GOATs. They are lighter, very quick, agile, great traction and are just as well suited for fast running on smooth cruiser trails, as they are moving fast in technical terrain. They cost nearly $100 less to boot. The S/Lab UG is much more stylish and might be a better choice for longer distances with softer foam, but that is debatable.
New Balance Fresh Foam More Trail (RTR Review)
Jeff V: Oof, the Fresh Foam did not work for me in the least. I could not achieve any foothold and on top of a freakishly tall stack of soft foam, they are downright scary running on even moderately to barely technical terrain. The S/Lab UG is superior in every way.
Merrell MTL Adapt Matryx (RTR Review)
Mike P (9.5): Another one of my early favorites for 2025 - the Adapt has a narrower platform on the ground, and feels more agile to me even with its high stack. The midsole foam is firmer though for sure with less cush but more response. Not just the midsole foam itself, but the foot feels like it rides higher inside the Adapt. With the Ultra Glide, you feel seated deeper in the shoes, especially with the sidewalls wrapping. Perhaps this makes the UG more stable, but I like the Merrell’s more agile feel. The Merrell is also 0.5oz lighter and $70 less.
TNF Vectiv Enduris 4 (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0): Perhaps the top competition as far as big trail brands going head to head. The Enduris really leans into the rocker setup, with almost a metronomic forward trajectory. I’m not usually a fan of rockers like this (see Ultra Glide 2), but this one works. The wide stable platform, plus the TPU cage add that touch of stability and touch of propulsion that keeps the ride ticking along. The S/LAB in comparison feels softer underfoot, with flex only up front at the toes (see pic in the review). It’s a different feel, and likely will be more comfortable for some, but I think the Enduris ride is more efficient. The Enduris upper is also super dialed - no loose spots or pressure points to speak off - really well done. I would go with TNF for cruising and long miles.
Jeff V: Agreed with Mike on all points and will add that the Enduris 4 has a more reasonable fitting upper that is more appropriate for longer distances, while maintaining superb foothold. They are a little lighter and at $160, the price is much more appropriate. The S/Lab UG does have a superior outsole, particularly in wet traction and in loose terrain or snow.
Brooks Caldera 8 (RTR Review)
Mike P (10.0): The Caldera has a noticeably roomier fit, especially in my US 10, which I think is correct for me for Brooks. Perhaps I could squeeze a 9.5, but I think width would still be the same (nice and wide) but I may get some rubbing at the front sides of the toebox. The Caldera is, and feels heavier on the run. The ultra wide platform sucks up a bit of energy and the ride feels flat to me. I was able to run them at quicker paces, but it didn’t feel ideal, and at 11.2 oz, it would not be efficient keeping that up. I think the Caldera is a shoe built for larger runners, where the relative weight would be less of a factor and the stability would be a big plus.
Jeff V: Agreed with Mike, mostly, but even though the Brooks weight is a bit more, I feel like I could more easily run in the Caldera all day, mostly because of the more reasonable fit. They are a bulkier shoe and for overall control if the terrain got technical, the S/Lab UG would have an advantage, especially if traction were a factor.
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
Salomon S/Lab Ultra Glide Video Review (13:52)
SALOMON RUNNING
Salomon S/Lab Ultra Glide available now
Tester Profiles
Sam is the Editor and Founder of Road Trail Run. He is in his 60’s with 2024 Sam’s 52th year of running roads and trails. He has a decades old 2:28 marathon PR. These days he runs halves in the just sub 1:40 range if he gets very, very lucky. Sam trains 30-40 miles per week mostly at moderate paces on the roads and trails of New Hampshire and Utah be it on the run, hiking or on nordic skis. He is 5’9” tall and weighs about 164 lbs, if he is not enjoying too many fine New England IPA’s.
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.
9 comments:
Hi guys, looks like a fun shoe but i was looking at the older reviews here: https://www.roadtrailrun.com/p/blog-page.html searching for something specific about the Genesis model and realized that all the links on that page are broken, could you please fix that? : ) thanks.
Same here!
Hi guys, this should be fixed now. Sorry about that.
Hasn't change for me, the section All Reviews still contain /blog/page/edit links
It takes a while till the page changes are online. From what I can see, the links work again.
The last picture on this review that shows the lugs, how many miles on the shoe? Looks like some significant wear on the lugs.
"Fit runs large and roomy upfront and could use more front and mid foot lockdown for tech terrain"
Salomon usually is way too narrow.
So Salomon Large and Roomy might actually be just right for once.
I would love to hear how the sphere actually work. Also gluing together the bottom down the middle, why was that done? Does that create a weakness for separation? How much technical down hill running was actually done in these to write a review? How many miles do you have on them now and can you show wear patterns?
@Tim - I just posted an A/B test against the Enduris 4 at HumbleRunning. Probably touches on some of your questions, and more discussion about the ride and the feel of the spheres under foot. (Steep) technical downhill running has been limited due to the season and trail conditions. But I find some limitations in foothold and security so I would not be to keen to try much of that in these. I will of course continue testing as weather and conditions improve.
Post a Comment