Article by Renee Krusemark and Jacob Brady
Icebug Arcus 2 GTX ($220)
Introduction
Need a winter shoe? The Arcus 2 features a GORE-TEX ePE (PFAS free ) Invisible fit upper with 14 carbide steel studs, meant for long runs on gravel and road during winter conditions. The need for a waterproof upper and a studded outsole is very specific, making the Arcus 2 a very niche shoe. Of course, for runners who loath the treadmill, the Arcus 2 is an option to keep logging miles during winter months.
Pros:
Cushioned midsole with smooth ride: Renee
Gore-Tex ePE membrane is PFAS free and reduced carbon footprint: Renee/Jacob
High volume toe box: Jacob
Icebug has great environmental goals and aims to prioritize the planet over their profit: Jacob
High quality materials: Jacob
Durable; expect many seasons of use (snow/ice running is not hard on shoes): Jacob
Cons:
Upper security and fit: Renee/Jacob
Limited utility—studded so ice is needed, but not great on technical trail: Jacob
Price: Renee
Stats
Spec Weight: men's 12.88oz / 365g
Sample Weighst:
women’s 10.56 oz/300g US8, men's 13.5 oz / 382g US12
Stack Height: 38mm/33mm (including outsole, studs, and insole)
Platform Width: 85mm heel / 68mm midfoot / 103mm forefoot (US W8)
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Renee: To GORE-TEX or not to GORE-TEX? That is the question. Actually, it’s not that philosophical. Like many runners, I steer away from GORE-TEX in all non-winter months. With a good pair of socks, I’d rather allow moisture to enter so it eventually exits.
For winter running, a GORE-TEX upper has more utlity. When running in snow or sleet in the cold, GORE-TEX can help keep the feet warm for longer periods of running. The Invisible fit of the Arcus upper is similar to other Invisible fit GORE-TEX uppers, to a degree.
The fit of the shoe is wide, and as someone with narrow heels and low volume feet, I had some issues with a quality lockdown, even with midweight wool socks. For mid-width feet, this might be an asset. The underfoot and the insole is not significantly wider than othe shoes I have run in recently, although the midfoot is a bit flatter. If needing arch support or if you have a narrow midfoot, switching out the insoles might be helpful.
For me, the width affected the upper security. I wouldn’t take the shoe on single track for that reason. For rolling or flat terrain, the fit isn’t as much of a concern. The heel counter and collar have ample padding and the tongue is gusseted. I’m between half sizes, and wore my usual women’s size 8. I think a 7.5 would work better. Most runners can stay with true to size if they have a wider foot.
Jacob: I was first struck by the amazing shoe box with many notes about helping the planet and wildlife and cute pictures of squirrels and bugs. There is a lot of good info on the shoe box about what Icebug is doing to reduce impact on the planet.
The construction of the Arcus 2 is sleek for a big shoe and high quality. I appreciate the Gore-Tex upper for insulation (even though its the thinner invisible fit, it still adds notable warmth and protection) in cold temperatures which is the only time this shoe would be used, given the spikes.
The fit is very nicely roomy in the forefoot both horizontally and vertically which I think is fantastic as the other two spiked waterproof shoes I have (Salomon Spikecross and Hoka Speedgoat Spike) are relatively narrow and don’t give my little toe enough room.
However, the heel in the Arcus 2 feels loose. It would be fine for a smooth terrain shoe or road shoe, but a waterproof spiked and lugged shoe needs to be able to handle post-holed ice or rutted frozen sidewalks with post-holes and snowblower tracks, so I’d appreciate a more locked in midfoot and heel fit.
Midsole & Platform
Renee: The midsole is Icebug’s rockered SuperC nitrogen-infused TPU midsole. Like most TPU midsoles, the Arcus 2 offers a cushioned yet responsive ride.
Of course, the shoe is heavy, so responsiveness is dulled for that reason. When running on packed snow and ice, a true responsive ride can be hazardous, so this is not necessarily a negative.
The rocker is apparent but not obtrusive from a midfoot landing. As discussed in the upper section, I didn’t have the best fit in this shoe, so the midfoot rocker did not hug my arch as much as it needs to for a smooth ride. For easy paces, the midsole felt good, and again, for cold winter runs on ice,
I think the midsole is a good balance of cushion and stability. The midsole is firm, with some softness provided by the 5mm thick insole.
Jacob: The midsole is a thick, medium-firm, rockered, TPU slab. It is a high stack shoe. The midsole has a nice noticeable but not strong energy return. I think it feels great on hard smooth terrain and moves along well for its weight (the weight is high for running shoes overall, but the Arcus 2 is at a competitive weight for the category lugs spikes and all).
There is good protection and the rocker works well for me at making it easy and smooth to run, however, I think combined with the loose upper, stability is not good, and especially so at.the heel. This is the biggest negative of the Arcus 2 for me which I’ll touch on again in the Ride and Conclusions section below.
Outsole
Renee: Probably the best asset of the shoe is the BUGrip outsole and 13 carbide steel studs. Actually, 14 studs. The product information from IceBug states 13, but go ahead and count them. At their highest, the lugs are 5mm, so there’s some traction provided in light snow. The rubber itself is very grippy so , even without the studs, there’s extra grip provided when on the snow and ice from the outsole rubber. The lug pattern is more on par with road than trail with broader contact surface lugs, which makes sense given the shoe’s more gravel and road focus.
Four of the studs are placed under the heel, with a large exposed midsole down the mid center of the outsole. The remaining 10 studs are dispersed from the mid to forefoot. No matter where you foot strike, the studs provide traction.
Jacob: The outsole is composed of spaced lugs with a decoupling and weight saving groove of exposed foam in the middle, a rock plate in the forefoot, and of course, 14 studs for traction on ice. The studs are the reason to use this shoe and they work great, like all studded shoes I have worn, and allow running on ice and mixed conditions without being cautious of slipping.
The rubber I don’t find to be too grippy, however, and the lugs are rounded rather than sharp which also likely decreases traction. Compared to Vibram MegaGrip (such as on the Hoka Speedgoat 5 Spike which was my main comparison shoe), especially with the sharp edges and extra textured “traction lug” design, this Arcus 2 outsole is not exceptional.
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Renee: The Arcus 2 is for runners who refuse to use the treadmill if at all possible. For confident running on ice and snow/ice surfaces, the outsole/stud combo is great.
The ride itself is impacted for me because of the wide midfoot and lacking heel security. The Invisible fit upper is similar in stiffness to other GORE-TEX uppers. The laces help tighten, but not as much as my low volume feet need, sizing down should have helped me..
A good fit will improve the ride, as the rockered geometry will be most comfortable when midfoot striking. I’d need a higher arch and/or narrower midfoot area to benefit from the rockered nitrogen-infused TPU midsole.
Running aside, the shoe will make a good option for walking on ice regardless of how the upper fits. For the price, I think understanding the fit is important especially if purchasing for running. The shoe could be used on trail for those who have a secure fit with the upper. Otherwise, the ride is geared toward paved and gravel roads.
Renee’s Score: 8.25/10
Ride: 9/10 (potential with the midsole, but fit factors here
Outsole: 10/10)
Fit: 7/10 (heel and midfoot security will be a factor for narrow to average feet)
Value: 7/10 (with GORE-TEX and steel studs, it’s not totally overpriced. Still costly for the limited/specific use)
Style: 10/10 (probably not a factor for a studded shoe that can’t be worn casually, but the olive/terracotta color is subjectively pretty)
😊😊
Jacob: Icebug advertises the Arcus 2 as being for “all winter roads” and I agree with the “road” designation from the ride. The ride is interesting for a lugged and studded shoe. I think it runs very well on clear pavement, aside from the unfortunately loud noise of the studs, as well as on smooth, non-technical trail or dirt road. The rocker and TPU midsole lead to a good cruising feel which is surprising for the studs and weight.
However, combined with the casual upper fit, and especially the insecure heel, there is poor stability on technical terrain. For me, this dramatically decreases the utility of the Arcus 2 as challenging footing is very common in winter in the Northeast US with freeze-thaw cycles leading to hard uneven icy snow even on trails or paths that are flat gravel in the summer. Off angle landings cause the rear of the shoe to rotate around my foot (even when tightly laced) and put pressure on my ankle. If you have a high-volume heel and midfoot, this may not be a problem—and again I really appreciate the volume in the forefoot which is not problematic for me.
Though stability issues were unfortunate for my use case of the Arcus 2 as a winter all-around city paths and trails shoe, I think it could be excellent if using it exclusively on road. However, if the road conditions are bad enough to need a studded shoe, I’d be just as happy with a more trail-capable shoe (such as the Speedgoat 5 Spike).
Around here in Maine, USA, the roads aren’t bad often enough to need a road-specific studded shoe, so the Arcus 2 is not a great pick. I am disappointed because the comfort is excellent, it should last many seasons, and also I love to see Icebug’s emphasized support of the environment.
Jacob’s Score: 8.05 / 10
Ride: 8.5 (30%) Fit: 7 (30%) Value: 7 (10%) Style 10 (5%) Traction: 8 (15%) Sustainability: 10 (10%)
😊😊😊
4 Comparisons
Hoka Speedgoat 5 Spike GTX (RTR Review)
Jacob: The Speedgoat 5 Spike GTX is my main comparison shoe as it was my primary winter shoe the last two years. The Speedgoat 5 has the unfortunate issue of being too narrow in the forefoot for me—I have to run it with no insole to have enough space, thus decreasing comfort as well. The Arcus 2 is much more comfortable and accommodating. However, the Speedgoat has a significantly more locked-in upper and is more stable in technical terrain.
For ride, the Arcus 2 is smoother, easier to run, and more propulsive. It is much more fun on easy terrain such as pavement.
Overall, though, the Speedgoat 5 Spike remains my choice for a winter daily icy trails shoe, even with no sockliner, because the security is more important to me than smooth terrain ride or comfort. If you’re in the Northeast US, or anywhere where the trails get post-holed and rutted icy snow (road and trail) and want a studded shoe, the Speedgoat is my recommendation. If you want a shoe for security on roads only in rough conditions, the Arcus 2 may be the better choice.
Salomon Spikecross 5 (RTR Review)
Jacob: This older model of the Spikecross was my main winter shoe before moving to the Speedgoat 5 Spike GTX. The Spikecross is a performant shoe and has more technical terrain stability than the Arcus 2 and better foothold. However, the ride on the Spikecross is dull and does not give much in energy return or response. I also have some stability concerns with the Spikecross’ high-feeling blocky heel, and again it’s a bit narrow for me in the forefoot. For technical trail, I would still take the Spikecross, but overall, I prefer the Arcus 2.
Hoka Speedgoat 5 GTX (RTR Review)
Renee: The rockered geometry of the Speedgoat 5 GTX is more focused frm the forefoot while the Arcus 2 is more from the midfoot. The security and fit of the Speedgoat 5 GTX is much more secure for trail. While I didn’t review the Speedgoat 5 GTX Spike, I suggest reading that review. I wore a 7.5 in the Hoka and an 8 in the Arcus 2. I think sizing, however, is similar as my size 8 Arcus 2 felt long.
Nike Pegasus Trail 4 GTX (RTR Review)
Renee: I haven’t tried the Peg Trail 5 GTX, and of course neither version has studs for ice running. In terms of upper fit, the Peg Trail 4 GTX is much more secure and comfortable. The shoe itself is great for trails too (similar to the non-GTX version). The PegTrail 5 is a bit different in ride, so I suggest reading the RTR review of both versions.
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
Tester Profiles
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.
Jacob Brady is a runner and multi-sport athlete. He runs a mix of roads and trails in the Portland, Maine area. He has been running every day for over six years and averages 40 miles per week. Jacob races on road and trail at a variety of distances from 5k to 50mi. He has a PR of 2:49 in the marathon. In addition to running, he does hiking, biking, climbing, and nordic skiing. He is 29 years old, 6 ft / 182 cm tall and 165 lbs / 75 kg. You can check out Jacob’s recent activities on Strava.
No comments:
Post a Comment