ASICS GEL-Nimbus 22 Review

Article by Canice Harte

ASICS GEL-Nimbus 22 ($150)

Nimbus 21 RTR review

Introduction

Canice: The Nimbus 22 is designed to provide as much shock absorption as possible while still creating a fun lively shoe to run in. In particular the Nimbus 22 has a new softer GEL® cushioning unit in the heel which provides excellent shock absorption. The Nimbus 22 also has improved forefoot GEL® technology that further reduces the load on your feet. Combine that with FLYTEFOAM® designed to give you a more energetic ride and TRUSSTIC® technology under the arch of the shoe which provides stability, and helps extend the life of the shoe, and you have a max cushion, high mileage running machine.

Pros:

Canice: Soft flexible upper, a nice heel pocket with a well padded tongue and loads of cushioning. I love the breathability of the shoe as well.

Cons:

Canice: Heavy and though the goal of this shoe is to absorb as much impact as possible, the loss of ground feel is a negative

Stats

Weight::11.0 oz / 312g men's US9   9.6oz / 272 g women's US8 

 Samples: 11.7 oz / 332g men’s US10, 9.6 oz / 272 g women’s US8

Stack Heights: 

Men’s 31mm heel / 21 mm forefoot, 10mm drop

Women’s 33 mm heel / 20 mm forefoot, 13mm drop

Available now.  $150

Nike ACG Gore-Tex "Mountain Fly". Vaporfly for Trails? First Run Review and All the Details

Article by Sam Winebaum

Nike ACG Gore-Tex Mountain Fly ($220)

Sort of.. for Nike's first carbon plated "trail shoe" is it a trail runner or is closer to a boot or is it both? I take them for a first run on trail and some road and share all the details, my first run impressions and what they may be best for.

With a carbon plate and propulsion feel similar to Vaporfly in a soft React midsole, it has a Gore-Tex Invisible Fit upper and a trail outsole. 

At 13 oz / 368g in US9 it is clearly not at Vaporfly weight! for this trail runner and hiker and I say also road runner is focused on protection from the elements and a dynamic ride.  

I think a concept car if you will for what is to come and for now over in the All Conditions Gear more mountain segment. Available now. $220 at Nike.com.

WATCH SAM'S INITIAL VIDEO REVIEW (10:00)

 Read reviewers' full run bios here. 

RoadTrail Run's 2020 Runner's Gift Guide and Mini Reviews: Apparel, Gloves, Compression, Lighting, Traction, Masks, Carry, GPS, and More!

Article by RTR Team

In a challenging year for everyone,, we focused our 2020 Gift Guide on gift ideas that will keep your runner safer, warmer, and better informed as for sure we will and should be, more outside than ever before.  

We focus on apparel and gloves from Gore's Infinium line as well as Brooks Run Visible,  Title Nine, Ultimate Direction, Tracksmith's new Off Roads collection, and Odlo base layers and jackets. We highlight a number of masks and lighting options, new traction options from Kahtoola and YakTrax, carry options from Camelbak, Mammut, Compressport, and Ultrapire, lighting from Petzl, and UltrAspire, and for after you get home recovery shoes from Topo, Deckers Lab and Hoka. Finally to keep runners informed and yes to also monitor health stats we feature GPS watches from Suunto, COROS, and Polar.

Opinion: What are the best zero-drop shoes for trail-running?

 Article by Dom Layfield

Introduction

Let me start by saying that this article describes my personal opinion.  What works for one runner might not be a good match for another.  And I am sadly unable to test all the zero drop shoes in the world.  That said, I’ve run a fair few miles on trail, and a good fraction of those have been in zero-drop and low-drop shoes.   I think I’m pretty well qualified.

I should also perhaps say a little about my personal opinion about heel-to-toe drop in running shoes.  I don’t think that zero-drop represents some biomechanical ideal that we should all aspire to.   Moreover, while it might sound simple, it’s not clear what ‘zero-drop’ even means.  If a running shoe is rockered (i.e. the sole thickness is not uniform from front to back) then how does one determine whether it is zero-drop?  Should one evaluate sole thickness in relaxed, unweighted state, or when compressed by bodyweight?  When the shoe is worn, or after it has been broken in?   RTR Editor Sam swears that some “zero-drop” shoes feel as if they do have a small amount of drop, and I think I know what he means.  Certainly, I have squeezed many shoes which didn’t feel entirely flat, and even used calipers to check .

On the other hand, I’m pretty convinced that higher HTT drops (>6 mm) are undesirable, and regard shoe brands that continue to make >10 mm drop shoes as dinosaurs unwilling to modernize.  Even there, though, the waters are muddy.  A brand may intend to make flatter shoes, but cannot ignore feedback from its established customer base that wants new shoes to feel just like the old ones.   Then there is the trend in plated road shoes, pioneered by Nike with the VaporFly 4%, and copied and iterated upon by others, which generally have higher drops intended to improve efficiency.     For the most part, these seem only to be useful on the smoothest of surfaces.  The VF4%, for example, is terrifyingly unstable on trail, and any straightline performance gain is vastly outweighed by the challenge of remaining on your feet.   In regard to the latter, the only trail shoe I’ve encountered that incorporates such technologies is the pioneering Skechers Speed TRL, which is a more modest 4 mm nominal drop.

One important aspect of zero- and low-drop shoes is that they encourage mid- to forefoot striking.  Whether this is ‘better’ or not, in terms of long-term injury prevention or running efficiency remains controversial.  My personal belief is that every trail runner should be comfortable doing both, as the terrain will dictate which is optimal.  This opinion is reinforced by the fact that (arguably) the greatest mountain runner of all time does not consistently do one or the other.

TicWatch Pro 3 GPS Review: All the Technology You Want, with Most of the Running Prowess

Article by Michael Ellenberger

 TicWatch Pro 3 GPS ($300)

Introduction

TicWatch is from Mobvi a brand I’ve long had my eye on - back in 2015, the brand launched its original smartwatch offering, the TicWatch, including an innovative “Tickle Strip” for UI navigation (an alternative to Apple’s Digital Crown). In the years since, TicWatch has come under new ownership (Mobvoi, the same group who brought us the terrific Timex Ironman R300, is now overseeing TicWatch).

Indeed, after 5 consecutive years of buying and trying the Apple Watch, and consistently finding it not quite thereI decided to go a different direction this year, and compare one of Mobvoi’s flagship offerings - the TicWatch Pro 3 GPS - to my daily driver, the Garmin Forerunner 245, along with the aforementioned Timex Ironman R300 and Polar Vantage V. 

The Pro 3 GPS has a ton of top shelf features (as detailed further below), including a new Snapdragon Wear 4100 chip, which powers a ton of under-the-hood features and enables the Pro 3 GPS to absolutely fly for day-to-day smartwatch activities like checking and responding to notifications, queuing Google Assistant, and referencing bite-size information on the go. 

Undoubtedly, the Pro 3 GPS is the most advanced (technologically-speaking) Android/Wear OS smartwatch I’ve tested - on-par, spec-wise, with the Apple Watch and markedly better than, say, the Garmin Forerunner line. 

Still, fast chips and high-res screens do not a good running watch make, and I tested this (with the help from my programmer brother, who has great experience in Android and Google wearables!) to see if it can be an adequate all-day watch for a distance runner! The battery is strong here - especially with the lower-power “second” screen (which is a bit of a miss - to be discussed later), which gently sips the battery, compared to the main screen’s steady slurp.

ON Running Cloudboom Review (Spanish)-Despues de 100km / 62 millas

Article by Beto Hughes

ON Cloudboom ($200)

Info

Peso: 9.8 oz. / 280 g.

Talla US 13

Drop: 9mm

Precio: $200

Pros

Zapatillas que se miran Rapidas y se sienten rapidas con buen estilo.

Son Explosivas y Firmes para esos entrenamiento de Uptempo y distancias cortas como 5k y 10k hasta un buen 21k si nos enfocamos en media distancia.

El material Helion de On es ligeramente suave pero firme combinado con el speedboard de carbono dando una gran explosividad.

Un Upper muy traspirable, con gran ajuste en el medio pie y gran ajuste en el talon dando gran comodidad.

Cons

Muy ajustando en el area de los metatarsos. 

Helion Foam es bueno en el talon pero muy firme en la parte delantera para los que corren con el medio pie o punta.

Zapatillas muy caras en comparacion con otro modelos de placa de fibra de carbono en el mercado.

Reebok Floatride Run Fast Pro Review 2.0: An Update to the Only Sub 4 oz Racing Flat

Article by Bryan Lim

Reebok Floatride Run Fast Pro 2.0 ($250)

Introduction

Bryan: The Reebok Run Fast Pro (product code EF7871 to identify Version 2 from its first iteration) provides an updated upper and a slightly more forgiving offset to its predecessor whilst maintaining its weight below 4 oz. The biggest question is the relevance of racing flats with high stack, cushioned and plated shoes dominating the market’s appetite for novice runners to professionals. Off the bat, I’d say the Run Fast Pro is highly relevant as unlike other flats on the market, it is the only one that is significantly lighter than the lightest plated racer, the 6.6oz / 187g Nike Vaporfly Next%. The relevance of the flat has been reiterated by recent race results, including the adidas Takumi Sen 5 which was used in Kirptuo’s 10k road record set in January, and the Asics Tartheredge 2 which was used in toppling Sweden’s ladies’ half marathon record just last week. The racing flat truly has its place in the running scene. The recent implementation of stack height limitation on shoes used especially at track events further supports the relevance of the racing flat. In a nutshell, this shoe is extremely versatile in its potential applications! 

Pros and Cons

Pros: Extremely lightweight. Cushioned beyond its weight. Breathable upper. 

Cons: Extremely dear price tag (USD$250/ AUD $330). Not necessarily a con but it is unplated.

Stats

Weight:: men's / (US9) 3.88 oz / 110g men’s US9  Official:    3.92 oz / 111g men’s US9

Stack: No official stack height. 6mm drop.

Available now. $250

Tester Profile

Bryan is a road and trail runner living in Melbourne, Australia. He is a consistent sub 1:25 half marathoner and is presently chasing a sub 3-hour marathon. He is 176cm/ 5'9" tall and weighs about 63kg / 140lbs. 

First Impressions and Fit

Bryan: Holding the box in hand, I knew this was a special shoe. The box felt empty! This shoe is the equivalent of saffron in terms of price per unit weight! The fit is snug and race ready. The last I would consider to be on the narrower side. It is true to size for me, length and width-wise, however I fit fine in narrower shoes such as the adidas Adios 3.

Upper

The most striking update to the upper is Reebok’s choice to “rebrand” the ‘Delta’ logo used between 2014 and 2019, to its iconic vector which is splayed over the outer facing side of each shoe. Whilst it appears that the heel collar has had a slight alteration to its shape, I will not make any forced comparisons not having worn Version 1. The heel counter is not reinforced, but I found no issues with slippage or lack of support.

Version 2 retains its predecessor’s single layer engineered mesh upper and print overlays on both medial and lateral sides to provide some support. As you can see from the image above, where the shoe was held against some sunlight, you will notice the ample breathability the upper provides, especially with the perforated forefoot and cutouts in the already very thin suede tongue.

The main concern I had with the upper was the suede tongue, which is paper thin and non-gusseted. On my runs, my concerns were quashed as it was secure in its place and surprisingly never folded in any part. 

Midsole

This is where most of the changes have been made. Unlike Version 1, which sported a Pebax Floatride Foam midsole with an underfoot EVA stabilizing layer, which can also be found in both versions of the Run Fast and Panthea, Version 2 features a Pebax only midsole. Another main change is the drop, which has gone from 3mm to 6mm. However, you will see that the insole states 3mm in the image below, but Reebok’s website claims a 6mm drop.

Outsole

No changes were essentially made to the outsole where it is entirely constructed from SpeedTrac lugs rising from a thin transparent plastic plate / sheet. Without the EVA layer in the midsole, the plastic plate still seems to provide some form of stabilizing in the ride. The grip is absolutely phenomenal and this is a unique take on the traditional “waffle” or DSP outsoles found on other racing flats.

Given that the lugs are made from TPU plastic, they will likely last beyond the lifespan of the Pebax midsole. As in the image above, you will notice that the weakness in the outsole is its ability to pick up debris. And now looking at the image below, you will also notice that the Reebok is one of the few racing flats that does not feature some form of a midfoot torsion plastic plate. Despite this, I found the shoe to be very stable in its ride, which I will speak of more below.

Outsole comparison between the DSP waffle forefoot of the Asics Tartheredge 2 (top), Reebok Floatride Run Fast Pro 2 (middle) and the “Quickstrike” DSP waffled adidas Takumi Sen 5 (bottom).

Ride

Having worn several flats prior, this is the most forgiving of them all. The Pebax midsole provides both surprising cushion yet “pop” in each toe off. The analogy I think of when running in other racing flats is like using a graphite tennis racquet from the 90s; raw power that shudders with each stroke. The Run Fast Pro however, provides a modern and refined, and importantly, confident ride. The responsiveness in the forefoot is phenomenal and provides for a smooth transition of stride mile after mile.

Whether or not the drop is 3mm or 6mm, my feet did not feel as beaten up when running in other flats with a more forgiving drop e.g. Nike Zoom Streak Flyknit and adidas Adizero Sub 2 (both 8mm drop), adidas Takumi Sen 3 and 5 (9mm drop) and Asics Tartheredge 2 (10mm drop). Naturally, the high energy returning nature of Pebax largely reasons for this.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Bryan: This is my favourite flat so far. The main concern for most would be its versatility and price. As a relatively lightweight runner who has spent a large portion of my ‘career’ mileage in flats, I would argue that these shoes would be suitable to run in from a fast mile up to the half marathon. 

In saying that, the ample of lightweight, cushioned and plated racers on the market makes this shoe less suited for longer distances. For most, I would imagine that these shoes would be reserved for track / speed sessions and race day for 5k and under. 

I would go so far as to say that I would not feel disadvantaged to race on track in the Run Fast Pro, and it would provide athletes a non-spiked, and more forgiving racing option. Remember, this is lighter than the Nike Dragonfly (4.37oz / 124g), which has a ZoomX midsole (also Pebax) and the 10k road record holder adidas Takumi Sen 5 (5.99oz / 170g). The Run Fast Pro is 50% lighter than the 6.6oz Nike Vaporfly Next% whilst providing a similarly reduced level of cushioning.

My only recommendation is for Reebok to add a bit more stack height, which would allow the shoe to be a true option for distances between 10km and the half marathon. Not so much of a recommendation this is, but reflective in my score for value below is the steep price which would eliminate the Run Fast Pro as an option for many. These two would go hand in hand, where a higher stacked Run Fast Pro would justify its price tag better. Ah, if only! 

Bryan’s Score: 9.0/10 

Ride: 10 (40%) Fit: 10 (30%) Value (including durability): 7 (15%) Versatility 9 (10%) Style: 10 (5%) 

Comparisons

Index to all RTR reviews: HERE

Reebok Floatride Fast Pro 1 (RTR Review)

Bryan did not run v1.

Adidas Adizero Takumi Sen 3 / 5

Likely the most direct competition to the Run Fast Pro. The Takumi weighs in almost 2oz heavier but has some notable results and records under its belt. The upper is as breathable and comfortable as the Run Fast Pro. The outsole is potentially superior, with a blend of Continental rubber placed at the extreme forefoot and rear for durability, and proven DSP waffle throughout for grip. The use of the torsion midfoot plate is also noticeable in providing stability and rigidity in its ride. However, the use of a boost insert in the forefoot and EVA (Lightstrike in the Takumi Sen 6) throughout results in a harsh and raw ride. Placing them side by side, I would pick the Run Fast Pro over the Takumi Sen as it is lighter and offers a more pleasant ride.

Adidas Adizero Adios 3 / 5   (RTR Review)

The successors to the previous marathon WR Adios 2. The Adios has lost its purpose in today’s market, with the Adizero Pro and Adios Pro being the brand’s flagship marathon shoes, and the Takumi Sen being its prominent racing flat. However, the Adios 3 is a fiercely versatile shoe that is capable of a quick mile to the marathon, all in a minimal package. The Adios 5 is less versatile with the utilisation of Lightstrike midsole hardening the ride and making it more akin to a pure flat. The Adios serves a different purpose to the Run Fast Pro. The much heavier Adios has substantially more heel cushion and is less capable at shorter distances.

Adidas Adizero Pro (RTR Review)

This is essentially the Adios 5 with a plate and provides for a partial waffle outsole. It certainly feels like a plated flat that is suitable up to the marathon distance, and quick enough for shorter distances down to 5km. The main downside to the shoe is the bottom rear-end heavy feel to it caused by the almost excessive use of Boost midsole there. The adizero Pro weighs in at 8.3oz and is a versatile shoe which is more suitable for longer distances. It wins on versatility, but appears more so as a jack of all trades while the Run Fast Pro is a specialist in shorter distances.

Adidas Adizero Sub 2 

The Sub 2 weighs in at 5.60oz / 158g and features a Boost Lite midsole that offers slightly more stack height. It also features a full slab of durable Continental outsole rubber. However, the ride is harsh and its purpose is muted by this as it is not cushioned enough for longer distances yet not responsive enough for shorter distances like the mile. I raced a 4km in the Sub 2s where I found this to be the optimal ‘range’ of the shoe. The Run Fast Pro wins hands down in providing for a versatile and responsive racing flat option. 

Adidas SL20  (RTR Review)

At half the price of the Run Fast Pro, the SL20 provides stiff competition in terms of value for money. The SL20 is a budget friendly flat that utilises the harsh yet responsive Lightstrike midsole. Whilst the SL20 offers a sound level of performance and versatility, the Run Fast Pro is superior in terms of ride.

Asics Metaracer (RTR Review)

The only plated racer that is track legal. The Metaracer is responsive and a quick shoe that offers a meta rocker. The relatively smooth outsole does not provide the same grip that the lugs on the Run Fast Pro offers. As with any other shoe, the Metaracer weighs in heavier but offers the benefits of a rocker, if this suits you, and a plate. Personally, I would pick the Run Fast Pro over the Metaracer on track, and the Metaracer over the Run Fast Pro on road for distances over 10km.

Nike Zoom Streak 6 Flyknit 

An old but classic racing flat that offers a modern upper and traditional racing flat ride. The Pebax plate and EVA midsole fostered a smooth and quick, but hard ride. The Run Fast Pro wins on all aspects for me.

Nike Vaporfly Next% 

A different beast, the Next% is to me the long distance sibling of the Run Fast Pro. It is high stacked and plated, and mind blowing in many aspects, like the Run Fast Pro is in its own right. The Next% is far more versatile in its usage (although no longer track legal for racing), being a mere 6.6oz but yet providing enough protection for the marathon. 

Read reviewers' full run bios here. 

The product reviewed is a personal purchase. The opinions herein are the authors'.

Comments and Questions Welcome Below!

Please let us know mileage, paces, race distances, and current preferred shoes

RoadTrailRun receives a commission on purchases at the stores below.

Your purchases help support RoadTrailRun. Thanks!

ROADRUNNER SPORTS

Available Now!

Unisex SHOP HERE

Join VIP Family, Get Free Shipping and 15% in VIP Benefits on every order, Details here

HOLABIRD SPORTS

Available Now!

Unisex SHOP HERE

Free Shipping on most orders over $40

AMAZON  

Available Now!

Unisex SHOP HERE

RUNNING WAREHOUSE

USA  Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

FREE 2 Day Shipping EASY No Sweat Returns
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
AUSTRALIA Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

REI Men's & Women's  SHOP HERE

WATCH OUR YOUTUBE REVIEWS ON THE ROADTRAILRUN CHANNEL

Please Like and Follow RoadTrailRun

Facebook: RoadTrailRun.com  Instagram: @roadtrailrun

Twitter: @RoadTrailRun You Tube: @RoadTrailRun

INOV-8 Roclite PRO G 400 Gore-Tex Review: A Technologically Advanced Lightweight Boot for Fast Hiking

Article by Jana Herzgova and Sam Winebaum

Inov-8 Roclite Pro G 400 Gore-Tex ($235)

Introduction

Sam: The inov-8 Roclite Pro G 400 is an ultra light (14 oz / 400g) boot with the trail feel of a rugged trail runner and the support, stability and grip of a stout hiking boot. It is designed for moving fast in the mountains. 

Bridging the worlds of trail running, fast hiking/ fast packing, and trekking,, the G 400 is loaded with a Schoeller ceramic coated upper, Gore-Tex XCR bootie, plenty of firmer cushion, rear stability from its External Heel Cage and agile protection up front from its flexible Meta-Plate Pro and is of course shod with inov-8's Graphene Grip outsole 

inov-8 is from the north of the UK where the trails are rough, wet and wild, if they exist at all, and this is, as all their shoes are is a boot with that territory’s DNA.

Pros:

Sam: 

Very light, supportive boot with the front flex and agility of a trail runner

Generous toe box fit 

Impeccable all terrain grip

Durable and protective: by specs and material high level of abrasion (Schoeller ceramic coated upper) and water resistance (Gore-Tex).

Highly versatile for moving fast over any terrain.

Jana:

Very light, all terrain shoe, waterproof

Toe box is wide, yet does not have a floppy feel to it, and the front part of the shoe is very flexible and grippy when climbing very steep terrain. 

Heel feels secure and comfortably sitting, and the collar is stout but comfortable as well.

No problem with laces getting loose, or undone from the hooks. 

Outsole is very grippy, even in muddy/wet terrain. 

Cons:

Sam: 

Clearly premium priced. 

Where does it fit in your line up? between trail runner and hiker for most

Could use a bit more and a bit more forgiving cushion stack as found in trail run G 270

Actually a bit roomy and almost loose upfront in my half size up on my narrower foot likely due to no overlays

 

Jana:

A bit pricey

Mud can get stuck/build up between lugs a little due to close lugs positioning. 

Breathability is limited, a tradeoff given the Gore-Tex membrane. 

Tester Profiles

Jana Herzgova took up running in 2016 after a back injury. Prior to that she was a speed skater, but due to back pain and doctor's recommendation, she transitioned into running. Since then, starting with shorter ultra distance races she quickly evolved into an avid long distance and unsupported mountain runner. She also loves to take on challenges/races in arctic and subarctic climates, mainly in unsupported and semi-self supported style. She runs about 100 miles per week: 40 miles on road and 60 miles trail mostly at high elevations. She currently lives in Utah/Wyoming.

Sam is the Editor and Founder of Road Trail Run. He is 63 with a 2018 3:40 Boston qualifier. Sam has been running for over 45 years and has a 2:28 marathon PR. These days he runs halves in the just sub 1:40 range training 30-40 miles per week mostly at moderate paces on the roads and trails of New Hampshire and Utah. He is 5'10" tall and weighs about 163 lbs.

Stats

 Official Weight:: men's  14oz / 403g (US9)  /  women's / (US8)

  Samples: 14.2 oz / 403g US M9

      11.5 oz / 325g US W11

Midsole Stack Height: 20mm / 12mm, 8mm drop

6mm lugs

Available now.  $235

First Impressions and Fit

Jana: It has been about 3 years since I wore hiking shoes for the last time, and I  did not have a good experience with them (Columbia brand, don't remember the model). As a mainly trail runner, I was initially skeptical to use and review hiking shoes due to my previous experience. 

I must say I was very pleasantly surprised when I put them on. I wore them for a whole day around my house at first, without wearing socks, and they were comfortable and light. No experience with chafing at all. I did about 70 miles of fast hiking on rugged mountain terrain in them. The boot over all is well cushioned, yet light, with plenty of room in the toe box. Stable feel and grippy outsole made for a secure and comfortable fast moving ride across the very rugged mountain terrain I cover.

Sam: If you are familiar with Inov-8 glove light performance fits the G 400 has clearly a roomier fit. I was sized up half a size and could have gone true to size but chose half size up to plan for winter socks.The rear collar aided by the Meta-Plate Pro is at the same time flexible and very supportive. 

While the boot looks stout and serious, and it is all in black, it is also surprisingly light in hand and on the foot. Due to Meta-Plate Pro which extends from rear and side support walls as the External Heel Cage to the front as rock protection it is both more flexible than the typical boot and as flexible as most trail runners yet also torsionally very rigid and stable. This combination says to me that it will climb extremely well while handling downhills at speed just as ably which it did in testing!

Upper

Jana: I purposely tried to scratch/rip the Schoeller ceramic-coated fabric upper on rocky/rugged terrain, without success. The Gore-Tex waterproof lining feels comfortable and durable. 

Plastic caging around the heel and rubber toe layer add extra protection, yet does not feel bulky. 

There is a roomy toe box, without a  floppy feel.

The collar is pretty stout, but comfortable on skin. The ankle feels stable and is well secured. 

Sam: Schoeller, a Swiss company well known for highly protective and engineered fabric and coating technologies of all sorts provides a ceramic coated fabric for additional mesh durability. 

This is important as while we have a very stout toe bumper the rest of the upper is support overlays and lower rand protective overlays free but for where the side Meta-Plate Pro plastic rises as the External Heel Cage. The upper is designed to flex with the foot but without overlays and protection one might worry about abrasion durability and thus the Schoeller ceramic coated fabric.

The rear molded collar is more than adequately supportive and superior in support to other mid height light boots I have tested such as the Hoka Toa and Topo Trailventure WP,, but as with all such collars, not totally mountain boot secure, a tradeoff for the agility here.  

The hold overall  is not quite up to the level of the radical Hoka TenNine Hike a somewhat heavier boot with a very broad platform, somewhat stiffer collars, and narrower forefoot with lacing extending further forward  but which is clearly not as “runnable” boot as the G 400.

The top two lace hooks have grooves to lock the laces. Effective but I did find I needed to relace on occasion but less than the Toa and Topo and more frequently for sure than the TenNine. I do think the collars could benefit from a touch more stiffness

The Gore-Tex bootie is Gore’s XCR or Extended Comfort Range and on a warm day proved plenty breathable. This said this is not an ideal desert boot although in wet and snow you will not regret the protection and warmth the membrane will provide. 

Midsole

Sam: The midsole is fairly conventional in feel without the energetic bounce of the Terraultra G 270, a far lighter trail runner for example. There is plenty of cushion of a denser sort somewhere between a classic trail runner and a hiking boot. For sure this is not a Hoka bottomless cushion feel as there is a 20mm heel, 12 mm forefoot midsole stack, so relatively thin overall  but there is more than adequate cushion with plenty of trail feel to go with the fast and agile purpose of the boot. 

As said above, the External Heel Cage which extends further forward the whole being called the Meta-Plate Pro gives the boot lots of underfoot torsional rigidity and rear stability and rock protection while also giving it front flexibility something I really like in a boot or shoe designed to climb fast. 

Unlike a traditional boot the platform is clearly runnable as I even took them for a short dirt road run above Alta, Utah during a hike. Mount Superior is to the left at the top of the picture.

Jana: 

EVA midsole provides good stability and cushions the foot well with each step with a lightweight and flexible feel.

Outsole

Sam:

The G 400 box below makes big claims and while I have not taken them on mud or snow, on dry ground and wet and dry rock the Graphene Grip is outstanding while its elastic properties add a bit to cushion and trail feel.  As with the G270 this outsole compound is a step above in its grip and durability. 

Jana: 

The Graphene Grip outsole feels stable on any terrain. The 6mm lugs are very grippy on steep and rocky terrain (even during steep descents), and a flexible front makes for a smooth uphill ride. And the rockplate makes for a very comfy ride over a rocky terrain. The only slight problem I experienced is the mud build up between lugs, as they might be positioned too close to each other to prevent mud from shedding rapidly 

Conclusions

Jana:

As I mentioned before, I was a bit skeptical about using “actual” hiking shoes for hiking. With a unpleasant previous experience, I have been using trail running shoes as a substitute. I did about 70 miles of fast hiking on rugged mountain terrain in them. Needless to say I am very pleased with the overall feel, stability, and responsiveness of this shoe.

I don't have any other hiking shoe/brand to compare it to by experience, and that may be a bit one sided view. However, as a "freshman" to hiking shoes, the Roclite G400 moves along nicely on all kinds of terrain, has plenty of cushion and feels secure and stable. The outsole equipped with 6mm lugs is very responsive to any terrain. The front flexes well, and the roomy toe box feels comfy. 

The only slight problem I experienced is the mud build up between lugs, as they might be positioned too close to each other to prevent mud from shedding rapidly 

I have not used them for a multi-day hiking adventure yet, but the all day wear experience was rather on a less breathable side then I would expect. However, the fully waterproof Gore-Tex upper is a good trade-off to keeping feet dry for days when it is needed.

Jana's score: 8.6/10

Ride 9, Fit 9, Value 7, Style 8.5, Traction 9, Rock Protection 9

Sam: The G 400 is a technologically advanced ,light and fast hiker with what should prove a  surprisingly easy on the foot and roomy (too roomy as it is also overlay free upfront? ) highly durable ceramic coated upper with Gore-Tex XCR weather protection,, a sophisticated stability and rock protective plastic chassis from heel to toe and of course the incredible Graphene Grip outsole.

Sitting just above a heavy duty trail runner in weight with an underfoot feel and flexibility it is closer to a classic trail runner than a boot or max cushion trail shoe with an upper closer to a boot than a trail runner. As such it delivers a ride made for going fast uphill and downhill and can even be run.

I wish for a bit more cushion stack and the energetic bouncy feel of the G 270 midsole, no slouch on any terrain hiking or running and far lighter, almost 5 ounces lighter and my trail runner of the year before even getting into its prowess hiking the super rough White Mountains of New Hampshire.

At $235 I would also wish for lighter weight, with the tech included of course!   Many hike in trail running shoes and while likely durability will be superior here, and that is a big factor, as a boot at this pricing, it should be light enough to be yet more “runnable” and a bit more secure in its upper for fast movement on rough terrain including with a pack. A few strategic overlays, without compromising the admirable front flexibility and rear under foot stability and a bit more rear upper collar stiffness would in my view perfect the G400. Mind you it is excellent in those respects but the bar is set high by the G 270 and the pricing. All of this said, I can’t think of a better boot for deep snow running, snowshoeing and fast moving without a big pack on rough terrain.

Sam’s Score: 9.0 /10

Ride: 9 (30%) Fit: 8.8 (30%) Value: 8 (10%) Style: 9(5%) Traction: 10 (15%) Rock Protection: 9.5(10%)

Comparisons

Jana: As mentioned, I am mainly a trail runner, trail running shoes have been my go to shoes for everything off road related. So comparing trail shoes to hiking boots may not be the best scenario, but for someone who is trying to decide between such options, I hope I can help. 

Salomon Wildcross (RTR Review)

Jana: From trail running shoes I have used recently, the most similar to Roclite G400 would be the Salomon Wildcross. They both have similar shape with a wider toe box, outstanding grip on any terrain, and comfortable feel.

In my opinion where they differ is the durability. While Salomon is known for making fine and durable shoes, I am not sure if they will last as long as Inov-8's Roclite G400. Simply because I tried to rip the upper of Roclite G400 on purpose (on sharp rocks outdoors), without success. The smooth and pretty much seamless upper does not give much for an option to do so. 

As for handling the wet, Roclite G400 is waterproof, whilst Salomon Wildcross is not, at least in the version I tested although a GTX version is available.

Wildcross dries fast and stays light when wet, you won't need to worry about that wearing Roclite G400. 

Hoka One One Toa (RTR Review)

Sam: At about 14.3 oz in weight at a US men’s 9 so about the same weight as the G 400, the Toa has more and softer cushion, a considerably less supportive rear collar and less overall stability and a fine but not as aggressive outsole. Its  water proof breathable eVent upper ( in the 2020 version Gore-Tex lasted over 400 miles including 200 miles of mellow terrain across Switzerland and then about 200 miles of New Hampshire boulders for my wife’s pair after showing early wear.

The significant difference in price $170 for Toa vs $235 is of note and especially  for more mellow terrain the Toa is a better value.

Hoka One One TenNine Hike GTX (RTR Review)

Sam: An important match up. The super broad platform TenNine with its distinctive swallow tail and propulsive rocker is considerably more cushioned and more stable and has a more supportive upper for sure. It is not very agile on steep uphills or fast downhills, has no ground feel to speak of but otherwise rolls along like no other boot with superb leg saving protection. It is not a boot for fast as G 400 is but worthy of consideration for long long hikes on all terrain but the more technical where the agility of the G 400 will really shine

Hoka One One Kaha (RTR Review)

Sam: The high top Kaha has more cushion stack on a wider platform,  a soft pliable upper and not as stout collar support and is more focused on trekking than hard core fast hiking as the G 400 is. At 18.2 oz it weight almost 4 oz more than the G 400 and at $15 less is about the same price. For long long hikes on mellow terrain it might be a better choice but for hard core fast hiking and some scrambling nod to the G 400.

Topo Trailventure WP (RTR Review)

Sam: Similar in underfoot cushion and protection with very decent but not the superb traction of the G400  the $145 Topo is almost $100 less but has far less rear upper support and a super broad toe box that while a great choice for wide wide feet does not have the hold of the G400 for narrower to medium feet. 

Read reviewers' full run bios here. 

The product reviewed was provided at no charge for testing. The opinions herein are the authors'.

Comments and Questions Welcome Below!

Please let us know mileage, paces, race distances, and current preferred shoes

RoadTrailRun receives a commission on purchases at the stores below.

Your purchases help support RoadTrailRun. Thanks!

HOLABIRD SPORTS

Available Now!

Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

Free Shipping on most orders over $40

RUNNING WAREHOUSE

USA  Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

FREE 2 Day Shipping EASY No Sweat Returns
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
AUSTRALIA Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

ROADRUNNER SPORTS

Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

Join VIP Family, Get Free Shipping and 15% in VIP Benefits on every order, Details here

REI Men's & Women's  SHOP HERE

AMAZON  Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

WATCH OUR YOUTUBE REVIEWS ON THE ROADTRAILRUN CHANNEL

Please Like and Follow RoadTrailRun

Facebook: RoadTrailRun.com  Instagram: @roadtrailrun

Twitter: @RoadTrailRun You Tube: @RoadTrailRun