Every season brings a fresh crop of newly born trail running shoes to add to the huge selection of classic, popular designs. We spent many hours researching over 100 different pairs before purchasing 16 of the best to include in this comparative review. To bring you the latest and greatest, we added nine new pairs while hanging onto seven of the highest performers and award winners that have been minimally updated from a season ago. These shoes represent some of the finest new releases as well as standard setters in all of the various trail running shoe categories. We tested each pair on wild adventure runs in the western United States in the winter, spring, and summer, on loose dirt trails, alpine tundra, slickrock, and more, and we are confident we have the best recommendations for you, regardless of whether you run short or long, fast or slow.
The Best Trail Running Shoes for Men of 2018
Analysis and Award Winners
With hundreds of models to choose from, selecting the optimal pair for you can be a difficult challenge. That's where we come in! We recognize that shoes are constantly being revamped or discontinued, so we are in a non-stop quest to continually test and update this review to keep it current. With snow fully melted and wildflowers in bloom, we finished up our main annual testing period and updated this review with nine brand new selections in mid-July. These are in addition to the fresh updates of the Hoka Challenger ATR 4 as well as Altra Superior 3.5 that we completed earlier in the year. After testing a large new selection, a couple of new award winners pushed their way to the top of the mountain. The Salomon S/Lab Ultra is now the highest scorer in the review, and is the best overall shoe for narrow feet. For those with regular or wide feet, the Nike Air Zoom Terra Kiger 4 is unbeatable. While not a brand new release, we finally had the chance to test the Hoka Speedgoat 2, and gave it our Top Pick Award for Maximum Cushioning. From Death Valley to Zion National Park, the San Juan Mountains of Colorado to the Cascades of Oregon — and many places in between, we've pushed each model, such as those with maximum cushioning, zero drop, ultra distance, super light, and everyday trainers, to their limits. As always, we will keep updating this review as new releases become available, so check back!
Best Overall Shoe for Narrow Feet
Salomon S/Lab Ultra
After another season of intensive shoe testing, we have a new top scorer! If it wasn't for the narrow fit in the forefoot and arch areas, a trait very common in Salomon shoes, we would happily anoint the Salomon S/Lab Ultra as the best overall trail running shoe. As it is, we still think it is the best as long as you have the average to narrower than average foot shape that will allow for a perfect fit. We love this shoe because its combination of dual density EVA foam underfoot is supportive while also providing a relatively firm and responsive ride, in contrast to the bouncy foams found in some competing shoes that compress out very quickly. Combined with the mesh upper that is completely covered in rubberized welded overlays, this shoe is far and away the most protective one you can buy, a critically important component for running gnarly trails, especially long ones. This shoe also does a great job of cradling your foot "like a glove," eliminating any movement or slop of the foot while running.
Despite incredible foot protection, durability, and stability while running, we found a few complaints to point out to discerning readers. At 23.5 ounces for a pair of men's size 11, these weren't exactly super light shoes (although they are a far cry from some of the clunkers or stompers we have tested over the years). They are also the same price as two pairs of New Balance Fresh Foam Gobi v2's, the least expensive shoes in this review. However, these shoes offer the fine-tuned performance and fit to make up for the price tag and are a fantastic shoe for ultra distance races and runs, as well as for everyday training. If they comfortably fit your (narrow) feet, we think they are the best trail running shoes you can buy!
Read Full Review: Salomon S/Lab Ultra
Best Overall Trail Running Shoe
Nike Air Zoom Terra Kiger 4
The 2018 version of the Nike Terra Kiger 4 remains largely unchanged, except for color schemes, after the very successful update last year. Since it is one of the most comfortable shoes we have ever run in, we are happy that Nike chose to just leave it exactly as is. It rides much lower to the ground than your average everyday trainer, but that doesn't stop it from offering great underfoot protection, grippy and durable traction, and a super comfortable fit. This shoe has a foot-cradling elastic sleeve inside that easily locks the foot in place while also keeping the tongue positioned correctly to keep out debris. It also features a Phylon midsole combined with Nike Air cushioning pockets that give it better than average foot protection, despite its minimalist feel. There is no doubt this shoe can help you run faster and is equipped to stand up to the abuse of trying to do so.
While we love nearly everything about this shoe, there is still room for minor improvements. In particular, the upper does little to protect the foot from trail obstacles like jagged rocks, and is itself a bit fragile, being made of only very thin mesh fabric. At the same time, we were surprised this shoe didn't weigh even less, considering it was one of the lowest profile designs we have encountered in the trail running world. Neither of these minor complaints detracts from the experience of lightness while out running, and we feel this shoe delivers as a perfect choice for any type of on or off trail running. We used it on adventures that ranged from peak scrambles to talus slopes to gentle alpine tundra and smooth single track and loved it for all these types of terrain. If you want the best trail running kick available today, we recommend making the Terra Kiger 4 your first choice.
Read review: Nike Air Zoom Terra Kiger 4
Best Bang for the Buck
Nike Air Zoom Wildhorse 4
When assessing a product's value, many people fail to look beyond the price tag. However, when judging the value of a trail running shoe, measuring the number of miles run before the shoe completely disintegrates seems to be the norm. From our testing, there is no shoe in this review more durable than the Nike Air Zoom Wildhorse 4 (although the Salomon S/Lab Ultra is close), making it our choice for the Best Bang for your Buck award. Despite over a year of testing and abuse, our pair is still going strong with no damage that would make us even consider retiring them. Stories abound in online user reviews of runners who have put these shoes through the trials of 500 or even 1000 miles before relegating them to the trash bin, suggesting that the workmanship is top notch. Compared to most of the shoes in this review, whose torn treads, ripped uppers, and easily compressed foam cushioning start to reveal themselves after perhaps less than 100 miles, the Wildhorse 4 is a true workhorse.
There is little to complain about the performance of the Wildhorse 4, which closely mimics that of the Terra Kiger 4, except with a fair bit of extra underfoot protection. While these shoes can pound out the miles, they are also pretty heavy compared to their competition, weighing in at just over 12 ounces per size 11 shoe. For this reason, they are best used by runners who appreciate foot protection over top speed. They are perfect for use as everyday trail runners, or as ultra distance race shoes. At $110 retail, these shoes are slightly cheaper than average, but the real value comes from their longevity.
Read review: Nike Air Zoom Wildhorse 4
Top Pick for the Best Traction
Inov-8 Roclite 290
The Inov-8 Roclite 280 was the most surprising shoe that we tested last year, and with no changes made since that time, remains the grippiest shoe in this review. We chose to recognize it as our Top Pick for Traction because no other shoe gripped as well to every surface that we tested: wet rock, mud, grass, steep dirt, talus, and snow. The Tri-C rubber compound was far and away the stickiest rubber found on this crop of shoes, unseating the Salomon Speedcross 4, which had the best traction in our review for many years previous. Even more impressive was the fact that this was a shoe we didn't want to leave at home. No matter what manner of running adventure we were about to have, the Roclite 290 was the shoe we wanted on our feet.
After testing these shoes on more than just a handful of runs, we did also notice a few flaws, which is to be expected. While the deep and well spaced out rubber cleats do an amazing job of gripping steep terrain, they are also prone to ripping if you treat them too roughly. We tore one off while scrambling across a steep boulder slope on a peak climb. They are also pretty thin underfoot, giving the runner great feel for what they are landing on, but also shortchanging them a hair on underfoot protection. For that reason, these shoes are best worn for shorter days, or by those whose feet are prepared to stand up to a little bit of extra abuse. Think floating speedster more than plodding stomper. If you want optimal traction, and also love shoes that are comfortable, stable, lightweight, and sensitive, the Roclite 290 is surely worth a look.
Read review: Inov-8 Roclite 290
Top Pick for Maximum Cushioning
HOKA Speedgoat 2
Maximally cushioned shoes have a huge following in the trail running world, and for good reason! Not only do they protect your feet from rocks and other protrusions, they also absorb some of the impact of the act of running itself, resulting in less wear on your body. For older runners and ultra runners in particular, these advantages are huge. With such a large cult following, we wanted to add more breadth to this section of our review, and boy are we glad that we did! After many test runs, the Hoka Speedgoat 2 blew us away as the best maximally cushioned shoe that we have run in. It has a flatter and more stable feeling platform than the Hoka Challenger ATR 4, while also holding your foot in place more comfortably with a far more padded upper. These attributes, combined with larger and deeper lugs on the outsole made for a noticeable increase in our running pleasure while wearing the Speedgoats.
On the downside, these shoes still suffered from the classic complaints inherent in the maximally cushioned design. With a super fat midsole, your foot lives far off the ground, making for a less stable ride, especially on rocky and uneven terrain. They are also not very sensitive, a bit heavier than the Challenger ATR 4, and like all Hokas are pretty expensive. For ultra racers, older (more experienced) runners, those recovering from impact or overuse related injuries, or just anyone who likes a bit of extra bounce in their step, the advantages of a maximally cushioned shoe generally far outweigh the cons. If this sounds like you, we encourage you to check out the Hoka Speedgoat 2.
Read review: Hoka Speedgoat 2
Top Pick for Zero Drop
Altra Superior 3.5
The Altra Superior 3.5 is by far our favorite zero drop shoe. Zero drop simply means that the height of the midsole and outsole, basically everything that sits underneath your foot, is the same beneath the heel as it is in the toe area, mimicking the way our feet function when not in shoes at all. Surprisingly, very few running shoes available today are designed without a heel that sits higher than the forefoot, but that is exactly the market that Altra caters to. While Altra's trail running shoe line has expanded drastically in the last two years, the highly refined Superior 3.5, one of their original trail runners, has regained its old, lovable form. This shoe is supremely comfortable, doing an amazing job of correcting the discomfort inherent in the previous version while offering a wide fit throughout the shoe that will really appeal to those who have a hard time fitting in narrower toe boxes. The shoe is light, nimble, grips the ground well, and is supremely sensitive, offering unrivaled trail feel.
We happily recommend this shoe over its larger, clunkier cousin, the Altra Lone Peak 3.5. However, the shoes fill slightly different needs, and the Superior 3.5 will please runners who believe that less is more. It lacks a bit in underfoot protection if not using the included StoneGuard inserts, which we have found drastically alter the fit of the shoe, and not for the better. And while some may love the shoe for its wide fit, we think a number of people will have a hard time locking it down tight enough to generate a responsive ride. This shoe seems designed for shorter, faster runs, such as for speed work or shorter races, and that is how our testers enjoyed it the best. On the other hand, we have watched ultra racers win 50 milers in these shoes, so there is no limit to what they are capable of. For those who love zero drop shoes and the anatomically correct stride that they promote, we think that the Superior 3.5 is the new standard.
Read review: Altra Superior 3.5
Analysis and Test Results
The only essential piece of gear for running on trails is a good pair of shoes. Trail running shoes tackle the specific demands of the off-road environment, whether that means rocks, roots, mud, loose dirt and gravel, grass, or even steep scrambling. They have more durable outsoles than road running shoes, featuring sticky rubber and large, grippy lugs to help you gain the purchase you need. They also tend to have a rock plate or extra foam cushioning to protect the bottom of your feet from obstacles not found on the road. To compile the results and information contained within this trail running shoe review, we extensively tested each of the 16 models of shoes described here during countless hours of trail running adventures and training. Even though five of the models found in this review are holdovers from last year, we again tested them side-by-side against the eleven new pairs of shoes released this year, to be sure that all of the results and statements we make are congruent with what is available for purchase today.
Testing involves a lot more than simply going out for runs while wearing different pairs of shoes (although there is a whole lot of that). We pride ourselves on making the best comparisons among the various products to help differentiate which shoes are truly better. To help us, and you the reader, we have carefully rated each shoe based on six different metrics, giving a grade of 1 to 10 on how well each shoe performed. Furthermore, we weighted each of the metrics based on how important we feel it is to a shoe's overall performance. The table above shows where each shoe ranks in overall performance score.
Scores were awarded in comparison to each of the other shoes. Below we describe each rating metric in detail, including what are the most important aspects of that metric, how we tested it, how much it is weighted toward the final score, and what are the best shoes for that particular purpose. We want to point out that we selected what we thought were the 16 best and most representative trail running shoes after assessing the entire market, so even if a shoe receives a low overall score here, we still think that it is an elite product.
While all of the metrics combine to form the shoe's overall score, it is important to delve into the individual metrics to find the shoe that best fits your needs. For instance, you may not be interested in our top-rated shoe if it scores highly in a metric that is not important to you. Maybe the model got that rating due to its exemplary foot protection when you might define sensitivity as your primary criteria. Don't necessarily write off a shoe simply because it isn't the highest scoring shoe in the review. Delve deeper into the numbers that we have provided and carefully read the individual reviews!
A significant critical consideration when selecting a pair of trail running shoes is the value of the purchase. While one could simply assume that you get what you pay for, and thus more expensive products are also the highest performing, years of testing has proven to us that this isn't always the case. We don't grade each product specifically for value, but we do talk about the value in each individual review, so look there if you are curious about our thoughts.
When considering the value of a trail running shoe, three aspects are critical to consider: price, performance, and longevity. Two of these, price and performance, are easily quantifiable and can be compared effectively in the chart below. Mouse over the dots to see which product is represented (blue dots represent award winners). The further right a product is means the higher it scored in our cumulative scoring, whereas the lower on the chart it is represents a lower retail price. Thus, the products in the lower right-hand corner of this table give you the best performance vs. price, a solid indicator of value.
The third aspect of value for a trail running shoe is longevity, something that is not at all easy to quantify. Since all pairs of shoes wear out in a finite period and need to be replaced, finding shoes that can withstand more miles of abuse before disintegrating is also critical to ascertaining that shoe's value. Unfortunately, not only does every runner put a different amount of strain on their shoes, but we didn't have the time or energy to completely trash 16 pairs of shoes before publishing our findings! That said, after many years of testing literally hundreds of pairs of shoes, we have noticed some areas of shoes that tend to be the first points of failure, as well as certain design features that tend to wear out quicker than desired. While we don't want to succumb to speculation, we have pointed out issues we have found in a shoe's individual review.
In our opinion, the most important criteria for evaluating a trail running shoe is how well it protects your foot. After all, if it didn't offer your foot protection, why would you be wearing it? The largest component of protection is what is found underfoot — in short, the combination of the outsole and midsole. The soles of the feet are among the most sensitive areas of your body, so if you intend to run on rocky and uneven terrain, which is what we do when we trail run, then your shoe will need adequate underfoot protection. Forego this protection, and watch how your feet will dictate to you whether you can run on a trail or not, and how fast you can go.
Most underfoot protection comes in one of two forms: a rock plate made of a hard plastic or composite material that adds rigidity to the shoe and absorbs impacts, or in lieu of that, thick foam cushioning. The most common type of foam found in contenders is EVA foam, which not only protects the foot from protrusions but also absorbs a significant amount of the impact inherent to running before it travels upward into a runner's body. The third method of underfoot protection, found on the Nike shoes in this review, is trapped air pockets in the heel that also offer both protection and cushioning. An interesting component of foot protection is that it often comes at the expense of sensitivity, and vice versa, which is why we graded for both.
A lesser component of foot protection is how well the upper does in protecting the top and sides of your foot from protrusions like sticks or abrasion by rocks. The ends of the toes are a common point of abuse, as we have all accidentally kicked a rock while bombing down the trail. Rigid toe bumpers go a long way to helping alleviate this pain, as does choosing a shoe that is not too tight on the toes. Many manufacturers skimp on upper materials to save weight and offer greater breathability and water drainage, while some have uppers that are as mighty as a Kevlar bulletproof vest.
Three shoes, in particular, offered the best of the best in foot protection. Our Editors' Choice award-winning Salomon S/Lab Ultra did a great job of protecting the undersides of our feet with its dual density EVA foam, while also providing far more upper protection than any other shoe we tested. The combination left us smiling, and ensured we could run down a trail as out of control as we wanted, knowing that our shoes had our back. Offering an even greater amount of underfoot protection, but without a hugely protective upper, are both of the maximally cushioned Hokas that we tested — the Speedgoat 2 as well as the Hoka Challenger ATR 4. These shoes have tons of absorptive foam cushioning that not only absorbs impact from rocks, but also from the ground in general. Since we think this is such a vital component to running your best anywhere off-road, we weighted foot protection as 30% of a shoe's final score.
Mud, snow, grass, slippery or wet rocks, tree roots, logs, talus, scree, loose dirt — all of these surfaces are commonly encountered along the trail, so you need a trail running shoe that will grip when it matters.
To tackle these myriad surfaces, manufacturers have introduced many diverse solutions through sole material and design. Many of our test pieces have large arrow-shaped lugs, most of them employ a type of rubber stickier than your average road shoe, and most incorporate spaced out traction to shed mud easier as well.
Overall, we were impressed with the creativity and different materials that manufacturers use to create traction. But, we weren't content to only rely on our running adventures to tell us which shoes had the best traction, and so devised some head-to-head traction tests. For this, we tested each shoe on the same stretches of steep loose dirt, steep grass, steep muddy trail, dry talus, and wet rock. In the end, the highest ranking models were the ones that could tackle it all and never left us doubting whether we could firmly land and push off on any given surface. The best shoes tend to have deep, multi-directional lugs that are well spaced apart to better shed mud, cover the entire sole from end to end and side to side and are made of sticky, durable rubber. Short lugs don't grip grass and mud as well, while closely spaced lugs tend to collect mud and don't grip loose dirt easily; rubber compounds that are too firm don't give us confidence on talus and wet rock.
After all of these tests, there was a clear winner, the Inov-8 Roclite 290, which we recognized as a Top Pick for Traction. Its widely spaced, deep cleats are made of supremely sticky rubber, and handled every traction test with impressive ease, including wet rock! The insanely aggressive outsole of the Salomon Speedcross 4 also has large, well-spaced lugs, but it doesn't manage to grip wet rock quite as well as the Roclite 290. Likewise, the gnarly spiked outsole of the Saucony Peregrine 8, totally revamped in design from the past two versions of the shoe, may look like some medieval torture device but works exceptionally well at gripping all surfaces. Since improved traction is one of the foremost reasons why you would choose to buy a trail running shoe instead of just any old regular running shoe, it accounts for 20% of a product's overall score.
Any time that you wear something on your foot, you are modifying your body's natural ability to stand and move from a stable platform. Landing on the ground and pushing off for each stride from a stable platform is a fundamental aspect of running, and one that is greatly affected by the type of surface you are running over. When testing for stability, we looked for how easy it was to maintain our normal running mechanics over variable terrain while wearing that shoe. We found that some shoes would bend and morph to the running surface, forcing us to adjust our landing and push-off. While running in some others, we felt that the shape of the shoe required us to change our stride to ensure a stable platform.
Generally speaking, the lower to the ground our foot is (represented by the "stack height" which can be found in our specs table), the more stable it felt, giving us the confidence to push our speed without rolling an ankle. Another way to ensure a stable platform is to make the shoe wider and flatter, especially in the forefoot, as many of the most stable shoes did, so that our feet can splay out naturally as they go through the incredibly complex motion of landing and then pushing off again. In general, narrow shoes with high stack heights or large heel-toe drop (the difference in height between the heel and toe, measured in millimeters, can also be found in the specs table) feel the least stable underfoot and are the most prone to rolling an ankle or landing awkwardly. While many people appreciate the extra cushioning in the heel that comes with a high heel-toe drop, in our experience, especially when running downhill and across a hill, stability is indeed compromised by this trait.
Most of our testing for stability was done while out on trail or adventure runs, but we also compared shoes in a more controlled setting by running in each of them one after the other both across a steep hillside and straight down a similarly steep slope. Two shoes in particular feel significantly more stable than their competition, giving us increased confidence to push our speed on all types of terrain. The Altra Superior 3.5 is the winner of our Top Pick for Zero Drop, and is also the most stable that we tested. The combination of a completely flat footbed without any heel rise and a super wide platform that allows one's feet to splay out fully when landing ensures that stability is never compromised with this shoe. Despite having a 4mm heel-toe drop, the Nike Terra Kiger 4 feels equally as stable when running on varied terrain. This is due once again to the wide toe box and forefoot area of the shoe and the very low to the ground ride. As a critical component of a trail running shoe's performance, but not the most important, we assigned stability 15% of a shoe's final score.
Comfort is probably the single most important criteria when it comes to selecting a running shoe, or any footwear at all for that matter, and is what we recommend you value above all other factors when selecting a pair of shoes for you. However, it is also the criteria most difficult to rate - because it is so subjective. Everyone's foot is different, so what feels amazing to one person could be un-wearable by another. Some products are wide in the toe box while narrow in the heel, and some are just really narrow (or wide) throughout. Some fit perfectly "to size," while others run slightly long or short. We have done our best to describe how each model fits in the individual reviews. Since the comfort level of each shoe will be different for each person, we chose only to rate it 15% of a product's final score. We didn't want to penalize a shoe that felt uncomfortable to our head tester too much when many other people will naturally end up loving it. However, we did find some universal factors that could be compared and rated.
Craftsmanship seemed to play a large part in how comfortable a given model is. The most comfortable pairs use a seamless construction that make them easy to wear sockless (although we don't commonly do so, except for comparison testing). Poorly sewn seams or out of place material overlaps inside a shoe tend to rub and wear against the foot over long distances, significantly decreasing their overall comfort. Likewise, shoes that don't do a good job of naturally holding the foot in place meant that we needed to crank down the laces to provide a secure fit, often leading to discomfort along the top of our feet or front of the ankle joint over long distances. Some shoes don't breathe very well and left our feet excessively hot and sweaty, while others are a bit too short for the size, meaning our toes would hit the front of the shoe, especially while running downhill. Most of our findings for the Comfort metric were based on our anecdotal evidence from long runs on a variety of terrain. We also conducted the water drainage test (described in detail below) to get a better grip on which shoes absorb the least amount of water or sweat; our test also measured which contenders are the most efficient at drying out afterward, which we defined as another essential component of comfort.
At the end of our testing period, it was clear that three shoes were more comfortable to us than the rest. We experienced no rubbing, pinching, or blisters when running long distances in these shoes, and honestly, we rarely noticed them at all, perhaps the best compliment that can be made about a shoe after a long run. At the top of this list was our best overall trail running shoe, the Nike Terra Kiger 4, which we felt we could run in every day for the rest of our lives and be happy. The similar but more protective Nike Wildhorse 4 relied on many of the same design concepts to deliver unrivaled comfort. Lastly, the New Balance Fresh Foam Gobi Trail v2 is very well cushioned, both underfoot as well as surrounding the feet and ankle bones, leading to a supremely comfortable running experience. Most of the other pairs of shoes tested are also very comfortable, and to some degree, it is impossible to eliminate user bias when grading for this metric. With that in mind, we still strongly recommend you try shoes on before committing to a purchase. If you decide to order online, do so from a company that will allow you to return them if they don't fit as well as you had hoped.
The Water Drainage Test
The idea behind this test is to attempt to scientifically prove what products absorbed the least amount of water and then shed it quickest, making them well suited for runs or races where your feet are guaranteed to get wet. Running in the mountains of Colorado on a daily basis, it seems our feet are always wet. We either have to ford streams and creeks or end up tromping through muddy swamps, and no matter how careful we can be, our feet get wet.
If we don't have these problems, it still seems like they get wet from morning dew on the bushes and grass, or from afternoon rainstorms, or simply by sweating because it's so hot. Whether you run in the mountains in summer like we do, or run trails on the East Coast or Pacific Northwest, we suspect that water management is a critical factor in the performance of a trail running shoe for nearly everyone.
To conduct this test, we weighed each pair when dry. We then dunked each model in a bucket of water for 20 seconds to give them a chance to absorb water, then held them upside down to drain for another 20 seconds. Finally, we quickly weighed them again to see how much water weight they had absorbed into their material. We then put them on without socks and jogged around the block for exactly five minutes, took them off, and weighed them a third time to see how much water weight they had shed while running. For each model, we calculated as a percentage of their dry weight how much water they absorbed while being dunked for 20 seconds and how much water they still retained after a five-minute run compared to when they were dry.
The Salomon S/Lab Ultra were almost an outlier when considering water absorption immediately after dunking. Made largely of synthetic mesh and felt-like materials, these shoes absorbed less than 20% of their weight in water, making them by far the best choice if you want a shoe that will not absorb any water. The North Face Ultra Vertical and the New Balance Summit Unknown were also top scorers when it came to not absorbing water. If you gave all the shoes the benefit of the doubt and allowed them five minutes of running to shed any water that was absorbed while dunking, these three still had the least increase in water weight, but were also joined by the Topo Athletic Runventure 2, which managed to shed the water pretty efficiently. Check out the chart below to see how each pair of shoes performed in the water bucket test:
Weight proved to be a fairly easy criterion to judge. Fresh out of the box we weighed each trail running shoe individually and together as a pair, and completely ignored what the manufacturer claimed the weight was. For reference, every product that we received was a U.S. men's size 11. These weight scores should be representative, although not exact in their measurement, no matter what size feet you have. We then paid attention to how heavy the shoe felt while running in them daily. A few were startlingly light, and the math was easily backed up while out wearing them.
In general this year, we found that trail running shoes were more tightly grouped at the lower end of the weight scale, while not being willing to cut out necessary features like protection to attain a low weight. However, at a mere 16 ounces per pair, the Hoka Evo Jawz blew every other shoe out of the water, weighing three ounces less than the next closest competitor. This shoe is reminiscent of a racing flat but designed with mountain running in mind. The second lightest shoe is the Scarpa Spin, which thrives on short and fast mountain runs. Numerous other shoes weighed in right around 20 ounces, but perhaps the most remarkable of these is the New Balance Gobi Trail v2 because it includes a very nicely padded upper in combination with a lot of underfoot foam, giving more protection than its weight would suggest. As an essential thing to consider, but not the be-all-end-all in running shoe performance, we assigned weight 10% of a product's final score.
When grading for sensitivity, we tried to notice how well we could feel the trail while wearing any given shoe.
Like we mentioned before, sensitivity often comes at the expense of foot protection, and vice versa. We tried our best not to be judgmental about whether feeling the trail is a good or bad thing, or what amount of sensitivity we preferred but rather graded the most sensitive the highest. While it is easy to decide which ones were the most and least sensitive, it is a preference thing regarding how sensitive you want your trail running shoe to be. Some people like to be intimately connected to the ground they are moving over, while others would prefer to have much more protection for their foot, which often comes at the expense of sensitivity.
We tested the sensitivity of shoes pretty much the same way that we tested for underfoot protection — by choosing an especially rocky and jagged patch of trail and running back and forth over it countless times in each shoe, comparing how they felt. The shoes that are the thinnest underfoot were most often also the most sensitive, a fact which shouldn't really be that surprising. Three shoes proved that they are designed to emphasize sensitivity and trail feel above underfoot protection.
The Altra Superior 3.5, relying on a scant amount of foam cushioning, is perhaps the most sensitive of this group, but also comes with an optional removable StoneGuard rock shield, which is a thin flexible insert that can be added underneath the insole for added protection, and naturally dampens the sensitivity a tad. However, we find that adding this protection reduces the volume of the shoe enough that it is no longer comfortable for us to run in, and after asking everyone we have seen with these shoes whether they use it, they all concur that they prefer to run without it in place. We graded the model based on not having the rock shield, thus enhancing its natural sensitivity. The two lightest shoes — the Scarpa Spin and Hoka Evo Jawz — are also some of the lightest on underfoot protection, a reliable indicator of sensitivity, and should be among the first shoes considered for someone who values trail feel more than protection. As a somewhat less important aspect of a shoe's performance, we only allowed sensitivity to account for 10% of a shoe's overall score.
There are so many trail running shoes available on the market today that choosing the best pair can present a real challenge. Even after testing the very best shoes available for literally hundreds of hours, we still have a hard time choosing the one that we like best, and indeed prefer to have a quiver to choose from based upon the run planned for each day. We hope that the information that we have presented here has helped make your choice easier, and encourage you to delve deeper into the individual metrics and reviews to better understand which shoe will be optimal for your needs.
Still not sure? Take a look at our buying advice article for more info.