The following review was featured in Trail Runner magazine and is published courtesy of Trail Runner magazine.

Trail shoes have come a long way in a relatively short span. Ten years ago, there were only a handful of shoes that qualified as true "trail shoes." Five years ago, there were about a dozen running shoes on the market specifically designed for trails, but most of those shoes were grossly inadequate. They were one of two types: overbuilt road shoes with knobby outsoles, earth toned uppers with overlays of leather or synthetic waterproof material, and toe bumpers; or modified hiking or approach shoes that were rigid and had only a few ounces (but nowhere close to enough) shaved from the hiking mold. Today, however, there are approximately 70 styles of trail running shoes available with more than 20 manufacturers in the market.

Running shoe companies approached the trail market from their road, track, and cross-country background, while hiking and climbing shoe manufacturers came at trail running from the outdoor industry angle. The current selection of trail shoes indicates that the two approaches have finally reached a happy medium, one where speed and performance meet traction and durability. Trail runners are the beneficiaries of the flow of designers, developers, and product line managers that has transpired between running shoe companies like Nike, adidas, and Reebok and outdoor industry companies like The North Face, Mountain Athletics by Timberland, and Salomon. The different trade groups have melded with the result being better-designed trail shoes.

Although this spring’s offering of trail shoes is more diverse and expansive than ever before, it shows noticeable trend towards the middle ground of a performance-oriented hybrid shoe that functions well on most any surface. The testers considered only a few of the shoes to be "trail only" or too burly for running on pavement. In fact, most of the testers found the shoes did well transitioning between road and trail, which makes sense because most trail runners are unable to avoid some, albeit minimal, contact with streets.

This review was performed with the assistance of a diverse test team (see sidebar) who readily volunteered to log miles and fill out forms to give this guide objectivity through a range of views from runners with different needs, backgrounds, abilities, genders, ages, foot types, running styles, preferences, and idiosyncrasies. There were a lot of idiosyncrasies! Their general feedback and comments provide a valuable element of reality and pump life into what would otherwise be a technical cataloging of the various shoe features or one person’s perspective.

Although the spring review includes more than 20 trail shoes, it only covers new shoes for current release. Shoes slated for release later in the year will be featured in future "Trail Tested" columns. Many manufacturers have carried their more successful lines forward from prior seasons and reviews of those models are available in back issues and on www.trailrunnermag.com. To find out if you can still buy a favorite trail shoe style, call your local specialty running shoe retailer or check out the manufacturer’s web site. Company information is listed in the contacts sidebar.

Buzz

It was more the futuristic appearance than the name of this shoe that caused a real buzz among the testers, but adidas’ gaitered waterproof shoe was the most talked-about shoe of the bunch. And most of the talk was resoundingly positive!

Essentially a waterproof version of the adidas Boost, the Buzz features a zip-up lace cover and removable mini-gaiter that adidas calls an "MP" which stands for "mud protector" or "monkey panty," depending on who you ask. The shoes were highly rated for fit, performance, weight, and cushioning. The words used to describe the shoe included "great," "agile," "nimble," "energetic," "snug," "glove-like," "versatile," "quick," "responsive," "high-tech," and "Star Trek."

A favorite among the testers, the only complaints about the Buzz were the lack of breathability of the upper and the sentiment that it was not well-suited for runners with larger volume feet or who need extra support and motion control.

Lightfoot

Sometimes a name says it all. This shoe is, indeed, true to its name, but adidas could just as appropriately have chosen the moniker "Surefoot." The Lightfoot is a minimalist approach to trail running and is more akin to a fell, cross-country, or racing flat than the usual clunky shoe that one conjures at the mention of trail footwear. It is an extremely low profile shoe, which gives incredible trail "feel" — more than any other trail shoe on the market. However, while that close-to-the-ground sense of touch is heightened so too is vulnerability to bone bruising.

The Lightfoot is suited for short trail races or for stable, lightweight runners who want to run with speed and are not concerned about cushioning or support. The outsole has ample traction, the midsole is almost nonexistent, and the upper is both breathable and secure. Depending on a runner’s weight and running style and the surface on which the Lightfoot is run, they might not endure more than a couple hundred miles, but at least those miles will fly by with these featherweights!

Gel Nandi DS III

Was Asics was trying to make the uppers from last season’s Nandi more sexy by adding fishnet styling? Sex sells, but the purpose of the outer cosmetic mesh is a total mystery. Fortunately the changes to the shoe were only superficial, and the testers easily overcame initial negative impressions when they ran on the Nandi and appreciated the dandy performance. One tester loved the Nandi so much she said she would not change a thing about them!

Recommended by the testers as very stable for runners with higher-volume feet, the Nandi was perceived as lightweight, especially given their ample support and protection. High ratings also went to the lacing system, durability, traction, cushioning, quality of construction, and general performance on trails in all conditions. A tester who has battled plantar facitis was particularly fond of the stability and support. The Nandi’s only negatives (besides the PG-13 rating) were the midsole stiffness and an awkward heel-to-toe transition when walking or on flat, smooth trails or roads

Kronos

A new arrival in the trail running market and one of several mountaineering shoe companies to add their experience to the mix, Boreal’s start is a strong one. The Kronos evinces Boreal’s expertise in climbing shoes and mountaineering boots by integrating high-density sticky rubber and a secure-fitting upper. The Kronos are a lot like Montrail’s Vitesse, with more midsole rigidity (more than the testers appreciated) and better traction from both the outsole pattern and rubber compound.

The Kronos feature higher-cut, slip-on, mesh and waterproof leather uppers with bungee cord lacing and a lace lock for ease of use. The shoes tested well on rugged single track trail but were given low marks on more tame surfaces, especially on pavement, where they were too firm an did not provide enough cushioning. The shoes felt light, provided ample protection from bone bruising, and were rated as very durable, good looking, and well-built. The Kronos gives Boreal a promising toe hold into the trail running market and it will be interesting to see what innovations the company can bring with future off-road and adventure shoes

Gila II

For those who loved the first iteration of this shoe, you will be pleased to learn that the Gila II is not too great a departure from its predecessor. The Gila was rated as a very good all-around shoe that ran particularly well on dirt roads and fire trails. Due to a well-designed "Crumple Zone" outsole and midsole construction, the Gila offered superb forefoot flex, but did not have enough protection in the forefoot on rocky terrain.

The Gila is a high-tech package of supportive, cushioning, stabilizing, and protective devices. The testers observed that, for the most part, the technologies actually worked, even though the shoe had a "drab," "not flashy," and "blah" appearance. One tester loved the fit of the Gila and chose them as her favorite of the bunch, wanting to go back to them throughout the test. The Gila was given its only negative marks for being too high off the ground, having a sloppy-fitting heel, and having inadequate forefoot protection from bone bruising

Enduro

Designed to be both a trail running and "adventure sport" shoe, the Enduro is remarkably light and runable. The testers gave thumbs up for the Enduro’s comfort and fit, but noted that although the speed lacing made the shoe easy to get into and out of, it had a tendency to loosen up and feel sloppy. On longer runs and rockier trails, the testers found the cushioning inadequate and noted that the forefoot midsole lacked suitable protection. As a price point shoe, the Enduro’s materials don’t compete with the durability of more expensive trail running and adventure shoes, but the tests indicated that the Enduro offered a lot for its $65 suggested retail price. As far as aesthetics are concerned, the Enduro was seen as one of the more handsome shoes tested.

It is particularly noteworthy that Hi-Tec offers the Enduro in a mid-cut style. This is great news for trail runners who seek extra ankle protection or prefer a higher cut at a time when almost every other trail running shoe manufacturer has stopped producing mid-cut shoes.

Catalyst

The Catalyst might have gotten its name because it is a light enough hiking shoe that it might be the catalyst to move a hiker to run . . . and buy (other) shoes designed for running. This rugged, well-made shoe offers plenty of traction, cushioning, and protection from sharp rocks and other trail hazards. The testers found them to be rugged and "very beefy" with a great tread. They also appreciated the composite shank and enhancements that Hi-Tec has integrated into the shoe for medial and lateral support. The testers did not, however, want to run very far in the Catalyst, characterizing them instead as better for hiking or as an approach shoe that serves as a running shoe in a pinch. They were slated as a "recreational" shoe that was pretty good for almost all outside activities.

Torrent

Coming from Maine, it is no surprise that LL Bean’s shoe would be a Gore Tex stalwart that can plow through snow and slush with the best of them. After their initial impression that the Torrent was heavy, stiff, and bulky, the testers were pleased to find the shoe fared better than they had expected. For trail runners who want a firm midsole that provides plenty of rigidity for kicking steps into snow on a traverse or ascent, the Torrent is an excellent choice.

Built to last and keep your feet dry — at least from the outside if worn with a gaiter — the Torrent generally fit the testers well, except in the toe box. As a waterproof shoe, it did not breath well and was also heavy, board-like, inflexible, lacking in cushion, and clunky on paved surfaces. The testers recommended the Torrent as a good choice for heavier runners who were going to use them for slower running and hiking and for runners seeking stability and protection.

Exotech

The Exotech is a hard shoe to nail down. It is an excellent light hiker/approach shoe, yet it is comfortable and smooth enough for running. A bit heavier and stiffer than the testers would prefer for a true trail running shoe, the Exotech ended up being pegged as a solid adventure shoe that was stable and durable enough for carrying a pack and transitioning between running and hiking. A great "shuffle" shoe, if you will.

The testers found that Merrell did a fine job with the Exotech’s construction and thought the shoe would have a long life, especially in light of the firmness of the midsole, which the testers deemed too rigid for single track agility or high-speed performance.

Leona Divide

All too often a company makes a good shoe only to discontinue the style the next season. Montrail bucks that trend by taking its high-quality shoes and improving on them. The Leona Divide exemplifies Montrail’s dedication to its trail running customers. Montrail listened to the comments and suggestions of its users and altered the shoe to address those concerns so that the end product is a superb, stable, lightweight trail running shoe that offers excellent traction.

The changes from the predecessor include a lace loop on the tongue that prevents the tongue from slipping down, a softer collar around the ankle, a wider toe box yet less overall foot volume, and the removal of rock-collecting treads. The testers appreciated these changes and gave the Leona Divide high marks on overall performance, flexibility, aesthetic appearance, stability, breathability, traction, durability, and weight (or lack thereof). The only negatives were aimed at the bellowed tongue and lacing system and one tester had a problem with the way the tongue crease pressed on the top of her foot.

Wasatch II

Montrail also scored high marks on its improvements to the Wasatch, which is a more rugged (characterized by the testers as "burly" or "bomber") trail runner than the sleeker Leona Divide. The Wasatch II was successfully designed as an endurance shoe that offers stability, protection, and cornering and edging performance. The testers found the Wasatch to be very stable and recognized the emphasis that Montrail put on the mid-foot support, offering excellent performance on technical trails. This shoe got very favorable overall ratings from all of the testers who were lucky enough to try it.

The Wasatch is not, however, a shoe you would want to use for the roads. The testers found the shoe was too much for paved surfaces, given its armor-like protection and lack of breathability in the water-resistant upper.

Charging

The name was not intended to have any subliminal message in connection with your credit card. The Charging embodies Mountain Athletics’ ties with Timberland in that it is a well made shoe that is probably better suited for fast hiking, given its heavier weight and burly upper. The shoe would make an excellent beginner’s trail running shoe, especially if the novice is coming to trail running from a hiking background.

The testers enjoyed the shoe’s traction, cushioning, and protection and recommended it as excellent footwear for fastpacking or adventure sports, especially for recreational athletes with high-volume feet. The Charging received poor marks for flexibility, fit, and performance on technical trails, where agility is at a premium. One tester found the flex point across the top of his foot quite painful. Another was skeptical about the shoe’s bulky appearance until he put them on and ran in them and was pleasantly surprised by the performance.

McQuick

In contrast to other shoes in the Mountain Athletics line, which appear to have been influenced by Timberland’s hiking origins, the McQuick is more of a road shoe with trail features. It is, indeed, a fast and sleek shoe, with one of the lowest profiles for close-to-the-ground agility, trail "feel," and some exposure to bone bruising. The testers found the McQuick to be a very lightweight, flexible, and highly responsive shoe on most all surfaces, including road. They also enjoyed the grip of the rubber outsole and the lace flap that protects the laces from trail snags. The fit was generally comfortable, although a bit wide and voluminous in the forefoot.

The negative side of the McQuick’s minimalist midsole and forefoot flexibility was that the shoe lacked sufficient forefoot cushioning and did not offer enough protection for longer runs or on more rugged, rocky trails. The testers also found the shoe’s upper did not breath very well and the ankle collar was too rigid. In one case the shoe caused the tester to blister on his Achilles tendon.

704 AT

Sometimes less is more. Although New Balance has done remarkably well with its 800 AT series and also offers an even more burly 900 AT series, its more simple 700 AT shoes consistently offer adequate cushioning, protection, and stability at a lower price. Even though the 804 and 904 come with New Balance’s cushioning compound, ABZORB, in both the forefoot and heel while the 704 only has heel ABZORB, the testers found the shoe to be cushioned enough for their trail running needs. So why pay more?

The 704 performed very well on all surfaces, from paved roads to rugged single track. It fit the testers well and, as a New Balance shoe, comes in a variety of widths. One tester noted that the forefoot was comfortably wide for his moderately wide feet. The 704 was also stable and supportive, offering adequate forefoot flex and protection and moderate traction. This versatile shoe is an excellent one-shoe-does-it-all option for the budget-minded runner who loves to run on all types of terrain.

Air Sebec

This "Jack of all trades" shoe was a master of none, yet managed to leave a generally good impression with the testers, especially given that they all had somewhat negative first impressions due to the ugly appearance of this bland shoe. The Sebec is well suited for the normal, casual, recreational runner who won’t be running high mileage, on especially technical trail. The shoe would not fare well with runners needing extra support, stability, cushion, or protection.

Many of the testers found the fit too narrow in the forefoot and reported the weight too heavy. Others liked the low profile versatility. The Sebec drew the widest range of opinions of any shoe tested, which attests to the fact that this is a middle-of-the-trail shoe. Given the diverse and sometimes opposite impressions of the testers, it would be best to try the Sebec with a test run on a treadmill or clean surface at a specialty running shoe store that allows for pre-purchase test runs.

Air Max Tailwind

When the testers first got the Tailwind, they thought there was a mistake. Several immediately reported: "This is a high-end road shoe!" Indeed, it is, but to the testers’ pleasant surprise, it also functioned well on the trails and was a great shoe for runs that combined both road and trail. The Tailwind’s Air and PU midsole offered plenty of cushioning and rated moderately well for stability and protection on tame trails. The testers, however, had reservations about using the shoe on technical trails and only recommend the Tailwind for trail runners who are lighter on their feet and who don’t need any special support or stability needs.

The testers generally liked the fit and feel of the Tailwind, although the female testers found the heel hold insecure. The appearance of the Tailwind drew some interesting remarks from the testers: "swish," "fun," "space ship looking," "sci-fi," "like Spiderman," "spiffy," "crazy graphical designs," "wild and wacky colors," "something you’d see in Blade Runner," and "what was Nike thinking with these colors?"

Baja

Planning on running on Moab’s Slick Rock or going canyoneering or heading to the beach? Then check out the Baja. These hot climate running shoes are a novel addition to the mix of trail shoes on the market. Appropriately, the Baja features a white, extremely breathable mesh upper and its gusseted tongue serves to shield the foot from sand or trail debris. The speed lacing system was quite comfortable, although the shoes ran a bit wide for the testers. Although the Baja features a somewhat heavy gummy rubber outsole, the testers perceived the shoes as relatively lightweight. The shoes are not recommended for technical single track where traction and stability are required. Unfortunately for small women trail runners in hot environments, the Baja only comes in men’s sizes 7-14.

Coyote Ridge

One of the tester’s all-around favorites, the Coyote Ridge managed to please everyone as a low-profile, nimble, lightweight, supportive, stable, protective, durable, flexible and versatile trail shoe that offered excellent traction and a comfortable fit. As it did with the Ultra 100, North Face got this shoe right! According to the testers, the shoe looked great, performed very well — even on technical single track — and was highly recommended for agile runners who want a responsive shoe that is good enough to race on, especially in races that are between two and three hours in length.

The only negatives that the testers found with the Coyote Ridge were that the lacing system did not allow for customized localization of pressure on their feet and a couple testers thought the shoe could use a bit more cushioning in the forefoot. One tester found the toe box was too large and the arch too wide, which caused her toes to bump into the front of the shoe on descents.

XCIII

As was the case with previous iterations of the XCIII, it is a good all-around running shoe, regardless of the running surface. As a relatively basic trail shoe, the testers found the even though the shoe lacked extra bells and whistles, it had a certain integrity that translated into a simple ride that left a good overall impression. As one tester (who generally liked the shoe) so aptly put it: "There are no stand out features on this shoe!" With a $70 suggested retail price, the XCIII is an excellent "beginners" trail shoe, especially for a runner transitioning from roads to trail and who plans to run both.

The XCIII received excellent marks on its perceived weight, general fit, overall function, performance, traction, and upper breathability. One tester swore by the XCIII’s "perfect fit" and chose the shoe for his long runs. However, the XCIII got low ratings on its arch support, toe box fit, the comfort of its ankle collar height, and the lack of forefoot and heel cushioning.

Summit II DMX

The testers’ overwhelming response to the Summit II DMX’s performance was one of pleasant surprise. After scoffing at the shoe’s appearance and making comments as to how the shoes were "goofy," "ugly . . . even with mud on them," "hideous in color," "belong on a basketball court or an ‘Abdomonizer’ infomercial," "not a shoe I’d pick for aesthetics," and wondering aloud if they had been "stolen from a Wal-Mart employee," the testers were impressed with the solid functionality of the Summit.

All of the testers enjoyed the fit, cushioning of the DMX absorption system, general comfort, traction, quality of construction, and ride of the shoe when running. The shoes are excellent for all-around running shoes, especially on runs that require running on the roads to get to the trail. The DMX flow in the midsole was a little "weird" or "strange" for most of the testers and there were some doubts and skepticism about the Summit’s stability on technical single track because of the dynamic quality of the cushioning. Otherwise the DMX was recognized as a positive quality even though it was odd feeling when the shoes were used for walking.

Raid Race

Many so-called "adventure" shoes are just a lot of hype and cosmetics thrown onto a cross-training or light hiking shoe in a poor attempt to tap into the growing excitement (read: sales) that surrounds the sport of adventure racing. The Raid Race, however, is the real thing!

Salomon’s fine design work is meticulously manifested in this piece of footwear art. From the ground up, the Raid Race scored very well among the testers, who appreciated the protection and support of the multi-layered outsole/midsole construction and ability to make the shoe feel custom fit with the state-of-the-art Kevlar speed lacing system. The testers liked the Raid Race for long jaunts that involved running and walking through mixed terrain and thought they would fare very well for adventure races — their intended purpose. As a pure trail running shoe, however, the Raid Race did not make the grade because they were a bit unstable and lacked a certain responsiveness that the testers sought for higher speed pursuits.

Raid Sport

As the less technical sibling of the Race, the Sport lacks some of the bells and whistles — such as speed lacing — but offers the same versatility for adventure sport and off-road endeavors. The testers gave the Raid Sport excellent ratings when it came to fit, lacing, weight, traction, comfort, protection, and appearance. The shoes came highly recommended for a mix of hiking, running, and casual wear. The Raid Sport performed well on more tame trails than on either rocky technical terrain or paved road.

On the negative side, the testers complained that the Sport was unstable (especially for the ankles), not well suited for technical speed running, and lacked arch support.

Grid Departure

The Departure is, indeed, a bit of a departure from Saucony trail shoes of the past. This model is geared more to the trail runner and less to the roadie. The testers — being the trail aficionados that they are — were tickled by the Departure’s soft and fun performance and gave it high marks in many areas. In fact, one tester rated it her all-time favorite of the bunch.

The Departure features a water-resistant upper, a hard plastic shank, an outsole with effective triangular lugs and flex grooves in the forefoot, and a somewhat ineffective GRID cushion system in the rear of the shoe. The shoe fit very well, felt light, and handled well on everything from sketchy single track to paved roads, although the testers did not recommend it for road running because the cushioning and protection in the forefoot were not adequate for that kind of hard surface pounding.

Grid Aura TR

Fond of last year’s Puma XC? Then you’ll like the Aura TR, which is remarkably similar in appearance and feel to the Puma. The Aura has a sporty road shoe look and feel to it and is both low in profile and low volume, providing considerable response and speed on any surface. The shoe was close fitting and although it would not be good for trail runners with wide feet, it was snug enough to feel quite agile. For runners who are converting from road to trail (or, heaven forbid, from trail to road), the Aura makes a good shoe for both surfaces.

For noticeable forefoot flex, the Aura integrates grooves into the outsole. The triangular lugs provided ample traction and a tester with prominent anklebones was especially appreciative of the Aura’s low ankle collar height and Achilles flex notch.

Ricochet

After Teva introduced its wonder-sandal, the Trail Wraptor, they had the world of endurance hippies wondering what novelty they would unveil this season. The Ricochet represents the newest in hot and wet weather footwear innovation. Somewhere between a shoe and a sandal, the mesh screened, webbed, and laced upper of the Ricochet secures the foot to a sticky, "Spider Rubber" outsoled footbed for top breathability and comfort. The Ricochet makes an ideal beach or jungle running, canyoneering, or wet-weather adventure shoe.

Not surprisingly, the Ricochet got top honors for its breathability, while picking up some respectable scores for traction on smooth or slick rock, fit, and comfort. However, the testers considered the Ricochet to be too heavy, unstable, slippery, stiff, clumsy, and unprotective for running on rocky trails. The oversized drain holes in the insole also irritated the feet of half of the testers after relatively short runs.

Vector

Vasque comes to the trail running world from its time-honored history as a top-notch hiking boot manufacturer and thus far its trail "running" shoes have been better suited for fast hiking. The Vector continues that trend, as footwear appropriate only for an occasional adrenaline burst into a run. As lightweight hiking shoes the Vector commanded high marks for comfort, cushioning, stability, traction, protection, and shock absorption.

The testers were not moved to run on the Vector. Although they admired the construction and promising durability of the shoe, the testers characterized them as a hiking, approach, or adventure shoe because it was "too stiff," "inflexible," "rigid," "heavy," "bulky," and "sloppy" for agility on the trail. The shoe received especially low marks for its performance on pavement.