La Sportiva Sandstone GTX-XCR
August 25, 2008
La Sportiva was really asking for it when they posted an adline for these shoes reading “Built For Abuse!” I just have no choice but to abuse the hell out of them, clearly.
At first I tried to come up with some riff on abuse for this post, but I really couldn’t get it right without inevitably offending someone, somewhere, so let’s all just accept that I’m not going to make any off color abuse jokes. Accept it you must, because I limited my mistreatment of these shoes to the standard muddy, slippery trails; sharp chossy rocks; long, punishing hikes, and various other means by which to establish just how “built for abuse” they are. And I have to admit, they seem to be fairly abuse-worthy, as I couldn’t even crack the waterproofing until I’d been wearing them several times a week all spring and summer. They held out through weeks of mud holes and it seemed that they were a match for my abuse skills. Had I not worn them in a serious downpour while stomping through chest-high wet grass for three and a half hours, I think they’d still be shedding the elements. That particular trip really was tatamount to dunking the shoes in a river, so the fact that they lost their waterproofing at that point really isn’t a black mark against them.
The Sandstone XKC/YR/Magnum, PI (whatever, I haven’t cracked the code yet) low hikers feature a tread pattern that Sportiva calls Impact Brake System (note the unfortunate acronym); intended to make descending a little easier on the joints. As you may have noticed, I’m not too techy, so I didn’t bother trying to figure out how it works – but work, it does. The Sandstones won’t slip for anything, and I really do notice a difference while descending. They feel really solid and trustworthy; not too shabby for something I’ve been abusing for months. Speaking of long-term abuse, my aging joints have of late been objecting to steep descents, so every little bit helps.
Before I tried the Sandstones, I was never big on “low” hiking shoes. It was either running shoes or hiking boots for me. Hiking SHOES? What is that about? But these, I love. I love them so much I have barely even worn the hiking boots Sportiva sent me to test. Er, sorry, Sportiva, I’m a little behind. I’ll get to the boots soon, I’m sure, just wait until I’m done thoroughly abusing the shoes first. It’s not my fault you make shoes that just won’t give up!
La Sportiva Slingshot Trail Running Shoe
July 23, 2008
[Readers, you should take this tester's comments to heart. She recently went out just to "improve her time" in a marathon-length mountain running race, and instead went ahead and won the women's championship. So she knows a thing or two about mountain running. Just thought you should know. -Head Geargal]
In the garage we have a 6ft x 6ft book case filled with shoes. No, I am not Imelda Marcos, we use a lot of specific athletic footwear, like running shoes. Trail runners are really close to my heart, because I want them to fit well, last at least a month or two, and give me the sensation of light feet that can feel what is underneath them. I stumbled across La Sportiva Slingshots in my size at a sale section of local mountaineering store and, since there were a few inches of extra space on my shoe shelf, I bought them without even trying them on. It was not until the first trail running race that I realized what a treasure I had just stumbled upon. There was no heel lift, they fit like a glove (well, not literally but you know what I mean). And they weighed nothing [again, not literally - HG], yet gave enough traction and support for on mud, rocks and roots. Because I’m a bit worried that such a light race shoe won’t last through all the training miles, I have dedicated these shoes for racing only, which works out perfect since as soon as I put them on I feel like a pro of sorts. They just make you feel fast! My first Slingshots are just starting to show wear and tear after a full year of trail racing. Time to get a new pair!
Scarpa Diva A/T Boot
June 27, 2008
It’s summer! What better time for a ski boot review? Okay, so I’m a little behind on my gear review pile. But Scarpa said they won’t be making changes to the boot so this review still applies to next year’s Diva. So in a way, I got to test a prototype!
This boot was tested by two, count ‘em, TWO Geargals. One of whom (me) does the writing, and the other provides thoughtful, technical appraisals such as “I love them! They’re white, and they’re called Divas!” Hmm. Guess I’m on my own on this one.
They are pretty and have a cute name, but there are other reasons to love this boot. They’re light. They’re Dynafit compatible. They have Intuition moldable liners (heaven!). They’re nicely stiff, and even if they’re not stiff enough, they come with an extra super mega-stiff tongue that can be swapped out with the hinged, flexible touring tongue. Scarpa told me “it’s like getting two boots in one!” which I’ll just have to take their word for because not only am I a touring skier, I’m a lazy touring skier who doesn’t like to carry extra things and therefore never lugged the extra tongues up any mountains to test them out. I also didn’t want to sit in the snow trying to swap out ski boot tongues, so I never even tried to see how easy or difficult it was to do. Bad tester! I’m, er, sure they’re really nice tongues though.
So, I only skied the Divas with the flexible touring tongue, but even so, the boot was plenty stiff for me, a welcome relief after trying other mushy touring boots. The micro-adjustable four buckles made for a snug, custom fit, though with the genius instep strap, the fourth buckle almost seems superfluous. That instep strap is probably the best idea ever (except for all of the other “best ideas ever” I’ve mentioned in this blog) because it completely eliminates heel lift and lateral slop. It’s awesome! Not in the classic sense of awesome as in “inspiring awe” but awesome as in “totally rad!” Look I said I was behind on the reviews. You’re stuck with “awesome.” And awesome is how these boots ski – in all conditions they were solid and dependable. I was surprised at how well the boots performed on ice and in various other lousy ski conditions – usually a light boot means a performance trade-off, but not this time. For serious alpine touring divas, the Diva really is the holy grail. Do all rave reviews fall back on that hackneyed metaphor? Gads, I’m slipping.
The instep strap buckle itself, while an excellent design, is kind of nonintuitive and a little strange to adjust – at first look, it appears to be kind of a ratchet type of system, which I guess it is, but it doesn’t really ratchet. You just shove it through the buckle and then strap it down. It would be nicer if you could ratchet it tight when it’s already buckled, so that you don’t just have to just guess how much to shove through. My other tester reported problems with ice buildup in the buckle when she’d undo it while skinning up. I didn’t have that problem, mostly because I skin with my boots buckled, but I can see how it could happen.
The Divas shine in the uptrack, as well, in large part thanks to that very nice flexible touring tongue. I think that the hallmark of a good touring boot is that you really don’t notice it much while skinning, and the Diva fits that bill perfectly. While trudging up the mountain (otherwise known as “touring”, but come on – it’s just trudging up the mountain. No amount of sugar coating will change that), you don’t have to think about, be distracted by, or otherwise notice the Divas. If you’re coming from a heavier boot, you might notice how light the Divas are, but that is an acceptable distraction for certain.
La Sportiva Imogene Trail Running Shoes
April 24, 2008
I think this must be a Geargals first: a sarcasm-free post. I really want to deliver the message, here, and it’s too important to be lost in smartass comments.
As you can probably tell from my other shoe posts, I am very picky about footwear. It’s really difficult for me to find shoes and boots that fit right, and most of the time I’m left with something just “okay” because I can’t find anything better. Pretty much every trip ends with foot pain, blisters, numbness, and various other discomforts. I’ve learned to live with it, because it just didn’t seem that I had a choice. And then the universe smiled upon me, and La Sportiva sent me a pair of Imogenes to review.
These shoes are incredible. I never realized that I didn’t have to finish every run with numb and tingling feet, and that trail running didn’t always have to include twisting my ankle every few steps. Thirtysomethingmumblemumble years it took me to figure this out – well, all those years and these shoes, that is. The Imogene is billed as a neutral, well cushioned shoe, and let me emphasize that I don’t think I’ve ever worn a truly neutral shoe before no matter what manufacturers have claimed. This shoe is so well balanced that I knew within a few steps of starting my run that I was in for a great experience.
It really was the most amazing feeling to run along and feel that every step resulted in a solid, flat foot placement, even on mud, snow, ice, roots, and rocks (all in one run – that is trail running in Alaska in the spring, folks). I am a high-arched underpronator, which means that my foot takes an enormous beating when I run because my arches don’t distribute the shock forces well, and being an underpronator makes me tend to run and push off of on the outsides of my feet. I twist ankles all the time, especially to the outside, and it’s kind of amazing that I’ve continued trail running all these years, because uneven surfaces are really difficult for me. Not in these shoes. They allowed my foot to actually land and push off flat, in any trail condition. This made for a very relaxing run because I didn’t have to constantly worry about twisted ankles – and this was my first real running workout after knee surgery. I actually had to make myself stop when I was done with the route, because I was having so much fun I wanted to keep running. I really didn’t have any idea that a shoe could make this much difference.
Another welcome change was that I didn’t have to mess around changing insoles. The insole that comes in the Imogene is nothing particularly groundbreaking as far as I can tell, but the design and balance of the shoe eliminates the need to replace it with a “better” insole. Also a first for me.
The incredible cushioning is no joke. It was like running on a very firm trampoline. Even on pavement the Imogene absorbed every step without feeling mushy or spongy, which I never thought could truly be accomplished in a running shoe. Other runners with high arches should take note: these shoes will change your life. I don’t know what laws of physics La Sportiva bent to create this shoe, but whatever they’re doing, they’re doing right.
Cannondale Roam Cycling Shoes
April 2, 2008
If only I were 12 years old, so I could have an excuse to fill this review with rainbows and flowers and dot all my i’s with hearts, for that would illustrate just how much I love these shoes. A rabid clipless pedal addict, I have never been a fan of those hard plastic slipper-style, velcro-closure type of cycling shoes, so the hiking-shoe styling of the Roams really caught my eye. The idea behind the Roam (or so I gather) is for riders to be able to swap out the cleats, put a rubber sole back on, and wear these as “real” shoes when they’re not riding. Say, perhaps, you want to do a ride/hike combo. You could put the cleats on, ride out, take the cleats off and put the rubber back on, and then go hiking. Interesting idea…
I suppose if I were to do a ride/hike combo as described above, these shoes would be perfect. Frankly, though, I think that most people just either go out and ride or go out and hike. For instance, I will not ride without my padded bike shorts. However, I’ve no desire to hike in padded bike shorts. So I’d have to carry a change of clothes, AND change the cleats on the shoes, etc. etc. Too much work. Besides, I think the Roams really shine when riding, so the cleats have stayed on mine permanently (so far). They’re already perfect for riding, so why bother trying to hike in them?
For the sake of an accurate review, I did swap the cleats on and off a few times to test the process. It’s not that easy; it requires some force to push hard enough on the sole to get the screws to grip. It’s enough of a pain that I wouldn’t want to sit alongside the trail and try to change the cleats out of my shoes. Then I’d have to carry the cleats separately, and the parts might get lost, etc. etc. I’ll just keep them specifically as cycling shoes, but that’s just fine by me!
A nice, snug yet comfortable fit allows efficient power transfer to the pedals. A cool snap loop keeps the laces out of your way, and when you get off your bike, the shoes feel like regular shoes, so no hobbling around on weirdly shaped curved soles. As a matter of fact, if you didn’t already know these were bike shoes, you would think they were regular hiking shoes. Around here, people are really snobby about clipless pedals and unless you have them, you are not a real biker. So I feel even more ultra cool, because I ride with clipless pedals but the Roam gives me that stealthy, I’m-so-cool-I-don’t-have-to-show-it-off attitude. I did have an issue for a while with a pressure point in the sole of the left shoe (I figured it was from the cleat system somehow) but I swapped out the insoles for a sturdier pair and the problem was solved.
Aside from that, these shoes are so awesome that I’ve had to restrain myself from getting another pair just to HAVE another pair. If these ever wore out and I couldn’t replace them, I’d be heartbroken. So keep making the Roam, Cannondale (chances are I’ll pick up another pair this season anyway, just to be safe).
La Sportiva Mythos Climbing Shoes
March 31, 2008
These have to be the most popular women’s rock shoes ever made, just from the number of people I see wearing them. I got kind of shouted down at our last Geargals indoor climbing session when I said I didn’t like these shoes much. And the shouting down wasn’t from just the other Geargals, either – pretty much every woman in the climbing gym was wearing these shoes. And all of them were climbing better than I, so that should tell us something. But I get to review them, so I have the final say. However, lest you join the dismayed chorus of loyal Mythos wearers, hear me out.
I did appreciate the flat sole, which made belaying while wearing the shoes tolerable (I’m one of those squeamish people who can’t stand running around on the stinky, germy, climbing gym mats barefoot, so I’m constantly changing footwear to give my feet a break from pinchy shoes) which was a nice change. It was also a nice change to not have to dance around frantically after every climb, desperate to pull my shoes off because of the toe-crimping pain that comes with the territory with curved-last shoes, but I felt that the performance of the Mythos left me a little cold. It seemed really mediocre, with kind of blah edging and not a lot of grip for smearing. I didn’t understand the appeal – and I guess I still don’t, for people who only climb indoors.
Well, I don’t care to climb indoors much. Frankly I don’t like it at all. So, when I headed to the crags, I brought these shoes along just for the hell of it. I had already made up my mind that I didn’t care much for them, but lo! When I applied the sole to the famously chossy Chugach crud that makes up our local crags, it stuck like a fly to, well, flypaper. The smearing was sublime. I could edge on tiny cracks and had no problem with foot jams. And when I got to the top of the crag, my feet still had feeling! They weren’t numb, they didn’t hurt! Amazing. I climbed in the Mythos the rest of the day, and now they are a permanent addition to my outdoor climbing gear. They are the only shoe I wear for climbing outside, and my feet don’t kill me at the end of the day! NOW I understand why so many people wear them.
I still dislike them at the climbing gym, but who cares? The climbing gym sucks anyway. I’d much rather be outside in the elements, free from gym mats crawling with athlete’s foot and other nasties, and have comfortable feet to boot. There is something about the La Sportiva rubber that just works on real rock and not on gym plastic. I think it is a conspiracy from La Sportiva to get people outside – and I can get behind that kind of conspiracy. I kind of wish they came in a velcro version for easier on/off, but then again, I didn’t have to take them on and off all day like I have to with other rock shoes, so it’s a fair trade.
The North Face Bryce Mid Hiking Boot
February 15, 2008
First let’s get one thing straight. Hiking, to me, means going into the backcountry, where trails are rough, mountains are steep, rocks are sharp, gravel is loose, and water is cold and, er, wet. The backcountry is also big, which means I don’t want to carry lots of heavy stuff. So I was excited about these boots, which seemed tough, supportive, and really really light.
Huge let down. Why? Because they don’t FEEL tough, supportive and…well, they feel light, but that’s about it. They feel like a run of the mill sneaker that happen to go up to my ankles. I have had these for a while but haven’t reviewed them because basically I stopped wearing them. They didn’t feel right in any situation, especially not for hiking. I think the last time I wore them was on a stroll down a bike path, and I still couldn’t come up with anything to say about them that couldn’t be summed up in one word: “meh”. I just don’t like them. Plain, blunt, and not very detailed, but true. If I were to classify this boot, it would be as an entry-level walking boot, most at home on the feet of tourists who like dressing up in the TNF gear they bought special for their Alaska cruise, but don’t ever wear anywhere besides the paved streets lined with tchotchke shops and “homemade fudge!” vendors.
Scarpa ZG 40 GTX Boots
February 12, 2008
Sheesh, I hope I got the name right on these things. Whatever happened to one-word names? What’s with all these letters and numbers? What do they mean? Don’t look here for answers, I’ve no idea. But I do have an idea of how these boots perform, if you’ll just step this way, please.
It took me a long, long time to get these boots reviewed. Why? Because it took a long, long time to get these boots broken in. I struggled all last summer with these boots. I wanted them to be great, so I put up with months of blisters, hours of are-they-too-tight-or-are-they-too-loose contemplation, countless lace configurations, and several changes of insole, all because the superior construction, incredibly tough (practically unmarkable) sole, and supportive yet light upper made me really, really, really want to wear these boots. For weeks I was unable to wear them while I waited for the blisters to heal. I had all but given up when one day, I put them back on, headed down the hiking trail and realized, “Wait! These boots feel pretty good today! Can it be that they have finally, simply, broken in???”
And that seems to be the answer. Ever since then, I haven’t had any fit problems with the boots. What? It only took a full calendar year. What’s the problem?
The thing is, there really isn’t any problem. The dang things still look brand new. The soles don’t have a mark on them despite all the abuse I’ve put them through. They are completely waterproof, tough, light, and functional. The sole has that great Scarpa grip and even though they take crampons, the superior edging performance of these boots makes crampons necessary for only those boilerplate climbs. They are marketed as a three-season boot, but I can’t really figure out which three seasons they mean. They’re warm and waterproof in the winter, shrug off the spring and fall mud and slush, and are great for summer backpacking; so I guess if you only want to wear them during three seasons, just pick your seasons. Or live here in Alaska, when you really only have three seasons anyway: winter, more winter, and 24-hour daylight.
The only problem I have with these boots is that it’s hard to find gaiters that work with them due to that funky leather loop for the laces, down near the toe box. It’s hard to explain but there’s no real way to connect the front hook of gaiters onto the lowest part of the laces. If you try it, you’ll see what I mean. And if anyone can describe this better than I can, please, feel free.
The sublime ankle support means you can really load up the ol’ backpack if you can’t bear to camp without the finer things in life; but as always I recommend going fast and light and making your boyfriend carry the heavy stuff, like the magnum of cabernet, your copy of the complete works of Jane Austen, and all the water for the trip. Don’t look at me like that; men like to carry heavy things, it makes them feel manly and needed, and it will make your trip a lot more fun and your joints a lot happier. And your manly, needed boyfriend will be happier, too, so everybody wins.
Anyhow, I seriously cannot get over how tough these boots are. I guess that’s the trade off; a full year of break-in agony for boots that last and last. They can dish it out AND take it. So suffer through the getting-to-know-you period, it’s worth it.
La Sportiva K4S Boot
January 27, 2008
This is one of those reviews that I waffled about writing, because this isn’t a women’s boot. It’s allegedly a “unisex” boot, which we all know is just a men’s boot with a more confusing sizing system. However, because of the dearth of women’s specific boots out there, I decided to go ahead and review this boot.
Because of the “unisex” (bleah) sizing, the fit of this boot is not great. I’m left wondering whether the boot itself fits weird or that it’s just designed for a man. Not sure. Anyway, the fit is what keeps this boot from being a shining star. Everything else about it is great. The grip is incredible, it has just enough flex to make walking decently comfortable, and it performs well on technical ice. Takes crampons easily and is stiff enough for front-pointing all day long. The synthetic material is warm and requires little maintenance, which wins it extra points for me because I don’t like the maintenance associated with leather. My feet stay nice and dry, which, again, isn’t the case with leather.
The lacing system could be better. I’m constantly fiddling with the laces, but again, that probably comes back to the poor fit.
I wore these boots for technical ice climbing at about 6 degrees Farenheit, and my feet froze, but for mountaineering the boots stay warm down to zero – as long as you keep moving.
I realize that this review has a bit of a boring tone, but the poor fit of these boots leaves me cold (ha!) and I can’t bring myself to rave, which these boots would fully deserve had they a better fit. I can see that I’d love these boots if they fit me better. So, to stop babbling and sum up: great technology if your feet happen to fit, but if they don’t, you’ll be squirming.
Lowa Struktura Pro Lady A/T boot
January 27, 2008
I liked the Struktura as soon as I put it on – once I got it on. My pair inexplicably shipped with a super low-tech non-standard liner, with no assist loop at the back, a low cuff, soft ankle support, and finger-slicing narrow laces. I try not to swear in this blog, but these things were a B*TCH to get on. No loop in the back? On an A/T or downhill liner? What the….
Out of curiosity, I scoured stores both online and off, and it seems that the Struktura is supposed to come with a better liner with a higher cuff, stiffer ankle, softer, thicker laces, and an ASSIST LOOP AT THE BACK (see photo – see the loop?). I called Lowa to basically give them a chance to say “whoops, our bad, here’s a better liner” but no luck. The first customer service agent I spoke to was sweet, but clueless – didn’t really understand the concept of an assist loop. She transferred me to a tech guy, who told me politely but firmly that I probably just got a “sample pair” with an incorrect liner, and that it was just too bad because there was nothing he could or would do. Why Lowa ships boots with crappy “sample” liners, I’ll never know, and it probably doesn’t matter because the tech guy also told me that Lowa is getting out of the A/T market here in the US.
So, although the boot pictured above shows the correct liner with assist loop and all, the boots shipped to me do not have that liner. Since Lowa couldn’t provide the “real” liner, I am forced – forced! – to review the boot I got, crappy liners and all. So here we go. I tested the Struktura in a backcountry setting the first day, and at the resort the second.
I can barely get these boots on my feet, for starters. The liner, like I said, has no assist loop and is soft at the ankle, so when I tried to grip the sides and force my foot in, the ankle just collapsed and my foot got repeatedly stuck halfway into the liner. After breaking a sweat and saying many bad words, I got the liners on, and tried to tighten the laces on the liners. The laces are meant to hold the liner onto your foot instead of onto the shell, eliminating the blisters that just seem to come with skinning up thousands of feet. It’s a good idea, but these laces were about .5mm thick and not burly enough to grab with my bare hands and tighten, especially in 15 degree weather at the trailhead. My ski partner had to squeeze the sides of the liners once I got them on my feet so I could tighten the laces with thickly gloved hands (to avoid being cut by the knifelike laces) just to make them remotely fitted. To add insult to insult, the laces wouldn’t even stay tied. Bah! Once the liners were on, the shells were easy, and off we went.
I have notoriously difficult feet, especially in ski boots, so to wear these boots two days in a row for over 5 hours at a time without having to remove them to regain circulation in my feet was a dream come true. Skinnng up with the buckles either undone or very loose was quite comfortable and much like wearing a stiff hiking boot. No pins and needles or pressure points on these boots. The boots weren’t broken in at that point, so after tightening the buckles for the downhill portion, ski mode was a little too stiff, so I skied in walk mode, which was pleasantly adequate for the fluffy powder of the day. Once I got the skis pointed downhill, I forgot all about my quibbles with the boots; they skied well. Might have something to do with the amazing powder, but I’ll let Lowa have this one. For the comfort in climbing and the responsiveness while skiing, thumbs up.
I had some problems with the buckles coming undone; something Lowa promised to have addressed with their new buckle retention system. The buckle retention devices, meant to keep buckles closed while skiing, didn’t seem to function worth anything as evident from the number of times I had to stop and rebuckle the boots, until I tried to get the boots off that night. The third buckle on the right boot just would not let go. My partner had to hammer at the clasp to get it off. I wouldn’t complain about this if that buckle hadn’t come loose a dozen times while I was skiing. As it was, it’s rather exasperating.
The next day I put these boots to work at the resort. I had similar problems with buckles not staying closed, and still wasn’t able to ski comfortably in ski mode for too long, but bear in mind the boots aren’t broken in and the liner issue was significant. Unfortunately for Lowa, I suspect these boots would ski a lot better with the higher, stiffer liner they’re supposed to have, but the short, flabby one my pair came with was ineffective and frustrating. However, I skied annoying, icy, choppy runs (all that was open that day) and the boots performed surprisingly well for being in walk mode AND having crappy liners. I felt like I had to choose between two evils; though – if I cranked the buckles down so that they would stay closed, I had too much pressure on the top of my foot, but if I buckled them firm-but-comfortably, the buckles would come undone. In ski mode this seemed to be less of a problem.
All in all, this is a backcountry boot most at home in the backcountry. The pair I tried was just not burly enough for hard charging at the resort, making me think that it’s not the boot for super extreme backcountry runs either. In two feet of perfect powder, they were amazing even in walk mode – I forgot I was wearing new ski boots on that run. For mellow bumps, powder, and perfect groomers, they were fine. For ice, hard bumps, and chop on anything steep, they were tough to control and were too flexible. That’s actually fine by me, as they are in fact a backcountry boot and not meant for the resort. There are backcountry skiers who find chop, bumps, and ice in the backcountry, but I’m not one of them. I ski the powder, and that’s what these boots seem to be made for. With a better liner – maybe I’d have a different opinion.
