Showing posts with label Clifton 2. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Clifton 2. Show all posts

Friday, November 17, 2017

Hoka OneOne Clifton 4 Review: 4th time a charm?

The Clifton line from Hoka has always been one step away from a great shoe for me. 


The first iteration was a revolutionary shoe, combining heavy cushion with lightness. Unfortunately, the thin tongue killed it as a wearable shoe although most other reviewers loved that feature and the model overall.

The second version mucked up nearly everything good in an attempt to remedy the tongue issue. Unfortunately, the changes to the rest of the upper and the midsole were counterproductive in my experience; I found it to be a hot and overly firm ride.  

The third version got the closest in my book to a big winner, but the upper really couldn't stand up to the beating I delivered during DC summers. http://www.midpackgear.com/2016/08/170-mile-revisit-of-clifton-3-not-so_18.html


So is the fourth time a charm? Through the first 40+ miles, I'd say yes.

Saturday, July 1, 2017

Altra Torin 3.0 review

Upgrades to good shoes get me nervous. The Torin 2.5 is a great all-around trainer. However, nothing's perfect - it has a few drawbacks spelled out in my earlier review.  


Torin 2.5


  • The midsole is very "foamy" - meaning it is soft and cushioned but doesn't have much responsiveness. It feels pretty dead when I am out on a run - like there is a lot of energy lost on impact with no bounce.
  • The wear pattern on the rubber pods on the outsole is uneven and early. I was seeing too much wear even with +/- 50 miles on the shoe for a $120+ purchase.
  • Others have complained about the plastic-y upper material that isn't very breathable. I didn't think it was that bad - it has mesh areas on right/left of your big toe that allowed breatheability - but it was certainly not the most airy upper I've worn.

Altra's Torin 3.0 seems to have successfully addressed each of these issues. 

The midsole has a little bit of bounceback sorely missing from the last version. According to the Altra website, they haven't made a change in the midsole material - still "Midsole Eva With A-Bound Top Layer & InnerFlex™." I don't believe it. While it's nowhere as bouncy as Ego, it has something else in there that is an improvement. A Torin with Ego is something to dream about...

The wear is improved for me. I'm around 46 miles and the rear outer pod on the heel is not worn down to the foam. Hopefully it can hold out for a good while longer.

Torin 3.0

Not so good on the Torin 2.5

Altra has also shaved off .7 oz - always good to see when a manufacturer can go lighter in an upgrade without destroying the shoe's good qualities. They possibly shaved some weight off the upper or even out of the midsole.

The shoe's upper is definitely much more breatheable compared to its predecessor. I have run under blazing hot summer conditions in DC and on a 4 hour trail race and my shoe hasn't turned into a sweatlodge. It's obvious how much breatheability is built into the upper - just hold it up to a light to see how much light gets through.




I referred to this shoe earlier as a Clifton that fit me right. I think that anyone looking for a cushioned zero drop shoe who has liked the Clifton but found one aspect or another of that shoe lacking (the Clifton 3.0 upper wore badly and stretched out, the 2.0 midsole was too hard, the 1.0 tongue didn't work for me) should check out the Torin 3.0.

Edit 10/10/17: The upper and the midsole of the shoe is holding up nicely through 150 miles. No wear or tear is visible on the mesh; the midsole has a lot of cushioning remaining by feel. The rubber pads on the outer heel are starting to wear away as with the 2.5. I'm still very positive on this update despite this issue which needs to get addressed by Altra on the next version of this shoe.

Edit 7/25/18: Altra Torin 3.5 knit review here.

Thursday, August 18, 2016

170 Mile revisit of the Clifton 3 - not as good

I think I might have spoken too soon at my 100 mile review about the Clifton 3s. At that point, I was seeing some premature heel wear. Over the next 70 or so miles (granted, this took place during scorching, drippingly humid Washington DC August running), the shoes visibly deteriorated.

First, the foam on the outsole started to degrade a bit in the places where there is no rubber. It's not a wholesale failing of the material, but it definitely is starting to show its age earlier than I'd expect. 

Second, the uppers really stretched out on me. I thought this was happening, and put in an order for a new pair since I thought I was getting to the useful end of the shoes. You can see in these photos how stretched out the 170 mile grey pair is compared to the new blue pair. The toe box looks more cylindrical than oval in the new unused pair - hope its visible in this pics.







Running in the new pair feels like a completely different shoe than in the 170 mile pair - the old ones are now sloppy and loose, and are getting moved to elliptical duty.  We will see how the second pair does in the cooler weather as we get closer to September and some relief from the excess moisture from my feet and from the air. But the first round experience with the Clifton 3s shows that Hoka hits a home run on fit and ride but grounds into a double play on wear issues.

Update at 200 miles:

After washing and air drying the grey/green shoes, they did firm up a bit and become less sloppy. However, the midsole at this point has really lost its pop and is quite dead, ready for retirement/slash/gym use only.

But its clear with the summer sweat and heat, the new blue/yellow pair is following the same course - starting to loosen up and develop a sloppy feel. Hopefully the Clifton 4s will make an adjustment to the mesh to perhaps be a tighter upper fit that lasts through the wear cycle, and a midsole that holds up past the 200 mile point.

Review of the next update - the Clifton 4

Monday, August 8, 2016

100+ mile revisit - review of Hoka OneOne Clifton 3

I fall out of love with shoes as easy as I can fall in love with them. After 100 miles, the basic limitations or defects of a shoe make themselves clear in a way you don't see after 2 or 3 runs in them.

I just hit 135 on the Strava odometer for my Clifton 3s. This includes average runs of about 5 miles, long runs 10-12, and weekly mileage of about 35. And happily, nothing much has changed from the point I first reviewed them here.

The fit has continued to be excellent. I did have a bout of black and blistered middle toes on both feet (I'll spare the pics because feet should be heard and not seen on the Internet), but that happened during a very sweaty half marathon where the rubbing was due to the sloshing in the shoe. I can't blame the mesh - the sweat was oozing out - it just was one of those 70+ dew point race days.

The upper is not wearing out at all.






And as you can probably see, the midsole seems to be holding up well also. It does feel like a little bit of the cushioning is shot, but in line with what I would expect 135 miles in - almost at the halfway point for these kind of cushioned shoes for me.

The only spot where there are some wear issues are on the rubber part of the outsole on the outer heel of my left shoe (the bottom right of the next photo), a spot where I do get some excessive wear normally. While the Clifton 3 has some rubber on that spot, it's clearly not enough to handle my heel strike on that spot. This became noticeable at least 40 miles ago; I would expect that the heel will hold up until 300+ miles at this rate.




You can see how the rubber held up on the right shoe:



Finally, one important post publish add: I have noticed that the foot pain (dull ache in the midfoot/ball of foot area xray negative) that has plagued me for the past two years - despite rest (or lack of it) - has finally disappeared while running with these shoes over the last month or so. 

Thursday, July 7, 2016

Hoka One One Clifton 3 review highlights

I've had a mixed experience with the Clifton line from Hoka One One. The first edition was exciting and promising - I loved the super light cushioned feel of the shoe apart from the flimsy tongue which made it hard for me to get a proper locked down upper.  

The second edition was better on the tongue - they padded it properly - but the combination of the shoddy build quality (the overlays started peeling away within weeks) and the slightly cramped toebox compared to the similar but more comfy Challenger ATR 2s made it a no go for me.

The Clifton 3 just hit the streets, and the third time is the proverbial charm here.  The biggest change is the substitution of the upper material - it went from a tighter nylon weave to a stretchy mesh. Look here - how when I flex my toe you can actually see it through the mesh.




This material is very similar to what Skechers used for their excellent GOrun Ride 3 shoe - which was quite comfortable but a little too loose for faster running. The Clifton 3 does a better job of holding your foot in place but still allowing enough give in the upper to prevent rubbing/hotspots. Much more give than the upper material on the Challenger ATR 2, a good thing for non-trail running imo.

The lacing system is Goldilocks perfect for me. Easy to get a good fit without having to over- or under-cinch.

The toebox is great - even more roomy and comfortable than the Challenger ATR 2s that I love.

The midsole is a little more squishy and has more rebound at the same time than the 2.  The 2 felt more like an inert foam - the three combines a bit of a rubber ball feel with some sponginess.  I'd still give it a 7.5 (with 10 being the softest).

The outer seems unchanged to me - it remains great. A big footprint, nice traction, rubber reinforcement on the right spots.

I'll report back if anything changes, but this is a super update. I've done two runs on them with no issues. Hopefully the overlays will stay in place and I won't experience the iffy quality I've seen in past Hokas.  As of now: If you are a fan, go for it.

100+ mile update
Review of the next model update - the Clifton 4

Saturday, April 16, 2016

Deep (more like quick) thoughts: Hoka Odyssey 2 vs Clifton 2 vs Challenger ATR 2

Midsole:

Odyssey 2: nice and firm. It almost was as firm as the old Saucony Mirage which at times felt like running on dehydrated sponges on the first run. It seems like it has softened up a bit on the last couple of runs - a little more forgiving. I'd give it a 4 of 10 in terms of softness (10 softest).

Clifton 2: really almost squish soft. Too soft for my taste for use as a regular trainer. Maybe a 7.5 of 10 for softness.

Challenger ATR 2: a little softer than the Odyssey 2.  I had previously said it was about a 5.5; that seems about right in that it is closer to the Odyssey 2 than the Clifton 2.


Upper:

Odyssey 2: A pretty locked down feel. Plenty of room for my toes, no hotspots, no sliding around. A bit more structure than the Challenger 2, a lot more than the Clifton 2. A 7 of 10 for structure (10 the most locked down feel).

Clifton 2: About a 4 of 10 for structure. My feet had lots of room to move, perhaps a bit too much.

Challenger ATR 2: 5.5 of 10. A touch less than the Odyssey. More toe room and a softer fee.


Tongue:

Odyssey 2: Maybe the best tongue so far on a Hoka for me. No slip sliding down during the run, substantial enough to provide cushioning. A 9 of 10 (10 being moderately cushioned and stays in place).

Clifton 2: A 7 of 10. Nice cushioning, perhaps a bit too much for my taste. But really slides down during runs.

Challenger ATR 2: A 8 of 10.  Much like the Odyssey 2s, maybe a bit thinner. Mostly stays in place with a little slippage.


Laces:

Odyssey 2: Don't have to tie too tight to keep the upper in place and the tongue from sliding.  And they don't come untied. Proper length. A perfect 10.

Clifton 2: I found I couldn't get the laces tied with the proper tension, but the laces pretty much stayed tied.  8/10.

Challenger ATR 2: I have a hard time getting the right tension to keep the tongue in place. It requires using the last eyelet so I can tie a heel loop, but ends up using too much lace. 6.5/10.


Weight:

Odyssey 2: Feels like the heaviest of the three when running, but doesn't weigh in much heavier.  8.8 oz men's size 9 according to Running Warehouse.

Clifton 2: Says an 8.7 for men's size 9, but it feels much lighter than the Odyssey.

Challenger 2 ATR: 9.8 in men's size 9, according to Running Warehouse, but feels as light if not lighter than the Odyssey.


Ground feel:

Odyssey 2: You definitely feel "higher" up than with the Clifton or the Challenger ATR 2. But I was able to run very comfortably on the trail with them. I will consider using them as a trail shoe.

Clifton 2: Because of the marshmallow-y feel, I didn't have a good feel for the ground and didn't love the feel especially on pavement.

Challenger ATR 2: The best of the bunch. I love the ground/trail feel. A pleasure on both road and pavement.


Durability:

Odyssey 2: Remains to be seen. I haven't noticed any overlay peeling, and they seem well made.

Clifton 2: Not good. Both pairs I had saw the overlays coming off the fabric fairly early in the lifecycle of the shoes - in the first 50-100 miles.

Challenger ATR 2: Fair. I'm getting close to 100 miles running with a good amount of hiking as well, and the fabric on the upper is starting to wear visibly. Hard to imagine getting much more than 250 miles or so before holes start opening up in the uppers.


Odyssey 2 on left, Challenger ATR 2 right:


Saturday, February 27, 2016

Clifton 2 part 2 review

I have had three go-rounds with the Clifton.

The first: the original Clifton.  I liked it a lot, but found the thin tongue lacking. Also, I didn't feel like the upper offered enough support.

The second: a pair of black and white (Black/Anthracite) outsole Clifton 2 s. I bought them as soon as they came out. An improvement in the tongue, but not a comfortable fit in the upper. They were also a little too cushioned compared to the more firm ride of the original. An worryingly, the upper plastic appliques  overlays were starting to peel early on.

The third: another pair of Clifton 2 s.  This time, the grey and yellow outsole (Grey/Acid). My reaction is that over the year, Hoka has tweaked the shoe to make it closer to the original. It has a better tongue, a nice forefoot fit, and a slightly firmer outsole than my first black 2.  Still not perfect: the tongue doesn't stay put, sliding a little to the side when you run. But all in all, a solid shoe that works well on road and non- rooty, rocky or slippery dirt.  A nice counterpart to the Challenger ATR 2.

Looking forward to the Clifton 3 at the end of Q2. It looks like I'll have worn these out by then - 26 miles and looking good.



Edit:  Ooops! No sooner than I posted, I spotted overlay separating from the shoe just like in the first pair of 2 s I bought.  Guess Hoka didn't solve this issue.