Hoka One One Clayton 2 review

Last you may have heard, I was in love with my Altra Instinct 4.0s. Unfortunately, I developed some heel pain, symptomatic of insertional achilles tendonitis, self-diagnosed with my degree in Internet medicine. I decided to experiment with non-zero drop shoes to see if there was any improvement in the pain I felt, mostly in the am and at night (not while running).

I decided to try the new Hoka One One Clayton 2s. I have tried on the original Claytons and didn't love the feel in the store. But the reviews of the update have been largely positive - an improved upper as well as a fix for a blistering problem many folks had with the original made it seem like an appealing choice.

I have joked it would be great if Hokas and Altras had a baby - meaning, a shoe with a comfortable (wide) toebox and the cushioning and drop of the Hoka. Cliftons have been almost great, but not wide enough. Challengers more so. And the lack of any heel to to drop was irritating my heel.

The Clayton 2 is very much in this vein. A super roomy toebox and comfortable upper, Altra style. And a 4 mm drop. Plus, a lot of Hoka style foam and cushion. They definitely did the trick for my heel - I experienced almost immediate relief and the pain completely went away in a week of running in the slight drop shoes.

These shoes were super comfy and light -- only 7.2 oz in a men's 9. I ran several races - including a 15 mi trail race through roots, water and mud, a 5K XC type race, and a fairly hilly half marathon without race-specific training with good results. The laces are rubberized and gave a really nice tie - cinching down the upper and preventing foot sliding. A super good fit. Except... a blister did develop on the inside of the ball of my right foot from the edge of the insole where the arch meets the upper material.

I thought it might have been a fluke - got my feet wet on the half marathon and thought that could have caused an unusual blister (I had already run 35 miles with no problems before it sprung up). But unfortunately, it happened again a few days later in the same spot on a 6 mile run.

I think the problem is with the insole - it should not have a rough ridge where it meets the upper material - it should be tapered and maybe even glued in place to avoid this irritating rough spot. I don't like cutting things up, but that might be my next step (or find a pair of replacement insoles).

Also, I experienced some pretty aggressive wear on the outside heel of my left foot - not completely surprising since its all RMAT foam and no rubber on the outsole (keeping the shoe so light), but its still not a good sign since it is almost all worn down in one spot after only 100 miles in. Another 50-75 miles and I'd be wearing into the white foam at this rate.

Hoka is so close with this shoe to something great for a light trainer/racer. But my experience through 100 miles is that they haven't solved the blister problem that has plagued this model. And Hoka still is not a long lasting workhorse for such an premium priced shoe - I had early breakdown with the Clifton 3s midsole material last summer.

I'm going in another direction - that combines the bigger toebox of the Altra and has some cushioning and a bit of heel/toe drop a la Hoka -- but that is pretty durable (some rubber on the heel) and better fitting: the Topo Ultrafly. I'll do a review on them once I hit 100 miles for a better idea of how they perform in the medium-term. 

Altra Instinct 4.0 review

I still love my Torin 2.5s, but my Torins don't love me back as much. At least the heel doesn't.

As you can see, the rubber outsole on the heel smears off like cream cheese on a bagel after about 100 miles. The top photo is after 108 miles, the bottom photo is a previous pair after 158 miles. Clearly I scuff a little on the outside of the heel, but this never has ripped off a rubberized area like this.

Altras didn't have a terrific reputation for build quality - I read a lot of complaints out there about wearing through uppers, especially on trail shoes. Personally, I haven't had that issue on my Lone Peak 2.5s or 3.0s, and I didn't have wear issues on my Instinct 3.0s.

So, given that I want a little extra heel protection beyond what the Torin 2.5s provide, and I don't want to give up the Altra Foot Shape toebox, I tried the Instinct 4.0s (for men; for women, it's the Intuition 4.0) out once again. I had already bought and returned a pair of this latest model; the right shoe didn't feel the same as the left shoe (I notice the first run of shoes when they are first released, no matter who the manufacturer is, often have minor defects like this. I've had issues like this with Hoka when I get them right off the bat; I assume it takes a couple of manufacturing runs to hammer out the problems.) But given that I loved the 3.0s so much (see my review of the Instinct 3.0 here... The 3.5s left a lot to be desired, so I moved on), I decided to give them another chance given the great reviews they've been getting, and the fact I loved their grandfather the 3.0s.

I went for the grey/yellow pair after striking out with the black ones. I think I got a winning pair.

First of all, the Instincts have a lot more rubber on the bottom. There's a yellow layer - and a graphite layer of rubber around/underneath that in spots. Then there's the grey foam.

Here's a closer look:

And again with more of a side view:

It looks like its going to take a lot of scuffing to go through the yellow and graphite layers of rubber. And even if I do, the light grey foam underneath seems firmer and more durable than the light foam on the Torin.  It costs an ounce or so in weight, but given that the Torins aren't exactly racing flats at 9.1 ounces, an extra .9 ounces is not really noticeable.

The Instinct 4.0s are 3mm lower than the Torin 2.5s, which I prefer - it gives you a better ground feel.

A couple of noticeable differences...

The upper: The Instinct 4.0 is a little less form fitting than the Torin 2.5, yet, I'd say it is a tighter lacing grip. Sounds contradictory, but the Torin holds by being more molded to the foot while the Instinct relies more on the lacing.

I'd also say the Instinct 4.0 upper will be more comfy on hotter days with a more breathable mesh. But the Torin 2.5 upper didn't bother me on warmer spring days, and I have hot feet.

The midsole: The Instinct 4.0 is a firmer shoe with better road feel. The Torin 2.5 is more cushiony and pillowy. 

The outsole: The Instinct 4.0 looks to be a lot more durable. It definitely has a better grip given the additional rubber making contact with the ground. The Torin 2.5 relied on foam in a few spots which really has little gripping power. I ran a fairly tame trail 50K in the Instinct 3.0 and I see no reason why I couldn't do the same with these. Same goes for road marathons - I did with the Instinct 3.0 and these should be similar. Not sure they'd be great for faster stuff like a 5K where I found the Torin 2.5 to be pretty competent if not ultra speedy.

Looks: Altra continues to improve in the design department.  See the improvement from the Instinct 3.5 to the Instinct 4.0 -- looking more presentable in public, the little kids don't point at your feet and yell "freak".

Retail: $110. Hopefully I can get a full 250+ miles out of these. I'll be back and let you know how it goes.

Altra Torin 2.5 review

I've procrastinated writing a review of one of the most comfortable pair of trainers I've ever owned, and the best pair of Altra's I have run in: the Torin 2.5. It's good I'm getting around to writing this review now, since the 3.0 is expected to be released in the next couple of months - long enough to get a lifecycle out of a pair purchased today.

The Torin 2.5 is a good daily trainer kind of shoe. It's relatively light and relatively cushioned - for my taste, just about right. I would be happy to wear them for a trail ultra if grip wasn't too big an issue, and would definitely wear them for a marathon or half. I have worn them for shorter distances - 10Ks and 5Ks -- but they have drawbacks at those races. The foam is not very springy - it's relatively dead - so you really don't get the kind of energy return bounce you are looking for in those quicker races. The ultimate upgrade for the Torin would be to use the EGO foam in the new Escalantes - it would allow this shoe to excel at the quicker stufff.

The shoe is pretty ugly looking. Altra is doing better in making the foot shaped shoe look less like a clown shoe and more like a regular running shoe. They've done a great job with their latest versions of shoes like the Instinct, Lone Peak and Escalante on the design front. Hopefully the Torin 3.0 looks a little more socially acceptable! (The black/red version is the better looking colorway, better than the blue/yellow, below)

Now, picking it apart in detail...

The upper: I love the construction on this shoe. Most of it is some sort of nylon material with varying degrees over plastic overlays. Some think it is too tight and not breathable enough, but it is great for me. I get enough support that my feet aren't sliding around, but I don't find it overly hot (and I do get pretty warm in the feet during my runs). There's a little bit of mesh on the upper that perhaps provides some ventilation. Maybe I'll be singing a different tune during the summer, but I haven't had a problem. More support than the Instinct 4.0 here, which feels too loose to me. The shoe laces up very well - not hot spots or puckering like I saw on the Instincts current and past.

The midsole: Absolute comfort. I don't find it too mushy or too hard - it is just right. My foot, which on the right has suffered from vague and annoying pain due to either too much or too little cush over the last couple of years - is happy and pain free. My feet don't feel "tired" at all - they've nailed it here. For comparison, it is significantly firmer the Escalante, slightly firmer than the Lone Peak 3.0, softer than the Instinct. 

The outsole: The weakest part of the shoe. I suffered excessive wear on the outside heels of both shoes. Yes, I tend to do my share of heel striking but land midfoot most of the time. I had to retire my shoes at around 150 miles because the black rubber was totally gone. Hopefully this was unusual wear, based on running on some rougher surface. But still, it doesn't look like this is a shoe that will have much life after 200 miles. Altra has consistently had quality issues like this, but is making progress. Hopefully the Torin 3.0 addresses this problem

Because I'm a little OCD: Altra Torin 2.5 reviews

The Altra Torin 2.5 is looking like the most suitable shoe of 2016 for me. I like a Goldilocks kind of shoe - neutral, some upper support but not too much, some cushioning but not too much. The only feature I like too much of is a roomy toebox. The 2.5 fits my needs very well. Edit: here's my belated review.

According to Sam at Roadtrailrun.com, we are going to see the release of the Instinct 3.5 as well as the Escalante soon in 2017, two shoes which will occupy similar space to the Torin 2.5, but likely with a bit less cush and more road feel. 

Until then, here are some of the most helpful reviews of the Altra Torin 2.5 I've seen.

Road Trail Run (convinced me to buy a pair)

Running Shoes Guru

Trail and Ultra Running

Gear Institute

My Year in Shoes 2016 - from Altra (Instinct 3.0) to Altra (Torin 2.5)

My Year in Shoes 2016

the uphill road to 1700+ miles and countless sneaker purchases

January

I started the year ensconced in the Altra Instinct 3.0.  They had been a great shoe for easy to run trail races like the Rosaryville 50K in November of 2015. And I was running 5Ks in them as well - starting the year with them on my feet at the Montgomery County Road Runners Club New Year's Day 5K.  I upgraded to the Instinct 3.5, and was pretty dissatisfied with the update. The harder more structured upper was much less comfortable and even began to cause a bit of foot pain on the top of my foot. Plus, they were uglier than your average Altra, which is saying a lot.

I did some trail running in the Altra Lone Peak 2.5, a nice shoe but which I found a little too sloppy over rocks and roots. I now use them as a walking around shoe, and haven’t tried out the 3.0 yet.

Instinct 3.0

Instinct 3.5 fugly

February

Challenger ATR 2

I ran some trial mileage in the Hoka Challenger ATR 2, wearing them for an uncomfortable soggy 24K at St. Mary’s Frozen Heart and for the relay at the Mid Maryland 50K. The ATR 2s were nearly perfect except for being a bit too tight in the toebox. I have read that the ATR 3s remedied this issue, but haven’t had the chance to try them on yet either.

Breakthru 2, Breakthru 1

As I didn’t have a good road shoe after tossing the Instinct 3.5 asides, I experimented with the Saucony Breakthru 1 and 2.  Neither was wide enough for my foot, but I enjoyed running in both shoes on shorter and faster race courses.  It is at the bottom of the line for Saucony, but they did well on that model.

I ran in the Breakthru 2s mostly during the March-April-May timeframe.

July

Clifton 3

By July, the tightness of the Breakthru’s were starting to wreak havoc on my feet, so I went back to Hoka to give the Clifton 3s a try. They seemed to get the shoe into a good place the third time around - a better tongue and upper material solved a bunch of problems from the first two models. I used the Clifton exclusively through July and most of August, squishing the Strava miles in them through the most unpleasantly hot and humid days of the summer when the material couldn't hold up to what I dished out.

August

At the expo for the Annapolis 10 miler race, I made an impulse buy of the Saucony Triumph ISO 2. It was a cushier and better fitting version of the Breakthru 2 for me, and I do love the ISO sockliner quite a bit. I ran with them for the A10, Larry Noel half, Parks Half, and the National Capital 20 miler. By the end of the run in them, I started to get some pretty severe heel pain which wasn’t going away from alternating some runs in the Clifton 3.

October

I went back to the Adidas Supernova Glide, 8th edition, in October. I put a couple of hundred enjoyable miles in them with no discomfort, successfully running the Howard County Metric Marathon and the NCR Marathon.

November

Once again, I was undone by an update, this time from the Supernova Glide 8 to the next version, simply called the Supernova. The update had a lot of great pluses - more TPU cush in the forefoot, better cushion around the ankle, a more padded tongue. But damn if the shoe wasn’t tighter in the forefoot than its predecessor. After 50 miles, it was clear it was causing pain in my right foot.

December

Altra Torin 2.5 penguin shoes

What goes around comes around. I started the year happy and comfortable in the Altra Instinct 3.0. And so I decided to come home to Altra, relying on roadtrailrun.com ‘s review of the Torin 2.5. And I swallowed my pride, putting function above style.

25 miles in, and I’m pain free and putting in comfortable daily runs. I think if I know what’s good for me, I’ll stay put.  As a sneaker geek, I always want to upgrade to the next model in the line, but as my experience with the Instinct 3.0-3.5, the Breakthru 1-2, and the Supernova Glide 8-Supernova shows, newer is not always better.  In fact, it's usually a step down.

Hoka Challenger ATR 2 review

I fall in love with shoe brands often to the exclusion of others. What happens is: I'll wear the hell out of a shoe I like, go through a second pair. Then an update, which is never as good as the previous version. Then a search for something else. 

I've been an Altra groupie since I discovered the Instinct 3.0s - and wore the hell out of several pairs.   I bought a pair of Lone Peak 2.5s - like them quite a bit, despite the fact they feel a little unwieldy on more rooty and rocky trail and aren't fit for much road running (a little slow feeling).

Altra just came out with the Instinct/Intuition 3.5s. Of course, they made aesthetic and structural changes that aren't a step forward, and arguably are a half a step back.  

So as I am mildly dissatisfied with my 3.5 Instincts, and not 100% into the Lone Peaks on all trails, I am vulnerable to any attractive footwear on the market for some transaction.

I walked into REI and saw a pair of the new Hoka Challenger ATR 2s... 

I loved the ground feel and cushioning of the originals - and the uppers were nice and light, and breathable. It was a good shoe in the first version, but still had some major flaws. 

The originals were too loose for me - I wear a 13, they felt like a 13.5. I didn't feel well locked down in them, and they weren't stable on more challenging trails. Plus, the inserts on the originals didn't stay in place because of the loose fit - comically looking similar to this after one hot and sweaty run. 

I put a pair of the CATR 2s on, and walked around in the store.  Sweet.  They felt like they fixed the sloppy fit of the original CATRs - these were snug enough, not too snug. The toe box was ok - definitely not Altra sized, but still comfortable. This gearinstitute.com review (loubrenner.06) reassured me that they'd loosen up in the toebox after a few runs.  The outsole seemed similar to the originals, same tread, possibly a little firmer but not by much.

I figured I'd take them - since I would wear them around, and could return them next week when I had to make a shipping pickup at the store if they weren't right.  

A day around the house and on the treadmill felt great.  No slippage, no tightness or hotspots, no foot discomfort.  Today, I took them for a 10 miler on trails, and they were terrific.  Just like the gearinstitute.com first review - very snug and comfortable. No irritation or rubbing. I felt confident on downhills - the stack height didn't come at the expense of groundfeel. They did nice on multiple surfaces -- ice, mud, rocks, roots and road. And the outsole is very close the original - firmer in a good way, but still pretty cushioned (I'd say a 5.5-6.0 in the 2s, a 6.0-6.5 in the originals, with a 10 being the softest). I'll check back here in 50-75 miles after they are nice and broken in, but so far so good.

Edit: Ginger Runner does a great review - points out the big change that I missed - tongue!  He nails the ortholite insert change. His view on the volume change is different than mine - but relevant to those who were happy with v1.

Altra Instinct 3.5 Review (cover your eyes)

Like for many, the road to finding the perfect shoe is long and endless for me as well.

I have big clown feet - size 13.  Many manufacturers stop making half sizes after 12, so it ends up being hit or miss just in terms of length - usually 13s are too short, 14s too long, in any given model.  I also have large toes - particularly the Captain, and most toe boxes are either too narrow or not high enough.

As a result, I've developed sporadic foot pain that comes from wearing shoes that are too tight.  I've had shoes where I've really loved the ride - a number of Adidas models come to mind -- but they weren't good for me.

The first model of shoe I felt comfortable in was the Sketcher GoRun Ride 3. A major issue: too much room, so much that during a 50K, my foot slid around so much that I got major blistering issue.  But no pain otherwise.  So I accelerated the search, knowing that I needed less structure (not too much less), more room, and some upper support to keep my foot in place.

Discovering Hokas was a revelation.  Shoes like the Clifton and Challenger were massive improvements in comfort and nice upper lock down, but the cushioning just didn't feel right to me.  

Altras seem like they are the best out there for my needs.  My first shoe was the Instinct 3.0.  The Instinct is the men's - the Intuition is the women's.  A cute and stereotypical naming scheme, which as a man with a strong sense of intuition I object to. Be that as it may -- I continue to run in 3s as the 3.5 comes into general release. The Instinct 3.0 toe box is great - never come close to blistering or feeling them rub at a hotspot.  Not too much structure but enough to keep my foot in place. The right amount of midsole cushioning.  No foot pain or discomfort.  And at least for me, durability through the 300 mile mark.  

(I also have the Lone Peak 2.5 which I like - more cushioned than the Instinct 3.0, but close to the general feel.  I tried the Torin 2.0s, but thought there was too much cush and it hurt my foot.  I'd definitely like to try The One 2.5 on of these days.)

Complaints?  A few.  The lacing of the 3.0 wasn't great.  Sometimes you get puckering around the eyes, and once in a while it's not laced perfectly and you can get a little discomfort on a spot on the top of your foot.  I also thought the upper could be beefed up - its a little too light.  I would have liked a little more tread as well - although they aren't slippy in wet weather, they could use some more grip for turning corners with more comfort.  But despite those minor drawbacks, I did run well in everything from a road 5K to a road marathon to a 50K on trails in those shoes with happy results.

I bought a pair of 3.5s, with some trepidation.  I worried that Altra, like most shoe companies, would end up messing up a good thing with the upgrade.  And the photos I saw of the shoe made it more hideous than the 3.0s.  To be fair, the 3.0 was most hideous in its orange or red version, but the blacks were acceptable.

I think Altra, for the most part, did a great job on the 3.5s.  The uppers are slightly beefed up, mostly I think by adding a leather strip that starts behind the heel, winds over the outside eyelets, and crosses over to the inside toe.  A pretty ingenious way of doing so without decreasing the breathability or flexibility of the upper.  They also use two different materials for the inside and outside of the upper - I think the inside might be a little thicker.  This also ads a little more feeling of support to the upper.

The lacing is improved - narrower towards both the toe and the ankle, wider in the middle.  

And the midsole is slightly firmer in a way I like - if the 3.0 was a 5 in terms of softness, this is somewhere in the 4-4.5 range.  The flex seems close to the 3.0 as well.

What could be better?  The looks.   See for yourself, but they look like what would happen if clown shoes had sex with bowling shoes, the bowling shoes got pregnant and took acid during the gestation.  I got the reds - they may actually be a bit less heinous in yellow or black, but blue is out of the question.  You almost think Altra is looking for an excuse to lower sales of the shoe by making them weird looking - just doing the same shoe in solid colors would have been a massive improvement.  The women's Intuition is much the same with some obligatory purple and pinks.

Also - it would have been nice to have had more grip on the outsoles - they seem identical to the 3.0s.

I would highly recommend the shoe for the fashion or vision impaired runner who is in search of pain-free, blister-free feet.

Update (58 miles): Unfortunately, I like these shoes less than after the first run.

- The outsole is just too firm.  I said it was a 4 or 4.5 out of 10 - with 10 the softest, with the 3.0s at a 5.  I would say these are closer to a 3 or 3.5 - significantly firmer, and on longer runs, too firm for comfort.  
- The upper is a little too structured compared to the 3.0s.  It is on the verge of a support shoe whereas the 3.0 was completely neutral.

I still have a pair of 3.0s that I wear, and I think I prefer them for the above reasons.  Your mileage and preferences may vary.

PS: This post would suck without photos.

From the top:

Left foot, outside shot:

Right foot, inside shot:

Also see: My Year in Shoes 2016
Altra Instinct 4.0 review (2017)