Torin 4.0 Review

The Torin is one of those models that seem to change substantially with each iteration yet managing to remain true to the concept of the shoe. The Torin is about plush and cushion for training and even possibly longer races (perhaps the  marathon/ultra distance at less speedy paces).

I've run in a bunch - 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 Mesh and Knit. My favorite of them was the 3.5 Knit, so it seemed like Altra was making good progress in their iteration of the line over the last few years. I've been running in the 4.0 (regular?) version for the last 60 miles and really like the shoe.

New and improved features of note:

- A well fitting upper that is an improvement over the 3.5 Knit, which was a little baggy around the tongue and laces. This shoe fits a lot more like the Kayenta - more form fitting without being too tight or creating hotspots.

- A better midsole material made of Quantic - closer to the feel of the Ego midsole of the Escalante line than the A-Bound of previous Torins. It has a bit of a bounce to it and doesn't feel like it has flattened out at all in the first 50 miles.

- Support straps at the midfoot. They aren't that noticeable like the ill-fated version Saucony implemented on the previous Kinvara models. They may incrementally help with lock-down. But they aren't anything to be that concerned with, one way or the other.

- A decoupled heel on the outer side of the shoe. This presumably creates a little more flex on heel landing on the outside of the shoe. Not sure I notice it at all, but the general feel on landing is comfortable cush but not squish.

- Nice laces - thin and stay tied. The 3.5 laces were not long enough, the laces of the Paradigm 4.5s are ridiculously long and still untie with a double-knot.

- Seemingly more durable rubber pods on the outsole. On previous versions, the pods seemed like they were made of midsole material or really soft rubber. The pods on the 4.0s seem like they are made of honest-to-goodness rubber that might hold up for a couple of hundred miles before they scrape right off. I am getting some wear on them at the heel (none elsewhere) but it seems more normal than premature.

- Light on my feet. While they are listed at 9.1 ounces vs. the 8.4 of the 3.5 Knit, the latest version feels like it weighs less. I would not hesitate to wear the 4.0s from a 5K up to a marathon - they are a joy to run in and never feel plodding like the 3.5 Knit/Mesh could at times.

- Look. Altra has kicked up the styling a bit to the point where the first thing that comes to mind isn't "clown shoes". These don't scream Altra - they look more normal which is a good thing in my book.  

I'm looking forward to trying the 4.0 Plush version -- a 28 mm height vs the 26 mm of the regular version reviewed here. The regular retails for $120 while the Plush requires a plusher wallet at $140.

But all things considered, this is an excellent upgrade that address some of my main complaints around past Torins outlined above.

A good looking Torin from above and below

You can see the midfoot straps and the highly functional laces. 

A nice mesh upper that fits snugly yet provides plenty of toe splay and aeration

The heel is segmented on the outer side of each foot

A good shot of the rubber on the heel before I start to wear it away!

The rubber is wearing a bit but not too badly

Another view of the wear and tear around the outer heel.

Altra Paradigm 4.0 review - good first try but not there yet

This is a highly awaited and positively touted update of the Paradigm series. I did not run previously in the Paradigm, but the early praise of the 4.0 by Sam Winebaum on Road Trail Run got me interested.

Saucony Ride 10 review

Saucony is a brand I keep coming back to but don't stay with for that long. Occasionally they have a winning shoe like the Mirage 3 and then end up modifying it or discontinuing it or both. Generally they get it just right, but not for consecutive models.

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:

Vivosmart HR review - Garmin Elevate HR module tips and tricks.

Several things I've found to improve your happiness with the HR module at least as implemented on the Vivosmart HR:

1) Let it warm up when you first put it into broadcast mode before exercising.  It seems it takes a minute or two to calibrate properly - and during that time it gives it a chance to have a durable link to the paired ANT+ device (in my case, the 920XT).  Not sure if this is necessary, but I got more satisfactory results this run (no disconnect from the 920XT or funky readings in the first couple of miles.

2) Wear the band right above your wrist bone, but not too high on your arm.

3) Find a comfortable tension for the band for your non-exercise time.  Something tight enough where it isn't sliding around on your arm like a bangle, but not so tight that its noticeably tight.  This is enough for good resting HR readings most of the time.

4) For exercise, tighten the band up a notch.  Enough to feel snug, not so much you are tourniqueting yourself.   Enough so when you loosen it up after exercise and move the band, you leave a light imprint of the stay loop on your arm (see the imprint above the strap on the top right of the band).  This technique definitely keeps the HRM more "locked in" during exercise.

Vivosmart HR - first observations

I've had a Vivo device since the Vivofit I was released in 2013.  First the Vivofit (v1), then the Vivosmart (classic) last fall.  It's become a must-have accessory for me, primarily for step counting and sleep tracking.  

A lot of people ask: why bother with steps when you do so much running?  First, walking is a great active recovery exercise on days off, and its nice to be able to keep myself honest - do enough walking that its significant, not so much that its not really recovery.  Also, with ultrarunning, you can do a lot of time on your feet that is walking or elliptical work -- less pounding than running, but still pretty useful on the longer races.  I find that if I get my average steps up to about 140K/wk, I can handle the physical demands of 6-8 hour races fairly easily.

I also like two handed device wearing -- being able to monitor mileage/pace on one hand, time or HR on the other.  Dork city.

So why upgrade from the Vivosmart - a really terrific device if its working so well?  I can't resist an upgrade - pretty much always have been an early adopter to a compulsive fault.  And I really want to track resting heart rate since I believe it is a great early warning system for overtraining/overdoing.

The Vivosmart HR jettisons the sleek and anonymous look of the Vivosmart classic and returns to the big bulky look of the Vivofit.  

Which is really not so bad... I never minded the size of the Vivofit - it still is a lot smaller than a running watch or a smartwatch.  It is light enough to sleep in without discomfort.   So the size bloat from Vivosmart to Vivosmart HR doesn't bother me much.

Plus: you get some added features from moving to the Vivosmart HR from the Vivosmart classic:

- Always on display (black background, white font - an LCD display that lights up when touched or when activity is started or notification arrives.

- Additional data (it can display weather on one of the swipe screens, transferred via Bluetooth when connected to your phone)

- And, drum roll please... Garmin's new proprietary optical HR monitoring that can not only take and track resting HR, but can also "broadcast" the HR signal to other ANT devices like any other Garmin HR strap would.  

Initial experience is positive and makes me think this might not end up back in the shopping cart behind the customer support counter at Best Buy.

1. The device is comfortable.  The strap is very soft, even when buckled with some firmness (which seems to help HR readings vs letting it dangle like a bangle on your forearm).  

2. Advantage to always on display.  One thing I forgot - whether its a fitness band or a running watch, the basic function of Time is underrated.  Its nice to see the time without having to raise your forearm on demand.

3. The HR monitor seems to work pretty well.  I've always been partial to chest straps, especially the new Garmin soft strap.  They do a good job for me in reliably capturing HR data, except when super sweaty.  Obviously, they aren't for 24 hour use.  Garmin's new optical monitor seems to be fairly reliable in both resting HR monitoring (its been showing an accurate resting HR) and for exercise (see below -- the first part around was an 8 minute brisk treadmill walk, followed by a two minute sprint at the end and a one minute cool down).

This isn't a hardcore workout/test, but it is a good sign.  Garmin is smoothing out the HR nicely in the graph, and the optical device is pretty responsive.  Better than a stick in the eye (fail) on day one.  

The only concern I have at hour 8 of ownership is battery life.  4-5 days is the claim; I'd hope I could get to the outer edge of that period on a regular basis since part of the charm of these devices is not having to do a nightly Apple Watch like charge up.  I'll report back here with updates by the end of the week about HR accuracy, broadcasting, and battery.  Over and out for now.

Edit: see new post on broadcasting HR data. 

Edit: See final post on VHR - http://www.midpackgear.com/2016/01/vivosmart-hr-final-wrapup-and-some.html