Initial Impressions: Altra Olympus and Hoka Bondi 4

After my disappointment with the Bondi 3 and subsequent Bondi 3 donation to the Salvation Army, I managed to find a pair of Bondi 2s at a reasonable price and have been running in those. Unfortunately the sole is on the way out so it was time to get new shoes for an upcoming double marathon. I have wanted to try the Altra Olympus for a while, but I wasn't up for paying full price. I noticed the price dropped significantly at Running Warehouse so I decided to pick up a pair. I had read that they run small so I ordered an 8 rather than my usual 7.5. As soon as I put the shoes on my feet, I knew I needed another half size larger. I've found that if I feel like a pair of shoes feels like they might be too small, they will be by mile 30. Luckily Running Warehouse is great about such matters, and I soon had a 8.5 at my door.

Instantly I liked the upper of these shoes. The inside has nice padding and the quality of the materials is impressive. Of course, they also have that distinctive Altra shape. These are my first pair of Altras so they felt different than what I am accustomed to. The Olympus is a trail shoe, but it is hard to imagine that the tread would be effective on technical trails. What really struck me as strange after putting these shoes on was the "cliff" that seems to occur slightly forward of the ball of my foot. I expected zero drop shoes to be... well... flat. You know, slope of 0 an all of that. As I rolled from my heel to the front of the shoes, it felt as if there was a cliff near my toes. Odd. This strange drop makes it feel as though I should be impacting the ground on the ball of my foot. Do all Altras have this rocker "cliff"? If you know the answer, please let me know. My first run was a 6 mile run on the roads which went okay, but I am fairly certain these will not be my next long distance shoe. 

Women's Size 8.5 comes in at 8.5 ounces (no insole)

I looked around for another pair of Bondi 2s with no luck. I noticed that the Bondi 4s had just been released so with a couple of looming races, I pulled the trigger. I had been told by Running Warehouse that the 4s should be lighter than the 3s (yay!), and I noticed they had changed the tongue of the shoe back to something that looked a little more comfortable.  

Despite Hoka still using my less than favorite upper that they incorporated since changing ownership, I was hopeful that the design change would make things better. For the most part, it has, but the stiffness is still a bit uncomfortable around the ankle area. The tongue of the shoe is significantly better than the one on the Bondi 3s, however. Instead of being a flat inflexible piece of material, it has some very comfy padding. 

Bondi 4 versus Bondi 2 sole

Hoka says they have added better material in key wear areas to increase durability, and the soles do look different. They also look slightly more narrow than the previous versions. Since I've read many complaints about the narrow nature of the Bondi model, I really do not know why Hoka would choose to do this. Perhaps to cut weight?  If so, it worked. 

Hoka Bondi 4 women's size 7.5 - 8 ounces (no insole)

The Bondi 3 came in at 8.5 ounces for a size 7.5, and now the Bondi 4 is 8 ounces. That still isn't as light as the original Bondi which came in at a mere 7.4 ounces for size 7.5, but it is a step in the right direction. I should also mention that I was told the new 4s run a bit larger than previous models, but I chose to go with my regular size, 7.5. I really see very little difference in the 7.5 Bondi 4s and the 2s. I am quite certain 7 would have been too small for me. The 4 seems more narrow than previous models, but things may feel different with added miles.

Left: Bondi 4 Right: Bondi 2

Left:Bondi 2 Right: Bondi 4

Just for kicks, I ran some miles on the treadmill in the Hokas and then switched over to the Altras. The sole of the Altras is significantly harder than the Hokas. The strange rocker shape of the sole felt as if I was slapping the ground with my feet unless I made the conscious decision to run on the balls of my feet. Making this effort in a 5 mile race is doable, but after mile 20 in a marathon my mind isn't up for a lot of thinking. I then switched backed to the Hokas which felt a little odd, but not as odd as the other way around.

If I could combine the feeling of the uppers and the anatomical shape of the Altras with the sole softness and rocker of the Bondi Bs, I think I might just have my perfect shoe. Until then, I'll put in some more miles with both of these shoes and see what turns up. Happy running!

Shoe Review: Hoka Kailua Trail

I picked up a pair of Kailua Trail shoes at Running Warehouse for $99 during a sale. I wasn't in the market for a Stinson Evo Trail (review) replacement, but I decided $30 off made them worth a try. While I like the Stinson Evo for trail running, I always felt like the tread offered a little less than what I expected as far as grip. I got that impression after running in the Mafates (review) which didn't fit me overly well but gripped the ground like nobody's business. After having these shoes for a few months, I finally got a chance to take them out on trails that weren't completely ice and snow covered.

Before I did that, I managed to get a few shots of them:

A tale of 3 Hokas: Kailua Tarmac, Kailua Trail, Bondi B (1)

Women's Size 7.5 (no insoles) = 7.7 ounces
Kailua Tarmac = 7.5 ounces
Bondi Bs = 7.4 ounces
Stinson Evo Tarmacs = 8.8 ounces 
trail Stinson Evos = 9 ounces
Mafate 2 = 10 ounces

Trail - left  : Tarmac - right

I just wore the Kailua Tarmacs in the El Paso marathon so I assumed a long trail run in a brand new pair of Trails should be just fine.  Just like the Tarmac version, I removed the thin little insole and replaced them with a pair of regular insoles. Just in case, I did throw my Stinsons into the back of my car. I headed over to meet my favorite Marathon Manic for an easy long run, but our first few steps onto the trail made it obvious this was going to be a little harder than anticipated. Part of the trail had a significant amount of mud and other parts were covered in slushy ice. There were some parts that were in absolutely perfect shape which made this a great trail shoe test course. The front of the Kailua Trails have a toe guard which was a good thing as I managed to kick something sticking out of the ground. I kept myself upright, and my toe didn't get hurt thanks to the hardened toe area. The tread also had a good amount of grip which meant I didn't do much slipping in the mud and ice slush.  The mud did stick quite a bit to the bottom of the shoe. That said, I would take this tread over the the Stinson Trail tread any day.

10 miles later, I never even considered switching from the Kailuas into the Stinsons. I did consider running my next trail 50 miler in these, though. These things were covered in mud by the end of the run, and after a quick washing, they look as good as new. They do have less cushion than the Stinson Evo trail so I'm still not certain which pair I will be wearing during longer events, but I may have found my new favorite trail shoe.

Shoe Review: Hoka Stinson Evo Tarmac

I picked up a pair of the New Hoka Tarmacs for a good price from RunningWarehouse.com by using their annual before Christmas gift card sale and a coupon code. It took some patience as I had to wait a few months for their arrival, but it was certainly worth the savings. When I opened the box, I was shocked with the blast of color. The images I had seen showed a more subdued blue with yellow accents. Cameras don't capture the color of this shoe well. The blue is much richer (think Zensah leg sleeve blue) than in the picture to the left, and the yellow is more of a tennis ball green (or yellow, whatever) than the banana yellow it appears to be. Mostly, I am happy that Hoka has recognized that women's shoes don't need to be boring white or gray like a lot of their past models. Thanks Hoka!

Stinson Evo Tarmac = Stinson Evo (left) + Bondi B (right) ... sort of.

The sole of the shoe has a different tread than either the Bondi B (read my review) or the Stinson Evo (read my review). This shoe is meant to be a road shoe. Just like the Stinson Evo, it comes with a pair of extra insoles that are thinner than the regular Hoka insoles and a pair of laces to replace the no tie version that comes on the shoe. The toe cap is also re-enforced like the Stinsons (unlike the softer Bondi B toe cap).

The weight of the Tarmac is closer to the trail Evo than the Bondi B, and the upper has some stiffness due to the rubber support structure just like trail Evos. The mesh material is thicker than the Bondis, and I think it will probably stay cleaner and last longer. (I currently have 804 miles one on pair of my Bondi Bs.) The toe box seems a bit narrower than the Bondis as well.

Women's Size 7.5 (no insoles) = 8.8  ounces
Bondi Bs = 7.4 ounces 
trail Stinson Evos = 9 ounces
Mafate 2 = 10 ounces

First Impressions:  Woohoo!  Unlike my last Hoka purchase (Mafate 2s, read my review), these things feel good right out of the box. Also, 7.5 in Tarmacs = 7.5 in trail Evos = 7.5 in Mafate 2s. I jumped on the treadmill for a mile just to see how running would feel. The shoes felt good, and my heels did not slip.

Second Impression: Ran 5 miles in the Tarmacs and had no issues. I did notice the white piece running down the middle of the shoe for the first mile, and then I didn't notice it again. I think it was a little stiff initially, but that went away quickly. I think the Tarmacs and I will get along just fine. It is going to be tough choosing between the Bondi Bs or the Tarmacs. Tough choice, I know. What can I say? Life is good. Time to fly!

Shoe Review: Hoka One One Mafate 2

I am happy with my Stinson Evos (review) for the trail, but when I saw the Mafate 2 on sale for $59.99 at LeftLane Sports, I had to go for it. I am planning on another 50 miler this year so I figured another pair of trail shoes would be a good idea. It also helped that I was saving $90 off of retail price. That's not an easy thing to do on Hokas. I also really liked the look and color of the new Mafate 2s. Yeah, I said it. People often give the Hoka a bad rap because of the look, but it is hard to argue with performance. That said, these Hokas look pretty good if you ask me... as mom laughs and says "Your little bitty legs and those big shoes!" You bet she wouldn't give up her Bondi Bs though.

These look a lot better than the yellow, black and red color scheme
of the original Mafates I had purchased. My new wood floor
also looks pretty awesome. :-)

My first dance with the original Mafates wasn't a happy one. The tongue of the shoe was very stiff, and it dug into the top of my foot.  The other issue was that I had ordered a size 8, and they were just too large.  My Bondi B (review) were an 8, and they fit perfectly. I had read that Hoka had corrected sizing in the newer shoes and the tongue issue in the Mafates so I was ready to give the remake a shot.

So the first thing I did was pull out the insole and break out the old school scale to get the weight of the shoe. I ordered the Mafate 2 in women's size 7.5. Good choice! My Stinson Evos were 7.5. My old Bondi Bs were 8. Seems from here on out I will be ordering size 7.5 in the Hokas. (For reference, I wear a 8 in Saucony Kinvaras and 7.5 in most Asics. 8.5 in Brooks Pure Flow.)

Size 7.5 (no insoles) = 10 ounces
Stinson Evos = 9 ounces
Bondi Bs = 7.4 ounces

Stinson Evo + Mafate 2

Bondi B + Mafate 2

The other thing I noticed right away was that the tongue of the shoe was, in fact, different than the original. Good news! Soft! The toe cap is nice and stiff for those times you accidentally punt an iceberg rock running down the trail. 

So the first thing I noticed when putting these on is that they have a very stiff upper. After taking a step, I noticed that heel portion on my left foot slipping. Ugh. I tightened the laces and used the very first eyelet that I seldomly use in shoes (except for the Brooks Pure Flow). Unfortunately this made the area around the shoe near the front of my ankle dig right on into my ankle. Ouch. After playing around with the laces, I now have what I think may be a configuration that will keep my heel from slipping and keep the shoe from hurting my ankle. I did not have to do this with either the Bondi B or the Evos. I ran a mile on the treadmill in the Mafates. I then put on Evos for a mile. My Evos definitely seem to be lower to the ground. The uppers also have a lot more give.  Then again, they do have over 200 miles on them. I am not a big believer that a person should have to break in shoes. Shoes should feel good out of the box. You shouldn't have to hurt your feet until a shoe feels okay, but that's just my opinion. That said, I think these shoe uppers may soften in time.

Now on to the trail...

I took the shoes out to the super highway of trail running after an evening of rain. There was plenty of fun mud so it was a good a test environment. :-) The tread was great, and I did very little slipping unlike my trail running buddy who was wearing another name brand. I am also happy to report that the tread did not pick up globs of mud so I didn't have to carry around extra weight on my run. Since I haven't put in a lot of extra miles on these shoes, I still wasn't happy with the overall stiffness. Only time will tell.

I like the Mafate 2 much better than the original Mafates, but if given a choice, I would go with the Stinson Evos for the trail. YMMV. Time to fly :-)

Hoka One One - Stinson Evo Review

After road running during the winter months, my trail season begins around spring. I love the shade of the trees and the new experiences on the trails. It keeps things fresh and different. I spent many a mile in the Bondi Bs (read my review) over the winter months. In fact, I managed to get over 800 miles in one pair which meant that per mile, they were the cheapest running shoes I have ever owned. That is pretty funny considering how expensive they are compared  to the shoes I was wearing previously.  For example, the Saucony Kinvara cost me about 20 cents per mile since I would barely get 300 miles out of a pair. The Bondi B's were 16 cents per mile. I could have gotten a few more miles out of them had I not found them another home in Peru.  Now someone else is getting some miles out of them.

When it came time to hit the trails, I decided to stick with Hoka. I had ordered a pair of the original Mafates from The Clymb for 1/3 the full price. Unfortunately, they felt stiff and uncomfortable after the Bondi Bs. The stiff tongue on the original version often dug into the top of my foot. The new 2012 versions of the Hokas were released a few months ago, and the Stinson Evo caught my eye. I was feeling a bit reluctant because I knew there was no way I would find a brand new version at any discount. The allure of a trail shoe that resembled the Bondi B and the fact that I was able to get so many miles out my last pair of Hokas was enough to get me to bite the bullet. I managed to find the women's version of the Stinson Evo in the size I needed at Zombie Runner.

The Stinson Evo feels a lot like the Bondi B but is a little stiffer, has a different lacing system, and has more of a tread on the sole. They are lower than the original Mafate and do not have the stiff tongue. I really wanted to like the new lacing system.  I always replace road shoe laces with lock laces, but lock laces are a bit too flexible for those ooey-gooey trail runs, in my opinion. These laces are not bungee so there is no stretch. Unfortunately I could never get them tight enough to feel like the shoes were fitting properly. Hoka, however, provided a normal pair of shoe laces for those of us who weren't feeling the love. After almost 100 miles in the Evos, I went ahead and replaced the laces with the regular pair. I am glad I did. That's a good thing since once the original laces are out, you can't put 'em back.

The other thing Hoka did was include two types insoles: regular Hoka insoles and the thin version.

Since I put in my Ortholites, I have used neither of these. I also should note that Hoka changed the sizing a bit from 2011. My 2011 Bondi Bs are size 8, and I ordered a 7.5 in the 2012 Evos. The fit seems equivalent.

At this point, I have about 150 miles on the Evos. I go out of my way to take care of them. If they get muddy, I make sure to clean them shortly after my run is complete, pull out the insoles and throw everything in front of a fan to dry. It's worth taking the extra effort when you shell out a chunk of change for a pair of shoes, and the Evos still look as good as new.

These trail Hokas are light for trail shoes. The women's size 7.5 comes in at 9 ounces (without insoles). The Bondi B size 8 women's weighed 7.4 ounces. (Yep, I used one of those old school postal scales that can be easily calibrated, and next I will do a math problem using a slide rule.... Continuing on....)


The picture to the left will give you an idea of how the 2012 Evo compares to the 2011 leather version of the Bondi B. I also have a pair of those that I picked up for less than half the normal price at LeftLane Sports. It is safe to say that I am a fan of Hoka shoes. See you on the trails. Time to fly!

'11 Mafate(8), '11 Bondi B lthr(8), '11 Bondi B(8), '12 Stinson Evo(7.5)

Hoka One One Bondi B Shoe Review

Plenty of folks debate what type of shoe is the right shoe to wear. Some even say wearing no shoes at all is the way to go. I am just happy that there are multiple options available. The Saucony Kinvara was my "go to" shoe over the last year. Unfortunately I injured my foot a few months ago while walking around barefoot, and the ball of my foot swelled and stayed that way for quite a while. I figured out that I could cut a hole in my insole to take the pressure off of the ball of the foot which allowed me to walk normally, but running was still an issue. Around the same time, a friend completed a 100 mile ultra in a pair of Hoka One Ones. 

I'm not a fan of not being able to run, but I also want my foot to last.  I decided it was a good time to try the Hokas. Since I knew I would be doing a lot of road running during the colder months, I went with the road version: the Bondi B.  These shoes are not cheap. I was happy to find them on sale at The Tri Shop, and I used a $25 coupon.  Cheaper than a custom orthotic or a doctor's bill at least.

Hoka One One Bondi B's (with Lock Laces)

When I got the shoes, I removed the insoles and threw in a pair of Ortholites I had around the house to add a little more cushion.  As soon as I started walking in them, it was what I didn't notice that counted the most. All other shoes pushed on the swollen part of my foot and hurt. I could not wear other shoes without my high-tech (aka insole with a hole) insole. The Hoka's with the Ortholites didn't hurt. I was happy about that because I didn't particularly want to butcher another pair of insoles. 

Hoka - Time to Fly?

Well, I am not sure about flying, but these shoes have a lot of bounce. I wore them everywhere. I wore them to work so I could walk normally. I wore them to run. I wore them going to the kitchen to get water. (Walking barefoot hurt too much.) While I wasn't up to my normal weekly mileage initially, the Hoka's at least allowed me to get in some miles. Without these shoes, I would have missed a 200 mile relay, a couple of 5Ks, a 15K, and two half marathons. I did a test run in my normal shoes yesterday after two months, and my foot still isn't 100%.  My normal shoes now feel lifeless, flat, and extremely stiff. 

Hoka Bondi B / Saucony Kinvara 2

Hoka Bondi B Size 8 Women's (without insole) = 7.4 ounces

Saucony Kinvara Size 8 Women's (without insole) = 6.3 ounces

I thought these shoes were so comfy, I ordered a pair for my mom who has foot problems. She isn't a runner, but she walks a lot. After wearing them for a few weeks, she said, "I just wanted to say thank you for the shoes. When I wear them, I feel like I'm back to my old self. They make a big difference."  Hey, moms know best, right?

Overall, I am very pleased with my Hokas. For me they were the difference between being able to run and having to stay on the couch. I've put over 200 miles on them, and they are still in great shape. With a perfectly well foot, I'm not sure that they would be my first choice if I were trying to PR at a 5K. The cushy nature of this shoe dampens the energy return to the legs somewhat. That characteristic is what also is saving my foot at the moment. They are my shoe of choice for my upcoming marathon.

If you are looking for something different, I would recommend giving the Hoka Bondi B's a try. The road calls. Time to fly!