But back to the topic at hand. Six weeks before Grimsthorpe,
I was happily intending to run the whole race in the X-Talons, but as you know
I went and screwed up my achilles. Now
the X-Talon 190s are not really the ideal shoe for Grimsthorpe in the dry as it’s
fairly light trails and about 50% tarmac, but I thought my alternatives were a
bit too lightweight. The X-Talon excels in
the soft and squishy stuff and on the downhills on slippery wet rocks as I
found at the Yomp Mountain Challenge (twice), so is a bit OTT for a dry-ish
Grim.
In comes the Trailroc to fill that gap between the F-lite
195 (which is great on the road) and the X-Talon 190.
So where is it similar and where is it different? Let’s
start with the last, the basic framework of the shoe; the F-lite and the
X-Talon are essentially the same show but with a different sole, built on the
same natural fit, which some have said is a bit narrow across the toebox. In my view however the flexibility of the
upper and the lightness of the shoe completely overcome that and the whole
package is light and flexible.
The Trailroc by contrast, although supposedly built on the
same precision last seems much wider across the ball of the foot. Looking at the pictures, I’m not convinced
that it is, maybe that’s an artefact of the Trailroc being a much more
structured shoe overall. If you look at
the comparison photos, you can see that where the X-Talon is the pared
down speedster – The Range Rover Evoque
perhaps, the Trailroc is the Land Rover Defender – definitely an uprated V8,
but still a defender. It’s clearly built
for the long haul, with rubberised bits around the toe to deal with stubbing
your feet on those loose rocks and catching edges of things, whereas the
X-Talon is designed for plunging into a peat bog and shedding water.
Taking a look at both side and top view it’s obviously a
well-made well thought out shoe. I
couldn’t find any evidence of a single manufacturing defect (unlike others where I’ve
had to trim a sockless liner to prevent blisters) and looking at mine after a
40 mile race they stand up very well.
Colours as usual are the typical lurid combinations and the ink and orange
I have is by far the most sober of the bunch.
Turn it over though and here’s the interesting bit, looking
at the sole it’s got some big beefy lugs, so obviously going to offer plenty of
grip on both loose gravel and light mud, but interestingly the lugs are not too
big for dry hard trails and even sections of tarmac either on the approach or
transition between trails. The other
really interesting thing to note here is the colours and sections on the
sole. Now that’s not just to make the
boring part of the shoe look a bit more interesting, but it’s three different compounds
of rubber to give a harder wearing compound where the sole takes the most
beating (as opposed to my soul which takes a beating on pretty much every run
if I do it right). That’s always been
one drawback of the X-talon in that it has a very soft compound to give it the
grip, but at a cost of high wear on road and hard trail.
The Trailroc also has the meta-shank stiffening in the sole,
which when you are more of a natural runner like me, could be a bit of an
issue, but we’ll get to that.
Looking side by side (excuse the debris on the X-Talon, I
told you it was a no-road shoe) you can see the slight difference in height and
construction, and also if you look closely you can see the one vs two chevrons
so a 6mm drop on the Trailroc vs 3mm.
Again, that’s going to affect the wear of the shoe.
So before we start talking about the experience, let’s
summarise the shoe. A theoretical 255g
(mine weigh in at 280 for a UK 8.5, worn a few times) which is theoretically 65g/2.5oz
heavier than the offroader, but still a pretty light shoe compared with some of
those slow and steady LandCruisers of shoes out there. As per most Inov-8’s I went a half size up
from my usual and was happy with that choice.
The shoe fit perfectly in the width, with just enough space in the toe
to accommodate a bit of downhill and a bit of swelling of the feet (I’ve never
lost a toenail to running yet and don’t intend to). The lace structure again has had a lot of
attention paid to it, pulling the upper in right along it’s length and providing
a very comfortable fit that is improved more by paying attention to how you
pull the laces in rather than just yanking on the free end. That plastic cradle on the outside gives great stability all round without being instrusive and the shoe just hugs the foot to help improve the feeling of ground contact.
I had plenty of toe wiggle room across the front and they
felt light and airy once on. On the run
though you can immediately tell the difference between these and the two
lighter, lower drop offerings. With the
6mm drop and the heavier shoe, I was immediately running with a flatter foot,
with the footstrike coming back to much more horizontal and a light heel touch
rather than the ball/toes of the foot before the heel comes down. That’s not necessarily a bad thing,
remembering after all that I bought these shoes to take some strain off the
achilles by altering my gait in just that way.
You can definitely feel the
weight differential though, slight as it is, if you’re used to running in those
lightweight shoes as I’ve been doing for three years. Again that has some benefits, as after
running in those for some miles, now that I’m back in the lightweight
performers for a road HM, my pace is markedly faster at the same HR (also a function
of fitness and the good base of an ultra, which is the subject of another article
I think).
So, comfortable, but slightly heavy. What about the rest of it? Grip – perfect for
the light, dry hard trails and light mud in my experience so far, also nice and
cool with that mesh upper if not quite as good at shedding any water. The tongue is nice and padded as well to give
enough protection from the laces on the longer runs. Let’s face it, I did 40 miles in a pair of
these so they are a decent comfy shoe and robust enough, and that soul is
definitely hard wearing and certainly does the job it was well designed for.
Which brings me back to my earlier point, this is not really a
comparison at all, but more of a contrast and one that shows that yet again the
thought going into the design means that Inov-8 have hit the nail cleanly on
the head with this shoe. So far I’ve no
real drawbacks with it and am looking to see how well it goes long term.
Now to the post Grimsthorpe.
Once I’d recovered enough to be able to walk again, I stuck to my word
and took two weeks off from running, putting in the hours on achilles rehab,
yoga, the bike and a bit of indoor rowing (where I managed to strain an
intercostal instead). That was definitely
called for, but then left it a bit late for my HM, just 6-weeks after
Grimsthorpe with 4 weeks to try and get some speed into the legs but not set
the achilles back to where I started from.
So far it’s not going too badly. With that lay off my legs seem to have found
themselves an extra bit of pace without my asking. They just seem to want to go
faster and I’m not stopping them. Target
pace for the HM is sub 4:50 per km and everything has been run at that pace or
faster with one exception. The bike has
also had a decent bit of use and that’s where I’ve been doing the steady
work.
The pace plan, hydration plan and BG management plan is now
all set and has been tried on a 12km at race pace session and refined a
bit. The overall plan is a negative
split i.e. starting conservative and getting faster during the race, with an
extended 7km between tests, so I only need to test twice during the race. I’l llet you know how it works in about 10-15
days.
No comments:
Post a Comment