I currently wear the Nike Zoom Elite 4 and really like this shoe. I'm having traction issues while trail running in wet conditions. I'm considering the Inov-8 320, 305, 295 and 310.
I land on the outside of my forefoot and then pronate slightly toward my big toe. I'm training for an Ultra and need something for the trails for long runs (over 20 miles). Anyone have any suggestions? Can any of these shoes handle some road use?
your footstrike sounds rather like mine. i've used inov-8 rocklite 285 (for as long as 30 miles) and f-lite 300 (for both a 50 miler and a 70 miler) and liked them both, although both give me blisters. the f-lite offers good trail to road transition, but the rocklite outsole is too luggy for me on hard surfaces (including hardpack trail). both have good sticky-rubber traction, but the rocklite has a bare patch right under the arch that could cause sliding if you land on a wet root.
that said, i'm now a devoted fan of the new balance 790, albeit with a "real" insole (e.g., from the f-lite), rather than the little bit of flat-nothing foam that the shoe comes with. the 790 fits like a slipper (and has about the same amount of structure) and uses grippy rubber for the outsole, but isn't luggy at all. i consider this a good thing because not only does it transition well to roads (i actually ran a road marathon in a worn-down pair!), but it also doesn't get gunked up with mud. i wear mine in all conditions, including snow, mud, hardpack, and go-forever singletrack. they're not great, however, in sharp-rock situations, such as desert trails. i did a 20-something-mile trail run in december when visiting phoenix, and it was rather ouchy at times.
I race in the 790 under 25K; however I need more cushioning for Ultra's and long runs
changing the insole in the 790 makes a huge difference for me -- the difference between chronically sore shins and happy legs. i've done a couple of 50 milers in 790s as well as the pikes peak marathon, which, um, takes longer than your typical marathon.
Anyone else with info on Inov-8 shoes?
I have a pair of 320s and don't really like them. The upper is about perfect, but not enough forefoot protection from rocks for the trails in my region. And I'm not sure there's enough midsole structure for ultra distance. I do like the low-to-ground feel and light weight. Close, but not quite there for me.
Nike Zoom Trail is the best trail runner for my money. It has all the upside of Inov-8... light, flexible, low to ground, sticky outsole, ...plus a bit more room in the toebox, more midsole structure, and the perfect amount of rock protection without losing ground feel. Simple, effective upper. This is a shoe for forefoot/flatfoot trail running. I've done up to 100 milers in these shoes.
Some recent shoes I've used:
Brooks Cascadia (3 pair in 2007/2008) - too much midsole, uppers just did not fit me (pressure points), feels like I'm 'on top' of this shoe, rather than 'in' the shoe.
Montrail Vitesse (3 pair in 2006/2007) - low to the ground and locked the foot down nicely but I can't find them in my size anymore. outsole was terrible.
Montrail Cont Divide - un-runnable heavy brick, like low-top hiking boots. 3 inches off the ground. worst "running" shoe of any type I've owned.
Although I don't wear them myself, several of my friends wear the Inov-8 295, and say it is much better than the 305.
I wear the 212 and really like it, but I only use it when it's muddy or snowy. Otherwise I just wear road flats.
Why is it "better"
They said the fit is better; that the upper is conforms better (more sock-like) because it has less overlays. Other than that, the 295 and 305 have the same exact outsole and about the same midsole. Again, their words, not mine.
Those are trail shoes. Stick with the Nimbus and keep it on the crete.
I like the 310 and NB 790