Shoe Review: Asics Gel FujiRacer

Buying running shoes isn't getting any easier.  Am I getting too much shoe?  Too little?  Am I spending too much for too little?  What is the right shoe for road?  For trails?  For mountain trails?  The list of questions goes on.  Given that I've been focusing much more on trail running (preferably with steep hills) lately, I thought it would be a good idea to put a pair of shoes on my feet that would suit the terrain I was running on.  This was after having run plenty of miles on the trails in my go-to shoe, the Brooks PureCadence.  The experience running in those shoes left me wanting a bit more traction on trails and a bit more protection from the plentiful rocks and roots New England trails have to offer.  After much deliberation, a bit of pure confusion at all the options out there, I opted for the Asics Gel FujiRacer.

The reasons for selecting this shoe were due to their similarity in specs to the PureCadence, light weight, low heel-to-toe differential (6mm), low profile.  Why not get the Brooks PureGrit, you say?  Well, given that I was looking for traction (PureCadence's biggest flaw) and protection (PureGrit have no rock plate) I made up my mind, closed my eyes and clicked buy (Running Warehouse makes it incredibly easy to buy shoes with their very liberal return policy).

It takes me a while to figure out whether I like shoes or not.  I've put in about 80 miles on these shoes so far, including a 19 mile outing in the White Mountains with lots of up and down and plenty of mileage on local trails.  

My first impression of these shoes upon putting them on was that they didn't fit.  I got a size 11.5, as is standard for me in any shoe.  It was very snug, tight in fact, when it first put it on.  I had read that I should buy a size up, but it's kind of hard for me to do that...  I've never had a size 12 shoe feel right on my foot (nor a size 11 for that matter).  Hoping they would stretch out a bit, I didn't send them back and set about running.

They did break in a bit, maybe even too much.  Surprisingly, after a few runs, I felt my feet moving around more than I was comfortable with in an otherwise narrow feeling toebox.  This was completely unexpected.  Granted, I sweat A LOT, and my feet were completely soaked when this happened (thus contributing to the slipperiness), but it's certainly on the negative side of how these shoes feel (especially descending a mountain, when you really want to trust your foot plant).

One of the most prominent things I noticed about this shoes is how ridiculously light they are.  This makes climbing an absolute breeze.  It's one of the absolute best features this shoe has to offer...  I found myself going up things I would have normally trudged up in hiking boots with ease i was unaccustomed to.  Asics have gotten this light weight a couple different ways:

Here is the bottom before a run, note the holes and nice tread

1. The outsole, rock plate and midsole of this shoe literally have holes cut in them all the way through the shoe.  If you take out the insert, you can see through the thing layer of fabric.  This is at once very smart, and certainly encourages quick drainage, but also allows things to come in rather easily as well.  The things that end up coming in are:  dust and dirt, small rocks, mud, especially placed sticks (rare, happened once) and most shockingly, water.  I say shockingly because the first time i stepped in a stream, the water was on the bottom of my foot before I knew it and it gave me a start.  But it also went right back out.  You can easily see the positives and negatives of this design, but after having put the shoes through the paces, i'm fine with the dirt, mud, rocks and what have you...  and I *would* be fine with the water, were it not for a pretty important traction issue.  Much like the PureCadence, when the outsole of this shoe gets wet, it will not grip any hard surface.  If you sweat like i do, soon into a humid summer run, those holes in the shoe will let the sweat get on the bottom of your shoes, stream or not.  This is an issue that must be addressed in the next revision of the shoe.  I will say that the traction is otherwise awesome.  The shoe will climb you easily through dirt, mud, and does great on the other surfaces when dry.  But when wet, be careful descending quickly where you put your feet...  one slight off kilter plant on a rock and you'll be picking yourself up from the deck.

here is the bottom after a run in dry conditions (yech, that's sweat!)

2. The shoe has much less cushioning than a tradition trail shoe, or even a traditional road trainer.  The interesting thing about this is that the shoe does have asics' patented gel in the heel.  You can really feel this any time you come close to a heel strike.  The forefoot of this shoe and the heel are night and day.  The difference in cushioning is especially noticeable compared to the PureCadence.  At first, this was very hard to deal with, as my feet were taking a pounding.  I came to realize realize just how NOT minimal the PureCadence are as I continued to run in these shoes (which are also NOT minimal).  The proprioception in the forefoot area of this shoe is great..  You really are in touch with the ground.  It does call for a much more deliberate style of running... but this type of running will help you keep from rolling your ankle or taking a digger.  It takes some getting used to, and I'm still not sold that the forefoot has enough cushioning, but I will say I'm going to continue to wear this on long mountain runs with steep descents, at least until I figure out another trail shoe to buy.

There isn't much else to this shoe, which I guess is another factor in the light weight of it.  The upper feels fine.  It has taken some serious beatings in the runs I have done and shows no sign of being worse for the wear (despite being quite dirty).  I do think it has a bit too much "flex", resulting in the fit issues I described earlier.

Of all the factors to consider in shoes, I think fit is very personal.  That the FujiRacer doesn't fit me perfectly will probably prevent me from buying the next revision of this shoe.  If they fix the traction issue, and if you are looking for a light weight trail shoe that will stand up to the punishment if a very long day on steep, rocky trails, this really is a great shoe.  If you aren't used to a less-than-plush forefoot cushion, it may take some time to get used to these shoes, but I think your running could benefit from it if all other factors are acceptable and you give them a chance.

If you have any additional questions or thoughts, definitely let us know!

Shoe Review: Asics Sky Speed

More than any other running shoe company, Asics likes tinkering with its lines.  New models will arrive one year, only to be completely discontinued the next.  Such was the case with the Gel-Bandito, which I loved.  And such is the case with the DS Sky Speed.

The Sky Speed was originally released in November 2010.  A slightly updated Sky Speed 2 followed in June 2011.  Then, in December 2011, the Sky Speed line was discontinued entirely.  It's now possible to pick up both the original Sky Speed and the Sky Speed 2 at clearance prices from online retailers.  I picked up a pair for $42.

So what is the Sky Speed?  It was designed to be a high-end, lightweight, neutral shoe.  If you think that sounds something like the Asics Speedstar, you are right.  But where the Speedstar was known to have a narrow fit, the Sky Speed was built on the same, wider platform as the very popular DS Trainer shoe, but without the DS Trainer's stability features. 

 I found the Sky Speed, like most Asics shoes, to have very firm cushioning.  In addition, the cushioning feelsto be more built up in certain areas, including under the joint of my big toe, and along the inside of the heel.  This felt awkward when I first stepped into them, but the sensation quickly disappeared while running.

One of the best things about this shoe is how well it holds my foot in place.  When running up and down steep hills, my foot did not slip inside the shoe at all.  For me, this shoe will make for happier, healthier feet when doing hillwork.

Some runners have complained about the asymmetrical lacing, which runs diagonally across the top of the foot.  For me, the lacing felt perfectly comfortable.   

While I have nothing against the bright orange color, the shoes do look a little plastic-y.  The overlays on the side and the toebox seem excessive.  (Some of the overlays are even designed to look like mesh; the silver "mesh" in the above picture is not mesh at all.)  Given this I worry a little about whether this shoe will feel hot in the summer.

In case you are looking at both the Sky Speed and the Sky Speed 2: not much has changed between the two versions, although Asics did modify the lacing system a little bit, and reduced the overlays.  I think the blue color of the Sky Speed 2 also looks better (although, to me, not worth paying more for.)

I'll report back on the Sky Speed once I've put down some more miles.  Drop us a comment if you have any questions.

Related posts:

Shoe Review: Asics Gel-Bandito
Shoe Review: Brooks Launch

Shoe Review: Asics Gel-Bandito

First impressions can often be deceiving, so while I continue to get accustomed to my new Saucony Kinvara 2's, I thought I'd post a review of the shoe that they will largely be replacing: the Asics Gel-Bandito.

In brief: the Bandito is my favorite running shoe that I have worn to date. Unfortunately, they were discontinued at the end of 2009, and while a few pairs can still be found in odd sizes around the internet, there aren't any that my feet will fit into. My pair doesn't have too much more life left in them, so it's about time to move on.

I bought the Bandito about a year ago, when I wanted to start moving away from motion control shoes, but I wasn't willing to give up support altogether. At that time, I also was looking to move into a lighter shoe than what I had been wearing. The Bandito is a lightly posted shoe, and Runner's Warehouse weighed the size 9's in at 7.9 oz, so they fit the bill. (As for the other significant stat: RW measured the heel height at 19 mm and the forefront at 10 mm. So, while the heels are not as built up as most, those who obsess about heel drops will probably lose interest right about here.)

The biggest reason I love these shoes is their breathability. I've run in them as far as 18 miles, and even on warm days, my feet never come out feeling hot or wet. The reason for this is the very open mesh upper. You can see the light shining through it in the picture below:

What's more, the shoe even has small holes in the sole:

All of this means that this is the only shoe I have worn that can almost guarantee me a blister free run. (I say "almost" because the one time I splashed through a few puddles, my feet quickly became soaked, leading to eventual blistering -- that's the downside of the mesh.)

Despite the very lightweight material, my feet stay nicely locked in these shoes. Part of this is due to the overlays, but I think the biggest factor is the laces. Unlike other shoes I have worn these laces don't stretch, and they have no give. Moreover, except at the very top the shoe has an extremely thin tongue; just more of the same mesh material. This means you have to pay extra attention when lacing them up: tie the laces too tight, and your foot is going to be in serious pain after a few miles, as I learned the hard way during a few early runs.

By the way, notice the faux-snakeskin that the overlays are made out of. Whoever designed these shoes included some seriously cool details. They don't make shoes like this very often.

But perhaps all these details made them too expensive to manufacture, because ASICS never came out with a "Gel-Bandito 2". Instead, they just began channeling people into other models. For a while, I was thinking about buying the Gel-Speedstar 5, but there have been too many reviews complaining about how those shoes don't breathe at all. Hopefully, ASICS will return to Bandito-style mesh soon.

The other factor for me is that I wanted a shoe with more cushioning. Although ASICS billed these shoes as "long distance racing flats," once I started getting above 15 miles, my feet started hurting. Surely, part of this is because the padding was already a bit tired by the time I started running so far. And an even bigger part is because my feet are still weak. In any case, I decided to look for a shoe with more padding, but still lightweight and breathable. I'll let you know if the Kinvara 2 fits the bill.