Asics Womens Trail - Winter Running Shoes Gel Fujis Etsu G Tx Gore Tex Reviews

Article by Mike Postaski

ASICS GEL-Trabuco 9 ($130)

Introduction

Mike P: I picked upwards this shoe as a personal purchase at the end of the summer after testing the Asics Fuji Calorie-free 2 ( RTR Review ).  I had previously purchased the Asics Trabuco Max ( RTR Review ) - which seemed to signal Asics' re-entry into the trail running shoe arena.  I like that shoe a lot, but detect usage a bit limited due to the strong rockered geometry.  I wasn't certain what to expect with the Fuji Lite two, but I was profoundly impressed past its flexibility, softer cushion, as well equally similarly performant Asics Grip outsole.

I then circled dorsum to the "regular" Trabuco ix which I had seen at a local running shop, and was surprised to notice that it had a pretty decent stack. I tried it on and was furthermore surprised by the super-comfy and accommodating toe box. Trying them on - they but felt good, and so I decided to pull the trigger.

The Trabuco 9 seems to be quite an under-the-radar shoe, equally I've never seen anyone wearing them and haven't found much information out there on the interwebs. That beingness said, throughout the review I will lean on comparisons and contrasts with the other 2 Asics shoes which seem to be improve known - Trabuco Max (TM) and Fuji Lite 2 (FL2).

Pros:

• Inconspicuously loftier stack

• Dense, notwithstanding not business firm or harsh FlyteFoam midsole

• Dual density midsole - firmer area at medial instep for support

• Total coverage Asics Grip outsole with 5mm lugs

• Still quite flexible for such a high stack/outsole

Cons:

• Upper could employ some refinement

• Lace/eyelet combination is too slippery

Stats

Weight:

  Official: men's 10.8 oz / 305g (US9)

  Sample: men's x.9 oz / 310g (Usa 10.0)

Stack Superlative: 34mm heel / 26mm forefoot (8mm drop)

Available now. $130

Starting time Impressions and Fit

Mike P: As mentioned in the intro, they felt good on my feet straight away when I first tried them on in the store. Noticeable was the flexibility - I was accustomed to the stiffness of the Trabuco Max (™), but these "regular" Trabuco'south have a dainty even flex from the midfoot through the forefoot. They felt really comfortable just walking around and I could tell that they were more my way as I tend to capeesh flexibility in a trail shoe.

The fit is truthful-to-size for me - I wear a US 10.0 with ¾ to a total thumbs width up front end in all 3 Asics shoes. The volume in the toebox is noticeably wider every bit well every bit having a bear on more than volume across the top of the human foot than the TM. This makes a big difference in comparison to the TM toebox - which tin can experience a bit restrictive, peculiarly with the rocker in play, and therefore less pes flex.

Upper

Mike P: The upper is the expanse of the shoe that I experience could use the most improvement. Asics did a adept job with the fit, especially upward front end, simply information technology seems like the materials themselves are kind of generic.  At that place were similar feelings about the upper of the TM, although thankfully the T9 does non utilise the same quicklace system of the TM.  Likewise of notation - the T9 gusseted tongue is normal (and normal length) unlike the TM. I accept no issues with information technology moving or shifting.

The upper provides a solid midfoot lockdown, although initially I did have some trouble getting a good heel lockdown. Eventually I figured out that the gap between the top eyelet and the lower of the ii "runner's loop"/talocrural joint eyelets seems to exist likewise large. I used a leather hole dial to create a new eyelet a bit lower and that fixed the issue.  Toying around with different lacing techniques and eyelet placements can totally change the experience of a shoe.. don't be afraid to experiment.

[I've been using a lace lock with the eyelet the lace is threaded through and the eyelet I punched beneath that one]

One of the standout features of the shoe is the toebox - I find it just the right width and compliant enough for any length of run, without beingness sloppy. I would say it is comparable to the Topo Mount Racer 2 in width at the forefoot, with the TMR2 being more boxy towards the very forepart at the toes. The T9 likewise has plenty of room though, and is not pointy at the toes- for me the perfect size and shape for long distance/ultra runs.  I wish I could transplant this toebox to many other shoes that would be otherwise suitable for very long ultras (VJ Ultra - I'm looking at you).

Besides of note - the upper utilizes a closed-mesh material which does a great job of keeping dirt and dust out.  This is a big consideration, especially out here in the American West. The upper material and the shoe in general seems to exhale well - I didn't have whatsoever feeling of them running warm when testing in very hot summertime temperatures. The full toe bumper is adequate to protect from small bumps, although not overly stiff.

Typically I don't critique laces, as it'southward a uncomplicated fix to trim them down or even switch them out.  And so I'll simply note that the T9 laces are a bit light and slippery, and the shoe too uses ii fabric loops instead of eyelets at the midfoot.  I switched to a pair of Knotley laces that have a bit more "take hold of" around eyelets and all is fine at present.

Midsole

Mike P: The Flytefoam midsole, at 34/26mm stack definitely has enough cushion to become a long way. Dumbo feeling, but not firm - it seems to be of similar durometer to the TM (although the TM does take more than underfoot at 39/34mm). The T9 features a Duomax midsole - with firmer density foam along the medial side for support. The firmness of that area of foam is noticeable when pressing with your fingers, simply on foot, it blends together seamlessly and you don't find it at all. This is unlike from something like the Topo Mount Racer 2 - which uses a dissever non-composite insert, and is somewhat noticeable when running.

[Highly rockered Trabuco Max on the left vs. more than standard Trabuco 9]

The specs as well mention a rock plate - but I have to say that I don't notice it at all.  I didn't even realize it had 1 until I read the features more closely.  I'd say this is a good thing, every bit protection is fantabulous, with no harsh plate being felt, likewise every bit no tippy-ness.

Specs also list "GEL" cushioning in the heel - again, this is another characteristic that is not noticeable to me.  Heel landings are definitely harsher than say, a Hoka, simply definitely in line with other less cushioned shoes, for example - Salomon's Ultra Pro or Due south/LAB Ultra.  A picayune flake of extra heel absorber would be welcomed for extended downhills, possibly something along the lines of how Heave is utilized in the heel of Adidas Agravic Ultra.

[Trabuco nine on left - no slouch @ 34mm heel vs 39mm heel of Trabuco Max on right]

Outsole

Mike P: Total coverage, deep lugged (4-5mm) Asics Grip.  The lug pattern is very similar to the TM and the condom seems to be the same compound.  Traction is excellent and it is probably one of the nearly durable compounds out right at present.  The outsole will likely outlast the upper and midsole.  The Fuji Lite 2 besides uses a like lug pattern, but with a softer, tackier safe compound. It works well for that shoe equally the midsole is much softer and way more flexible than both of the Trabucos.

The super-durable outsole really enhances the shoe'southward protection - you have to become through a dense design of lugs, earlier you fifty-fifty get to the 34/26mm stack (with stone plate).  I haven't taken whatever rock hits or zingers at all, and I've even tried to target some stone hits through testing.  I found a like level of protection with the Max.

[Left to right - Fuji Lite 2, Trabuco 9, Trabuco Max]

Ride

Mike P: The midsole and outsole come up together to provide a very well balanced ride. There'due south no stiff rocker as in the TM, but I find the enhanced flexibility much better suited to technical terrain. At that place's only enough flexibility - for such a decently stacked shoe on peak of full rubber coverage.  Perhaps due to that flexibility, and well balanced feel - it doesn't ride similar an 8mm drib shoe.  If that is something you may be concerned about, I'd say it rides more like a 5-6mm drop.

In technical terrain, the ride feels stable, although not quite as agile as a more lightweight or responsive shoe.  Merely again, we're dealing with a 10.9 oz max-absorber shoe here.  Every shoe needs to exist judged inside its proper context - the Trabuco 9 is more Speegoat than Torrent.  I don't notice whatever tippiness through rocky sections and I actually experience very content running through them rather than dancing around them equally the stone protection is excellent.

If you lot appreciate a firmer, simply still protective ride, fifty-fifty over longer distances, this could exist the shoe for y'all.  It'south definitely a more traditional ride than the proliferation of super cushy long distance trail shoes out correct at present (merely some examples- any Hoka, Salomon Ultra Glide, Terra Kiger 7). I'thou merely going to throw this out there - but information technology'southward forth the lines of the South/LAB Ultra, with the Ultra having a more than refined upper, but the Trabuco ix having more protection, noticeably in the forefoot.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Mike P: Truly an under-the-radar workhorse shoe, and even ultra racer - if you lot are similar a more traditional, firmer ride.  It must exist repeated - the toebox can't exist vanquish if you're looking for an all-mean solar day, ultra distance shoe.  In terms of longer distances, I'thou comfortable taking these out for any length or elapsing over any terrain.  I fifty-fifty planned to start with them at IMTUF 100 Mile this past September, although unfortunately I had to pull out due to illness.

The Trabuco 9 is definitely a staple in my ultra quiver.  I like the flexibility, dense cushioning, and overall protection for the longest days out on the trails.

[You can encounter my modified lacing technique here]

Mike P'southward score: (9.50/10)

Ride: nine.0 Fit: 9.five Value: 10 Manner: 9.0 Traction: ten.0 Stone Protection: 10.0

Ride is solid, although non dynamic - groovy for long mountain runs. While the upper could exist refined, Fit still gets a high score due to good stability and great toebox. Value - for such a durable long altitude shoe, $130 tin't exist vanquish. I like the Mode , only no wow factor. Asics Grip Traction is one of the best. Dumbo foam, full coverage rubber, plus imperceptible rock plate provides great Protection .

12 Comparisons

Index to all RTR reviews: HERE

Asics Fuji Lite 2 ( RTR Review )

Mike P (10.0)- Fuji Lite is more than suited to shorter runs and "shorter" ultras, if the terrain is smooth to moderate.  Fuji Low-cal Flytefoam is much softer, the shoe is a lot more flexible and overall is less protective.  FL2 has a bouncy, fun ride which I bask for shorter runs.  FL2 upper is likewise less structured and less secure, partly due to the much softer base.

Asics Trabuco Max ( RTR Review )

Mike P (U.s. x.0)- The Max has similar feeling Flytefoam midsole, simply with a fleck higher stack - well into super-max territory.  Like/same outsole.  Stiff, rockered ride can feel more dynamic at times, only is also more precarious in whatever technical terrain.  Trabuco nine's upper is more secure and likewise more comfortable, especially up front.  The Max toebox tin can feel circumscribed.

Adidas Terrex Agravic Ultra ( RTR Review )

Mike P (10.0) : Almost an ounce heavier, at eleven.eight oz, and that heft is felt. Agravic features a carbon composite plate which feels quite shine at like shooting fish in a barrel to moderate paces, only otherwise it does feel heavy. The Agravic Ultra upper is also very strong, and uncomfortable in sure areas, specially effectually the talocrural joint/heel collar.  You'd take to effort information technology on for yourself to see if it agrees with your foot, just I adopt the Asics.

Hoka Challenger ATR 6 ( RTR Review )

Mike P (9.five EE): A different kind of ride - softer cushion, and rockered from the midfoot.  For me the Challenger upper is less secure, but that may exist personal preference.  Challenger works well over moderate terrain, fifty-fifty roads, but is non suited for technical terrain. The Asics outsole is far superior on trails.

Hoka Speedgoat 4 ( RTR Review )

Mike P (x.0): Again a different kind of ride - much softer cushion, slightly rockered, but unlike the Challenger, well suited to technical terrain.  SG4 upper is more locked down and secure than the Asics. I also find the SG4 toebox to be wide enough, although with just a touch less book all around than the Asics. Traction is similar between the two. Comes down to preference - dumbo/firm vs. the ultra cushion king.

Nike Pegasus Trail ( RTR Review )

Mike P (10): I but had V1, simply didn't like them at all.  Much softer in feel, with an insecure upper - the college drop of the Peg felt deadline dangerous for me.

Nike Terra Kiger vii ( RTR Review )

Mike P (ten): My TK7s are roughly the aforementioned weight at 10.9 oz. This is a close comp as both are suited for very long runs.  The Nike'south experience a bit softer underfoot, just I find the forefoot also laterally flexible, causing some instability. Asics has superior traction, and is much more durable. Nike'south organization of lugs into rows under the forefoot doesn't feel practiced to me, and I think this contributes to the lateral instability.  Both accept a similar level of proficient, only not greal lockdown.  Toebox book is similar.  This one may come down to fit and experience preference - I much adopt the Asics.

Salomon S/LAB Ultra ii ( RTR Review )

Mike P (10): Annotation- I tried on, but did not run in V3 - sizing must accept changed between V2 and V3, 10.0 was mode also big, I would be 9.v in Southward/LAB Ultra 3.  Southward/LAB Ultra is besides on the firmer side, just definitely less underfoot - 26/18mm vs. 34/26mm for the Asics (plus the Asics lugs are much deeper).  The Salomon has a more secure upper, and would be more agile in technical terrain, every bit long as they feel protective enough for yous.  The Asics definitely absorbs more than bear upon. The Ultra V2 toebox was only slightly narrow, but I believe V3 is ameliorate and comparable to the Trabuco 9'southward.  I prefer the Asics, for me the main factor equally a midfoot striker is the much more than protective forefoot cushioning.  I found the Ultra V2 a flake thin upfront, particularly after putting some miles in them.

Saucony Peregrine 10/eleven ( RTR Review )

Mike P (nine.5): Very like in weight, but different in character. The Peregrine offers a firmer ride, using a woven rockplate and total rubber coverage to provide very good protection. The Saucony rock plate is much more than evident than that of the Asics. I have a size 9.5 in the Peregrine, which is more than of a tight fit. I'd say size 10s in both are comparable.  The Peregrine toebox is ok, just tapers more toward the toe. The T9 is definitely more roomy in the toebox, especially at the very front. Peregrine'south ride tin experience harsh over difficult ground, but it'due south a expert affair if yous need the protection.  I'd stick with the T9 for longer distances, Peregrine for shorter, rockier outings - although the T9 can handle those also.

Saucony Mad River TR 2 ( RTR Review )

Mike P (10): TR2 actually has a wider toebox than the Trabuco nine - likewise wide in fact, especially with the looser knit material they use.  TR2 lugs are also much shallower and traction is not as good. The ride is just dull.  These were a miss for me.

Saucony Xodus x ( RTR Review )

Mike P (10): These clock in much heavier at 12.2 oz for me, with less stack at 31/27mm.  The Xodus ride is more responsive and also very good in technical terrain.  They also have a much smoother ride on the road, if that's a gene (for me, not).  I thought the upper could use some refinement - I found it relied also much on cinching the laces tight, which tended to squeeze my foot too much.  Outsoles are both full coverage, the Xodus rubber is softer and therefore contours better, while the Asics deeper lugs bite improve.  I like the denser cushion of the Asics - preferring the protection over the more dynamic Xodus ride for very long runs.

VJ Ultra ( RTR Review )

Mike P (ten.5): VJ is better suited to short-mid distance ultra runs.  A lot more than flexible than the Asics, and nigh other shoes in the same stack course. Grip is top of the grade, aforementioned as is the Asics, simply condom is non total coverage - this aids flexibility and gives corking basis feel, but also offers less protection. Cushioning is much softer, mayhap also soft to get beyond mid-distance ultras.  The ride is faster and more than agile but again, less protective.  Security is great, simply toebox tapers more than sharply than the Asics - could be an issue depending on your human foot shape.  Note- I found they run modest, especially with the tapered toe box, so I sized up to a 10.5, my only shoes in that size.

Scott Kinabalu Ultra RC 2.0 ( RTR Review )

Mike P (10): The Scott is like to the Trabuco Max in terms of rocker/ride geometry, but much, much firmer and with a lot less stack.  The compactness plus the rocker was much also harsh for me.  It may piece of work amend for heel strikers.  I'thou adding information technology to comps, since it is advertised with "Ultra" in its name.  Clear wins for the Asics on cushion, comfort, flexibility, ride, traction, durability.

Topo MTN Racer 2 ( RTR Review )

Mike P (nine.v): The Topo is lighter at ten.2 oz.  As mentioned earlier, the Asics has a Topo-esque toebox, which I consider a good thing.  Actually both uppers as a whole feel similar, with good midfoot lockdown.  Also mentioned before, Topo's medial stability insert is more perceptible than Asics' Duomax blended support.  Topo's Zipfoam feels a bit softer, but the Asics only feels a scrap smoother underfoot.  The one detriment I plant with the Topo is that it does feel a chip sparse in the forefoot (for an ultra shoe).  It's listed at 25mm under the forefoot vs. 26 for the Asics, just I feel the ground much more in the Topo. Traction is similar between the two, just the Asics Grip lugs are sharper and deeper, and likewise add a greater level of protection.  I would say this is a toss-upward based on experience, simply once more, the better forefoot protection of the Asics tips the scales for me.

Mike Postaski Built-in and raised in New Jersey, I moved to Boise, ID in 2019, mainly to accept better and easier admission to outdoor adventure.  I have no formal running training, have never run on a squad at any level, and tin can count the times I've run on a track on one hand.  I actually grew up inline speed skating - both indoor brusque track as well every bit roads.  Picking upwards running in my early 30s, starting on roads, progressing to marathons (PR 2:40, Boise 2019), eventually I discovered trails. I dearest going fast and running all distances, only I peculiarly love long mountain ultras.  My 3 100 milers so far take all been in the 25k vert range. I also bask the challenge of looped/timed trail races, and even the backyard ultra format. I am definitely a gear junkie - I have gone through more running vests than I can remember, and my trail running shoe collection currently sits at 38 pairs (all tracked via spreadsheet)!  My wife does non capeesh this .

The tested sample was a personal purchase . RoadTrail Run has affiliate partnerships and may earn commission on products purchased through affiliate links in this commodity . These partnerships do non influence our editorial content.

The opinions herein are entirely the authors'.

Please bank check out our Vacation Gift Guides for Runners and Savings Page Hither

34 Run Shoes Covered!

RTR'due south Top Road & Trail Run Shoe Introductions for 2022 from The Running Result HERE

Comments and Questions Welcome Below!

Delight let us know mileage, paces, race distances, and currently preferred shoes

RoadTrailRun receives a commission on purchases at the stores below.

Your purchases help back up RoadTrailRun. Thanks!

AMAZON

GEL-Trabuco 9 is available from Amazon

RUNNING WAREHOUSE

FREE 2 Day Shipping Piece of cake No Sweat Returns
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
AUSTRALIA Men's & Women'southward SHOP Hither

FLEET FEET

TOP4RUNNING EUROPE

Apply RTR code RTRTOP4 f or five% off all products, even sale products

FREE Shipping on orders over 99, 30 days return policy, no questions asked.

HOLABIRD SPORTS

Gratuitous Shipping on most orders over $xl

REI Men'due south & Women's  SHOP HERE

Sentry OURYOUTUBE REVIEWS ON THE ROADTRAILRUN Aqueduct

Please Like and Follow RoadTrailRun

perrycestion.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.roadtrailrun.com/2021/12/asics-gel-trabuco-9-review-under-ultra.html

Share this post