we have very similar experience with these. my take is there same, though i still punish my first pair now and again. they almost have 1000 miles on them. foam is done. the only thing i wished lasted longer was the lugs. the white mountains are mostly exposed granite so it shaves them down quickly.
either those running 100s in these have a code of silence or they don’t use the internet.
i have put my norda 001s aside for a lot of longer races, mainly due to the non breathable upper, but i’ve learned my feet can handle a good deal of moisture over many hours with injinji liners.
I have been using Norda for several years here. 001 (also have the G-spike for winter) and now 005. Here are my thoughts:
001 one of the most resilient shoes for technical running I have ever had. I run my shoes hard. My Altras lasted approximately 300k before they would be destroyed. My 001s last at least 1000km before being moved to backup in the rotation. They then last another 2000km plus as dog walking and everything else shoes. I have one pair (first I got) that have over 5000km on them and I now use them for swimming in our rocky muddy river. Still completely together.
It runs warm, but it’s managed. Ran javelina 100 in it last year in the 100 degree heat. My feet were destroyed, but so were everyone else’s and I didn’t change my socks or shoes the entire day.
The winter spike version: wish it had a built in gaiter, other than that, perfect snow and ice shoe in Canada.
005: Goldilocks shoe for me. I have two pairs, one is at about 700km and has done a lot of big routes in the Canadian Rockies and ran an extremely muddy Death Race. They were soaked in mud, constantly wet. No blisters. Still running on them.
Just ran Javelina again in a new pair of 005s. My goodness they are amazing. Not a single hot spot, feet stayed cool, and even doused in ice water they worked great. I did put on some gaiters this year to keep the rocks out, and will continue to do so on sandy and rocky races.
I’m 6 feet, 200lbs, feet built like bricks. I have Morton’s neuromas on both feet and achilles made of tissue paper. My feet have never been happier in either of these shoes. Worth every penny. However, make sure you can return if you can’t buy them in person. They are not for everyone and in my crew, it’s about 60% hell yea, and 40% nope.
I have been using Norda for several years here. 001 (also have the G-spike for winter) and now 005. Here are my thoughts:
001 one of the most resilient shoes for technical running I have ever had. I run my shoes hard. My Altras lasted approximately 300k before they would be destroyed. My 001s last at least 1000km before being moved to backup in the rotation. They then last another 2000km plus as dog walking and everything else shoes. I have one pair (first I got) that have over 5000km on them and I now use them for swimming in our rocky muddy river. Still completelytogether.
It runs warm, but it’s managed. Ran javelina 100 in it last year in the 100 degree heat. My feet were destroyed, but so were everyone else’s and I didn’t change my socks or shoes the entire day.
The winter spike version: wish it had a built in gaiter, other than that, perfect snow and ice shoe in Canada.
005: Goldilocks shoe for me. I have two pairs, one is at about 700km and has done a lot of big routes in the Canadian Rockies and ran an extremely muddy Death Race. They were soaked in mud, constantly wet. No blisters. Still running on them.
Just ran Javelina again in a new pair of 005s. My goodness they are amazing. Not a single hot spot, feet stayed cool, and even doused in ice water they worked great. I did put on some gaiters this year to keep the rocks out, and will continue to do so on sandy and rocky races.
I’m 6 feet, 200lbs, feet built like bricks. I have Morton’s neuromas on both feet and achilles made of tissue paper. My feet have never been happier in either of these shoes. Worth every penny. However, make sure you can return if you can’t buy them in person. They are not for everyone and in my crew, it’s about 60% hell yea, and 40% nope.
I’m a trail runner that lives up in the Colorado mountains, I use normal trail shoes on the icy/snowy roads we have. I have goretex shoes but rarely use them since my feet somehow don’t get wet despite running in snow.
If you have a lot of ice you can get these spikes that attach to your shoes for traction. Just lookup “nano spikes” as an option. You can also get shoes with spikes built in, Salomon has a spiked version of their speed cross shoes. Norda makes a spiked shoe. Both of these options have gorged uppers.
I avoid spikes unless the entire path I’m running has snow and ice, if there are stretches of just bare road I’ll just run in trail shoes more carefully since spikes on asphalt feels like hot garbage.
You can also make your own spike shoes. Some runners put screws through an old pair of shoes (road or trail works). They do it so the tip of the screw is sticking out of the sole of the shoe and that will help with traction. Obviously removing insole first and screw from inside the shoe to the bottom and pick screws that will stick out a bit when flush with the bottom of the shoe so you don’t feel it with your feet.
You can also get water proof spays/coatings like never-wet and spray the outside of the shoe for added water protection.
Hope that helps, I would just try out your existing shoes to make sure there is a problem to be solved. I find that just having good balance is a bigger thing than the shoes, that is unless it’s smooth ice, then it’s time for spikes.
norda, especially the g+ models if you want them to be a bit better in the cold.
I have friends who hiked through the length of New Zealand in complete autonomy with two pairs. Durability can’t be beat, they are super comfortable and extremely light.
I just bought a pair of these - waiting for delivery. I'm also around 225lbs and have trouble between highly cushioned shoes and them being soft/unstable.
Have you ran in other "high end" shoes like prodigio pro or prodigio max? Tecton 3? Or Ultrafly Trail? Any other comparisons here - as I've tried a few of those to only modest success...
What other past Brooks have you run in - what did you like about those vs. the new cascadio elite?
I started upping my distances years ago, but didn't really get into trail shoes until I got a pair of Brooks Catamount 1's... I really liked the combination of fit, stability, speed, and ground feel. They changed the fit in the Catamount 2 and 3 and I never got along with them. I stocked up and bough 3 additional pairs of the 1st version and am wearing my last pair out now.
I've tried Norda 001/002 to no success. I have a pair of Nnormal Tomir02, and they are too narrow in the toebox, but I like the midsole. I have a Nike Ultrafly Trail, but use those for road to light trail only - not stable enough. Hoka Speedgoats are the most unstable shoe I've ever worn. Regular cascadias are fine, but clunkier than my preference.
I'm really hoping these bridge the highly cushioned, stable, with good fit gap that I'm looking for as a Catamount 1 replacement.
Doing the TMB in Aug - 5 days on trail, hoping these will work for that.
Right! For a lower stack shoe, I never had sore feet after long efforts - just the right amount of foam and the "plate" offered great protection, while still being lively, stable, comfortable, and fast. It was a great shoe. I could do everything from road, to flowy trails, to super rocky technical traverses, never a problem. I have a feeling the current Catamounts would still check the boxes if Brooks hadn't messed up the fit by making it way narrower. I never understand that - if you take a product and make it narrower, then also offer it as a "wide" using the same last as the previous iteration - you've already got the tooling...
Brooks - if you're listening, offer the Catamount in a Wide, please!
Here is my impression of the Cascadia Elite after a couple of short runs to break them in (total of about 15 miles) - if anyone was looking for more information.
Fit - my foot is wider and I have a high arch and instep, especially on my right foot. I normally wear an 11.5 in most brands. I ordered both 11.5 and 12, and chose to keep the 12. It was the right decision for sure. The sockliner offers a very comfortable/snug feel - that I appreciate very much. I feel that the shoe offers a wide enough fit in the toebox, but narrow enough in the heel to get good hold while not feeling constricting. The extra length of a half size up is great without being too big. I did add a Superfeet insole (which I do with all my shoes). The only pain point I had was with the lace retention strap over the instep, it felt too tight and was causing some pain over my bone/veins in that area. I cut that elastic piece out as I don't typically need/use the lace hold-down. Haven't had a fit problem since. I'm liking the comfort of the upper very much.
The Upper does seem to breath very well. I run hot, but normally do not overheat in hot conditions, or get cold feet running even in wet/snowy conditions. In this shoe, I did feel water/cold easily get in and out when running through a few puddles/snowfields. I think I am going to give them an A from the standpoint that I could feel the coolness, and with most running being done in dry/arid environments, am happy that these seem to dry/vent well.
Midsole running impressions - It is fairly bouncy/squishy under my weight (225ish), more so in the heel. AND it feels like the drop is more than the advertised 6mm (IMO). This combo feels more squirrelly than expected and very different from what I am used to, which is again, admittedly, something I'm not super familiar with - going to a high stack shoe (my preference to date has been the lower stack Catamount 1). That said, it is more stable than any of the other high stack shoes I have tried on, or purchased in the past. I think I will get used to it the more I run in it, and my hope is that the footbed beds down and the foam packs down in the heel. With stability being very important to me, I'm hoping this area improves, but isn't a deal breaker as I'll really be using this shoe for more long non-technical on-trail efforts (TMB) vs. other off-trail, technical efforts. The wide sole and base I think contributes to stability nicely and if you weigh less (say, sub 200), I don't think you will feel the foam instability at all. The underfoot feel is very soft/comfortable, yet neutral. I didn't notice individual rocks/roots poking through uncomfortably, nor did I feel they were particularly vague. I think they will do great on most trails. I have enjoyed shoes in the past with a full "rock plate" or "propulsion plate" to protect from rocks, but those were always with lower stack/less foam, so that combo worked. With more foam underfoot on the CE's, I don't think a full plate is really needed, but the U-shaped plate definitely adds some stiffness. That stiffness I think helps with forward propulsion and some stability. Without it, it would probably be even more squirrelly from side to side. I'm glad it has that plate and also feel like it does offer some forward push. I was running through mixed conditions which should have made my pace a bit slower than expected, but was keeping in the pace range that I normally would have on dry trail conditions. Cannot say for sure if the shoe played into that, or fitness, or just the day... but worth noting as I was running in my normal zones and would have expected slower times through snow/mud. The last thing about feel is that they don't feel particular quick/agile - again I think this has to do with my weight, as each step I take compresses the foam quite a bit and then has to rebound before lifting off - this extra movement just makes them feel a little less nimble than something with a lower stack.
Grip - I ran through grass, slick mud, hardpack gravel, and even snow. The take away is that the lug pattern and rubber held up well and I didn't feel like the grip was lacking except when side-hilling a snowfield, but that would have been the case with any shoe... perhaps less stack would have made that easier, or harder foam, but the grip is good - I am confident they will work in most all conditions. 3.5mm lugs could be 4mm-4.5mm and I don't think anyone would have batted an eye at increased weight... with the tradeoff being more grip and longevity... but that's nitpicking.
Overall, I'm really happy with them as a shoe to add to the quiver. The fit and comfort alone are awesome and I can see myself using these for long runs, an upcoming TMB trip, and once they are "worn out" just as a walking shoe as they are that comfortable. I will use these sparingly though, only for those long, sustained on-trail pushes, really anything 30k+ of flowy single/double-track. Anything backcountry, traversing, bushwacking, scrambling, I'll still opt for something more stable. So, not a quiver-killer, but definitely a long race-day shoe, or long effort shoe where you want to maintain comfort and safe the legs. The foam feels very comfortable and ultimately, that's what these high stack shoes are all about - this is the best combination of comfort and stability I have found for my use case.
Hope this helps - cheers!
Top Trail Running Shoes on Reddit
1
Mount to Coast
H1
85% positive of 177 users
Versatile road-to-trail, but struggles on wet, technical downhills.
Beyond-Dizzy
