For the fourth year in a row, we culled down a field of over 90 top men's trail running shoes and selected the ten best and most popular to test in a mecca of trail running, Colorado's San Juan Mountains. We added in four of the best shoes from last year's review that are still available on the market today and spent four summer months running on the best trails the state of Colorado has to offer, all to bring you the very best recommendations. While we primarily tested these 14 shoes on wilderness long runs, short and steep trails close to home, or off-trail scrambling missions to the tops of nearby 13- and 14,000-foot peaks, we also took them on adventures in a variety of places around the United States. These places included the Sangre de Cristo and the Ten Mile Ranges in Colorado, the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park, the Bighorn Mountains of Wyoming, the Dark Canyon Wilderness, Bears Ears National Monument, and Canyonlands National Park in Utah, and even on flat dirt trails in northern Minnesota.
While the foundation of our testing happens on trail runs and adventures in the wild places that we love, we wanted to add further accuracy to our testing by devising a series of controlled tests that we repeated with each shoe, comparing them to each other back-to-back. Those tests, and how we tested for each metric that we assessed for, are described below.
While running over the variable landscapes in the mountains subjects us to plenty of nice buff trails, alpine tundra and grass, sloppy mud, creek crossings, talus fields, steep and loose scree, and high altitude technical scrambling, we wanted to be sure that we knew exactly how each shoe compared to each other when it came to underfoot protection. To do so, we found a gnarly patch of sharp rocks and talus and spent an entire afternoon running back and forth in each pair of shoes, comparing them to each other, and taking copious notes. There is no doubt we have a firm grasp on the level of underfoot protection after such a test.
Our initial opinions of the performance of the traction on these trail runners were formed out on adventures and everyday runs, but we also subjected each shoe to a variety of different surfaces to compare their own traction.
To do this, we found areas of steep dirt trail, steep grass, dry rock talus, wet rock, and steep muddy trail, and again ran back and forth in every shoe on every type of terrain, keeping notes on how well they performed.
We also wanted to test them on snow, but poor planning meant the snow was all melted by the time we performed our testing, but we will be sure to include this aspect next year.
To better compare stability head-to-head, we located a steep grassy slope and ran back and forth across it, side-hilling incessantly to see which shoes induced our ankles to want to roll over more frequently. We also ran down this slope repeatedly, comparing relative stability in a very real-world test ¬– running down steep hills is an integral part of trail and mountain running.
There is no doubt that comfort is the most subjective metric that we tested for, and we found it very difficult to devise controlled tests that could accurately rate comfort in a way that will apply to everyone. The majority of our findings simply came from our everyday experiences, but we also conducted the water drainage test to shed light on this one aspect of trail running shoe performance and comfort.
The test is described in detail in our Best Trail Running Shoes for Men Review. Since it is only a tiny aspect of overall comfort, we only used this data to slightly modify the satisfaction scores for the very best and worst performers at this test and left most shoe's scores unaltered. Due to the subjectivity of this metric, we did not penalize any shoes with super low scores, and we also did our best to describe in detail in the individual reviews exactly how a shoe fit.
This one was easy. We weighed these shoes straight out of the box, and wrote down their collective weight, completely ignoring the figures on manufacturers' websites. The lightest shoes received the best score, and we went on down the list from there.
Similar to how we assessed for foot protection, we already had a pretty good idea of the relative sensitivity of each shoe after months of field testing but devised a controlled head-to-head test anyway. We again ran back and forth over the same patch of sharp rocks that we used to test foot protection and kept detailed notes as we did so. Shoes that allowed our feet to feel more of these protrusions through the outsole and midsole we considered more sensitive than those that allowed little to no feeling and graded accordingly.