Gear Institute Expert Test Menu
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Patagonia EVERlong Reviews (Spring 2014)

Patagonia EVERlong Reviews (Spring 2014) 10 months 1 week ago #631

  • justin
  • justin's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 140
  • Thank you received: 5
  • Karma: 0
Truth be told, I think the Patagonia Everlongs are pretty mediocre trail shoes, even for road-trail hybrids. I think they're best use is probably long distance runs on mild terrain, where speed and responsiveness are not really a concern. But overall, they feel really mushy and sluggish. Runners who currently run in thick mushy, comfort shoes, but want to get into thinner, mushy comfort shoes, will probably dig the new Everlongs.

What they are: These are 4mm drop trail shoes with a moderately thin midsole and really low-profile lugs so they can transition to pavement. You get some welded overlays on the upper and a little bit of a heel counter.

Comfort & Protection
The best thing about these shoes is the mushy, marshmallowy foam waiting for each landing. Despite being moderately thin (24.5mm/20.5mm for men) and 23mm/19mm for women), the midsole has a hell of a lot of squish to it. It's one of the mushier, wobbly foams I've seen. (A lot like Skecher's GoRun shoes, if you've had a chance to run in those mushy minimalists). I can imagine the mush is welcome on long Sunday runs -- 10-20 milers and such -- when you just don't really care to feel the sting of hard dirt paths. But these shoes feel flat and dead overall.

Speed
Speed is made up of two things: shoe weight and efficiency of the foam. The foam on these shoes is the opposite of efficient. It's like running in sand. The weight on these shoes, however, is very low--just 8.4 ounces for men and 6.1 for women). That means the turnover is quite light. Overall, the package feels sluggish, but at least you're not toting around a lot of extra foam.

Efficiency
See above -- these are really mushy and sluggish feeling on impact. That's the tradeoff you get for a lot of foamy comfort underfoot.

Security of Fit
The upper is reasonably snug, with a nice, close fitting last that doesn't feel narrow. On downhills, uphills, and in off-kilter terrain, I definitely noticed a bit of slippage, but not a great deal. This is certainly not a technical trail shoe, so that's fine.

Agility
Because of how mushy the midsole is, you can't really trust that you'll stick your foot placements on sharp rocks. But the lower stack height and low drop makes these shoes reasonably quick stepping and nimble. Although, frankly, you'll probably be running all flat and rolling hills with these. Traction? The lugs are so broad and flat, they aren't really lugs. These are dry trail, flat trail shoes. As soon as they hit anything wet or slightly gravelly on a turn, they're slipping.

Overall Speed: 3 (out of 10)
Energy Efficiency: 3
Comfort & Protection: 7
Foot Security: 5
Agility: 4
Value: Unknown yet

Appropriate for:
Roads
Flat trails
Rolling trails
Long runs

Not appropriate for:
Mud
Speed runs
Highly technical trails
Last Edit: 10 months 1 week ago by justin.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Patagonia EVERlong Reviews (Spring 2014) 10 months 1 day ago #648

  • yahkohb
  • yahkohb's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 31
  • Karma: 0
Patagonia EVERLong

I ended up with mixed feelings about this shoe. The superb forefoot fit, low-profile ride, and wide platform make for a wonderfully stable, nimble, and easy handling shoe. On the other hand, the mushy, energy-absorbing midsole creates an overwhelming feeling of flatness that removes any semblance of control and response. The result is something that feels more like a slightly beefed up minimalist trainer than the ultramarathon racing shoe that Patagonia was aiming for. The EVERLong will likely appeal to runners who want a soft, flexible, minimalist-inspired shoe with enough protection for long distances and rockier trails, but aren't necessarily concerned with speed or performance. So for example if you took a shoe like the New Balance MT10v2 and beefed it up a little, it's conceivable that you'd end up with something like the EVERLong. One additional point to be aware of is that the flexibility of the shoe does place additional strain on the feet, which may require adjustment.

Overall level of enjoyment: 5

Again, mixed feelings. Because of the easy handling I really enjoyed running in the EVERLong through technical terrain at slow speeds. But once I went much faster than an easy pace, I wanted a lot more than the EVERLong had to offer. So I really had to reset my expectations with this one. As a more protective minimalist-type shoe it fits the bill quite nicely due to the fit, flexibility, and light-on-the-feet feel. However it is not a performance shoe by any means, and personally I would never wear it for an ultramarathon even though that is how it is being marketed.

Security of Fit: 8

The fit of the EVERLong in the midfoot and forefoot was about as perfect as it gets. Right out of the box it was dialed in and felt rock solid, with no movement of my foot inside the shoe and no excess lace pressure. The heel however was somewhat loose and sloppy. It was not enough to affect performance, but it was enough to leave me scratching my head a little bit over the disparity in fit between the heel and the rest of the shoe.

Comfort: 5

The EVERLong is a very comfortable shoe from top to bottom and front to back - not in the sense of a highly cushioned shoe, but rather one that wraps the foot in a supportive but not constricting manner. The materials are highly pliable and soft to the touch. The laces and overlays wrap the foot nicely without causing any hot spots or discomfort. On the other hand, my legs and feet seemed to feel everything in this shoe, which is not ideal in a long-distance platform. I have a hard time imagining running a trail marathon at speed in this shoe let alone something longer, just because of the pounding and strain on the lower legs that would occur (unless you were going really, really slow).

Protection and stability: 7

The upper of the EVERLong protects reasonably well against trail hazards. However the soft midsole allowed for quite a bit of push through from rocks and other trail debris. Careful foot placement on rocky trails is definitely warranted with this shoe. However it's easy to forget that the EVERLong is only an 8(ish) oz shoe. At this weight there is going to be some loss of protection, the only question is where. So compared to other shoes in this weight class, the protection is actually better than average overall.

Speed, agility, and precision: 5

The low overall stack height of the EVERLong and the light weight really help facilitate precise foot placement. The outsole also is fairly wide up front which aids with roll stability of the foot. I had no problem cruising through rocks, roots, and switchbacks in these shoes. Turnover was similarly effortless. On the other hand, because the midsole foam essentially offers zero energy return, responsiveness was definitely lacking. I consistently found myself wanting more pop and stiffness when running fast. The soft midsole also reduces torsional stiffness which in turn inhibits control at speed on off-camber, technical trail. The low profile outsole lugs aid flexibility but limit traction on loose and sloppy surfaces.

Final Thoughts:

I can't help but think that if Patagonia increased the durometer on the midsole and inserted a rock plate they'd have a shoe with some serious trail racing credentials.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Patagonia EVERlong Reviews (Spring 2014) 9 months 5 days ago #713

  • nevergiveup
  • nevergiveup's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 33
  • Thank you received: 3
  • Karma: 0
Patagonia EVERlong

General description:
Patagonia's next installment in their trail running shoe line. It's another 4mm heel/toe drop with super low profile lugs and a really soft midsole.

What stood out about this shoe compared with others like it?
This shoe was super comfortable from the start. It has a simple but functional design to the upper, which rings true to Patagonia's design philosophy. It's surprisingly light at 8.4 ounces. However, two things really stand out for me with this shoe: super soft midsole and the lack of durability. From the 1st run until now, the midsole has been soft and sensitive, which I like in a partner, not in my trail shoe. It took away from the advantages of a lightweight, agile mountain shoe. Lastly, only a few runs into the testing, the shoe began to delaminate at the toe as well as on several of the lugs under the toes (~30-miles).

Who is this shoe best for?
It's best for Patagonia's brand loyal ambassadors who are more recreational trail runners. They would not be my first choice for a long mountain run in the rockies.

Please rate: 7

Overall Enjoyment
7/10 – I like this shoe, mainly because it is comfortable. They nailed it in the fit department. The toe box is good for medium to wide feet. It is low volume for more lateral stability. I thought a lack of a heel cup would be an issue but it was fine. The heel was a little big, but since it was taller than other minimalist shoes and more secure, I had no issues with rocks coming into the shoes.

Security of Fit
8/10 – Like I mentioned earlier, Patagonia scored in this department. Besides a slightly wide heel, it felt like a glove for my foot.

Comfort
7/10 – It is comfortable on pavement and crushed gravel trails. However, the minute you get on technical/rocky terrain you will notice the mushy midsole. It makes for a sensitive ride, but after 10-20 miles of bashing, the bottoms of my feet were done. I also thought there was a lack of bounce in the midsole.

Protection & Stability
6/10 - The low profile lugs felt like an exaggerated version of a road outsole. I didn't think they did well on snow or mud or rocks. Also, I found that toe protection was sacrificed for the lightweight material up front.


Speed, Agility & Precision
7/10 – The shoe is designed on a relatively flat last with a nice rocker under the midfoot. This encourages the mid foot strike, along with the 4mm drop which I liked. The fit of the shoe made it feel agile and precise. However, the midsole is the culprit in the energy sucking mushiness (technical term) that robbed the shoe of it's true speed and agility.

Last thoughts?
They could have a real winner here if the shoe didn't start falling apart after 30-miles and if they changed the midsole design/material.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Patagonia EVERlong Reviews (Spring 2014) 8 months 3 weeks ago #741

  • Erin McS
  • Erin McS's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 20
  • Karma: 0
The Good
This shoe is light, comfortable, and can take you between road and trail. The fit is snug, but flexible, and the upper is quite breathable.

The Bad
The rocks will hurt you if you take this on a rocky trail. I do not recommend this for aggressive trail running or rocky, uneven surfaces unless you want to be jumping over every possible hazard.

The Verdict
This is a good shoe for non-aggressive, smooth trail runs. It also may be a good shoe for those transitioning to a forefoot strike from a heel strike. With a slight drop and cushioned heel, it is forgiving for some heel striking while allowing for a mid-sole strike.

Comfort & Protection 7/10
This shoe is comfortable with light soft padding throughout...but watch out for rocks! The toe protection is modest, if not mild or nonexistent. The soles are soft and padded, but without any serious barrier between you and the pointy and other uneven surfaces you may encounter.

Foot Security 5/10
I felt secure in this shoe until there was a significant up or down hill, when some sliding would occur. On flat surfaces it is quite secure, but that should not be the standard for a trail shoe.

Speed 5/10
The shoes do not respond immediately due to the squishy and comfortable foam, but they still feel somewhat fast because they are light and airy.

Energy efficiency 6/10
The shoe felt energy efficient in spite of its soft and minimal, flat tread; I believe the flexibility and lightness of the shoe helped in this arena.

Agility and Traction 4/10
These shoes do not have particularly good traction or other security on uneven surfaces, leading to less-than-impressive performance on aggressive, steep, rocky, twisty, trails or other challenges traditionally found in trail running. The tread is relatively flat and smooth.

Good for/Bad for
Good for smooth flat trails and transitioning from trail to road to trail running. These shoes are also good for someone trying out a change in strike, with forgiving heel padding and limited drop. These shoes are not good for significant hills, rocks, or other technical runs.

How I tested this shoe
I tested this shoe on the river trails and Dale Ball trails in Santa Fe. The conditions were mostly dry and packed with some muddy sections.
Last Edit: 8 months 3 weeks ago by Erin McS. Reason: misspelling and unfinished sentence.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Patagonia EVERlong Reviews (Spring 2014) 8 months 2 weeks ago #889

  • kiskiw
  • kiskiw's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 26
  • Karma: 0
Overall I would say that this shoe is a decent minimalist shoe. I think that it would be a stretch to say that this would work for 100 mile race but could work for races 50km and under supposing that the race was not technical and had a reasonable foot (i.e. no roots, rocks etc...)

Comfort & Protection: 5
This is the category that this shoe really failed for me. With only durometer EVA foam instead of a rock plate to protect my foot, I felt all trail debris. I did how ever enjoy the cushioning when running on more tame trails and even the odd road section. It reminds me of my Saucony Kinvara road shoes.


Foot Security: 4
The Upper on this shoe was a little to "loose" for my liking. By "loose" I mean that even when secured down, and I have a high volume foot, it felt as if my feet pulled the upper around on the last. I think this might be because the shoe lacks a proper heel cup (no plastic form in the heel) so my foot pulled the upper around on all but the most gentle of slopes.

Speed: 7
The shoe did pretty well on this but only when running on the most "goat" of paths. With the lightweight build on this shoe turnover was a breeze. The flexible sole gave a nice midfoot landing and smooth toe off transition.

Energy Efficiency: 7
The durometer EVA foam that the sole is made out of felt quite cushy when on smooth trail and the occasional road section. As I said previously this shoe is very flexible so this may account for quality of the turnover and transition phases.

Agility & Traction: 6
This should have been better but with the upper being so weak and shoe felt too unstable to feel agile on the trail and the traction seemed to lean itself more to a less technical trail, like one with road sections and well wore paths with little or no trail debris.
The tread pattern on the shoe look more like flat pods which again lead one to believe that the shoe is less about agile trail running and leaning more towards a transition shoe from road to trail (I use the word trail loosely in this regard!)

Best For:
~Flat trails
~Midfoot Strikers
~Speed runs on said flat trails
~Neutral Runners
~Narrow feet

Bad For:
~Anything other than flat trails!
~Muddy, Rain, Wet, Snow, Ice - this is a fair weather shoe
~Pronaters need not apply
~Wide feet

Over all I think Patagonia missed the mark a bit on this shoe. There concept was sound but the result was a shoe that lacked a few finer details that made it the least used shoe of my test period. Too sloppy in the upper and no rock plate means that I can't use this shoe for anything but road and walking path runs.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Patagonia EVERlong Reviews (Spring 2014) 8 months 2 weeks ago #890

  • kiskiw
  • kiskiw's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 26
  • Karma: 0
Overall I would say that this shoe is a decent minimalist shoe. I think that it would be a stretch to say that this would work for 100 mile race but could work for races 50km and under supposing that the race was not technical and had a reasonable foot (i.e. no roots, rocks etc...)

Comfort & Protection: 5
This is the category that this shoe really failed for me. With only durometer EVA foam instead of a rock plate to protect my foot, I felt all trail debris. I did how ever enjoy the cushioning when running on more tame trails and even the odd road section. It reminds me of my Saucony Kinvara road shoes.


Foot Security: 4
The Upper on this shoe was a little to "loose" for my liking. By "loose" I mean that even when secured down, and I have a high volume foot, it felt as if my feet pulled the upper around on the last. I think this might be because the shoe lacks a proper heel cup (no plastic form in the heel) so my foot pulled the upper around on all but the most gentle of slopes.

Speed: 7
The shoe did pretty well on this but only when running on the most "goat" of paths. With the lightweight build on this shoe turnover was a breeze. The flexible sole gave a nice midfoot landing and smooth toe off transition.

Energy Efficiency: 7
The durometer EVA foam that the sole is made out of felt quite cushy when on smooth trail and the occasional road section. As I said previously this shoe is very flexible so this may account for quality of the turnover and transition phases.

Agility & Traction: 6
This should have been better but with the upper being so weak and shoe felt too unstable to feel agile on the trail and the traction seemed to lean itself more to a less technical trail, like one with road sections and well wore paths with little or no trail debris.
The tread pattern on the shoe look more like flat pods which again lead one to believe that the shoe is less about agile trail running and leaning more towards a transition shoe from road to trail (I use the word trail loosely in this regard!)

Best For:
~Flat trails
~Midfoot Strikers
~Speed runs on said flat trails
~Neutral Runners
~Narrow feet

Bad For:
~Anything other than flat trails!
~Muddy, Rain, Wet, Snow, Ice - this is a fair weather shoe
~Pronaters need not apply
~Wide feet

Over all I think Patagonia missed the mark a bit on this shoe. There concept was sound but the result was a shoe that lacked a few finer details that made it the least used shoe of my test period. Too sloppy in the upper and no rock plate means that I can't use this shoe for anything but road and walking path runs.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.289 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum