Bought these after watching this review. I'm 150 miles into them. Pavement, trails, everything. It's a phenomenally comfortable shoe. My feet and legs have come on leaps and bounds. Actually feel strong now. Thanks for the review.
Great video, thank you! Two things. 1. Would you recommend the Mesa Trail WP for muddy conditions? Have you ran in Mesa Trail WP? 2. Can you speak louder in your future videos? I could only hear you at max volume. Thank you
I've not used/run in the WP version, but personally, I never go for WP shoe options. Instead, I get wet feet and rely on the shoe's water drainage to remove excess water-which the Mesa Trail II does really well! I know that's not for everyone. But it's something to consider. Apologies for the audio quality. I'll continue improving.
Amazing review. Barefoot trail shoe reviews are so rare, especially from people that actually use them in trails. So all that sole wear is from trails? That's crazy to me. Must be some very hard surfaces. If I didn't know any better I'd think it's a result of running on pavement.
For the first 500km it was 100% trail. Now I don't mind doing "door-to-trail" runs in them, meaning there's some road running but still very little. It always depends on the trails you use them on, some hard packed and rocky trails can be just as hard wearing on shoes as roads can be. But if you're constantly in mud, you'll have a different experience.
I don't think it's any wider, and I have had some reports that the Scrambler Low midsole shape is uncomfortable for those with flatter feet, it causes pressure under the arch. That said the soft upper material make it very forgiving in fit, because in depth and width. I'd say you can run a little faster in the Scrambler Low because it has more protection underfoot, the draw back being less ground feel. It all depends on the goals for that run.
I have overpronation and find that my stability is noticeably worse in the scrambler low. You are higher up in that shoe, so it exacerbates any collapsing. The mesa trails have been incredible, they just won't protect you like that Michelin sole will.
Yeah, you sure can use them for walking! In fact they're likely a better hiking shoe than a running shoe due to their minimal make up. When you're walking you can be more mindful about foot placement etc.
@@an.20.24 yeah reviewed them over on my website, and I raced a 100km them. They're not as minimal as the Mesa Trail and a lot less flexible. But if you're moving over a longer distance, or if you need more protection, they're a good option. They fit fairly similarly.
Very well. I did many stream/river crossing yesterday and was still happy running in them. The materials are minimal so it doesn't hold on to too much water. An alternative, more focused towards water sports is the Xero Shoes Aqua X Sport. Which is very similar in construction, and more cut down. But for running, I'd stick with the Mesa Trail II.
I’ve the WP version of this shoe and wasn’t impressed at all - exceptionally stiff sole, the upper feels rigid and plasticky. Sizing was also way out - had to go up 2 whole sizes as it was so small. The only decent thing was the tread! I’ll stick to my Vivos and VFFs.
Bought these after watching this review. I'm 150 miles into them. Pavement, trails, everything. It's a phenomenally comfortable shoe. My feet and legs have come on leaps and bounds. Actually feel strong now. Thanks for the review.
So good to hear! Enjoy the ground! 😜
Great video, thank you! Two things. 1. Would you recommend the Mesa Trail WP for muddy conditions? Have you ran in Mesa Trail WP? 2. Can you speak louder in your future videos? I could only hear you at max volume. Thank you
I've not used/run in the WP version, but personally, I never go for WP shoe options. Instead, I get wet feet and rely on the shoe's water drainage to remove excess water-which the Mesa Trail II does really well!
I know that's not for everyone. But it's something to consider.
Apologies for the audio quality. I'll continue improving.
Amazing review. Barefoot trail shoe reviews are so rare, especially from people that actually use them in trails. So all that sole wear is from trails? That's crazy to me. Must be some very hard surfaces. If I didn't know any better I'd think it's a result of running on pavement.
For the first 500km it was 100% trail. Now I don't mind doing "door-to-trail" runs in them, meaning there's some road running but still very little. It always depends on the trails you use them on, some hard packed and rocky trails can be just as hard wearing on shoes as roads can be. But if you're constantly in mud, you'll have a different experience.
Do you think the Scrambler Low is wider or faster?
I don't think it's any wider, and I have had some reports that the Scrambler Low midsole shape is uncomfortable for those with flatter feet, it causes pressure under the arch. That said the soft upper material make it very forgiving in fit, because in depth and width.
I'd say you can run a little faster in the Scrambler Low because it has more protection underfoot, the draw back being less ground feel. It all depends on the goals for that run.
I have overpronation and find that my stability is noticeably worse in the scrambler low. You are higher up in that shoe, so it exacerbates any collapsing. The mesa trails have been incredible, they just won't protect you like that Michelin sole will.
@@euro_anchor Thanks for adding context. Always good to share experiences!
Can you use them just for walking/hiking on trails or do you think they're purely made for running? Thank you!
Yeah, you sure can use them for walking! In fact they're likely a better hiking shoe than a running shoe due to their minimal make up. When you're walking you can be more mindful about foot placement etc.
@@barefootrunreview Thank you. Have ever tried the Scrambler low? What do you think about them?
@@an.20.24 yeah reviewed them over on my website, and I raced a 100km them. They're not as minimal as the Mesa Trail and a lot less flexible. But if you're moving over a longer distance, or if you need more protection, they're a good option. They fit fairly similarly.
@@barefootrunreview Thanks a lot. Considering I usually walk with the Prio from Xero, I think I'm going to buy the Mesa. Thanks.
@@an.20.24 that makes sense to me. You'll like theM I'm sure.
Which size do you use in relation to foot length?
:) Foot length 26.7cm and I use US9. One of the only real true to size Xero I know of. Or maybe it's me. :)
agreed, great shoe. i haven't done a 50k in it though!
Maybe one day? :)
How well do they drain and dry after a dunk in a stream? Thanks.
Very well. I did many stream/river crossing yesterday and was still happy running in them. The materials are minimal so it doesn't hold on to too much water.
An alternative, more focused towards water sports is the Xero Shoes Aqua X Sport. Which is very similar in construction, and more cut down. But for running, I'd stick with the Mesa Trail II.
@@barefootrunreview Thank you!
I’ve the WP version of this shoe and wasn’t impressed at all - exceptionally stiff sole, the upper feels rigid and plasticky. Sizing was also way out - had to go up 2 whole sizes as it was so small. The only decent thing was the tread! I’ll stick to my Vivos and VFFs.
😁 Pretty much the complete opposite to all of my conclusions, but hey, everyones different.