Inov-8 Update

New Model- The Inov-8 X-Talon 212 makes a great orienteering shoe. It is very, very light (my size 11.5 is 9 0z. with insole,) flexible and comfortable. Low to the ground with a studs similar to the 280's. If you like a minimal shoe, this one gives you more of the feel of the ground than the 270 yet offers surprising cushioning. Drawbacks? I would wonder about durability but so far no complaints. Mine are tearing abit at the upper eyelet but no ill effect. The "sticky rubber" sole did not cope adequately with a wet, slick rocks in my one encounter but overall seemed similar in traction to a standard o-stud. And, if you require a lot of support, this may not suit you for longer runs. $100 from Scarborough Orienteering. See Mikkel's test report below.


Discontinued.- The Mudclaw 340 O+ with its 3/8" studs and metal tips makes this the best O-shoe for traction that I have seen in my 37 years of orienteering, has alas, been discontinued by Inov-8. That may be due in part to the high rate of the dobb tips tearing out. I lost two or three after a couple of runs though traction did not seem to suffer for my use. Anyway a s discontinued shoe, Scarborough Orienteering is offering 15% off and free US shipping on selected sizes.

Mikkel Conradi, BAOC member, has tested several Inov-8 models. As an advanced orienteer prone to blisters, his comments are most useful. Here are his latest reviews:

Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2009
Hi Joe,
I tried the 280's again on Saturday without in-soles. My heels
were still a bit sore from last week-end, but I managed to run for 2 x 30
minutes without 2nd skin, and without any further blister formation. I
didn't have any problems with grip, so they seem like a viable, lighter
alternative to the 330's in dry conditions.

I then ran with the 340's for a little over an hour. It's a very
rugged shoe with plenty of grip. I skipped the in-soles again. They
weren't quite as comfy as the 280's and 330's without the in-sole, maybe
because of the sturdier sole with spikes.

I think what's causing problems for my heel is that the heavier
shoes have a pretty hard cuff on the heel. The 212's are much more
flexible, which might we why I can wear them with in-soles without getting
heel blisters. I raced at Goethe Park today with the 212's and they were
superb for a flat 4.5km course!

If you have them in stock, I would definitely want you to bring a
new pair of 212's to Boggs for me to wear for the middle distance. I'd
also like a new pair of MC 270's as they seem to fit my foot better than
the 280's. (And my 330's are still holding up, so I don't need another
pair of sturdier, less comfortable shoe.)

Let me know if you want more feedback, I'm being brief because I'm
tired, and there's a lot of stuff to be done this coming week...


Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009
Hi Joe,
Here's a brief summary of my experiences so far:
I ran with the 212's at Spring Lake on Saturday. I was surprised how high
the heel was, and decided to run with the inserts. The shoes fit very
comfortably, and I ran for an hour without having any blister problems.
Then again, Spring Lake is flat, and it would be good to try these shoes
on hillier terrain before declaring them a success.

I like how the laces are thinner than the 330's - it makes it easier to
tie them and make the knot stick. I suppose they might wear through
quicker, but hopefully they can be bought separately if needed.

I did notice that these shoes have a relatively thin and flexible sole, so
I might not wear them in terrain that is known to be very rocky or have a
lot of deadfall. It will be interesting to see how the flexible sole
deals with contouring.

On Sunday I tried the 280's. Encouraged by how well the 212's fit I put
in the in-soles, but regretted it already on the way to the start. But I
left them in, determined to test them 'as designed'. The course was
pretty hilly, and after about 30 minutes I started feeling pain from heel
blisters. This is an improvement over the 330's with in-soles,
which only took seven minutes to develop the same kind of
blister.

At the end of my 70 minute race I had blisters on both heels
that were approximately 1.5" wide and 1" tall. On my left foot I also
developed a blister where the arch hits the ground behind the big toe,
which is unusual for Inov8 shoes. Like I said the courses were
particularly hilly, so that could have had something to do with it.

The 280's had adequate grip and stability for a dry day in Bay Area
terrain, but for a more thorough review it would be necessary to test them
in wet and muddy conditions also. Although you could probably predict
that the 270's or 330's would have better grip in the mud.

I haven't had a chance to try on the 340's yet but I'll test them this
week-end. I'll also try the 280's without the in-sole. In fact, I'm a
little bit scared of trying the 340's with in-soles, but I'm also worried
about the spikes pushing through without. I might need to do a shorter
test-run first to make sure they are comfortable before I do something
longer.

I think Inov8 needs to consider how steep terrain orienteerers confront.
The heel blister issue is very much impacted by how steeply one runs
uphill, and under-foot blisters are equally impacted by the amount and
steepness of contouring.

I feel like with both the 280's and 330's the laces are hard to tighten on
the lower part of the shoe. It's easy to tighten then on top, but then
they pinch and constrict at the ankle without providing the proper fit and
support for the rest of the foot. I think a more uniform grip around the
foot would improve comfort, and prevent both ankle and blister problems.

--Mikkel