In the last 2-years I have tested many pairs of winter running shoes. By ‘winter’ shoes I mean specific shoes that are designed to handle snow and more particularly, ice. A winter shoe for me must have studs.
Key brands are VJ Sport and Icebug. The duo have very much paved the way for shoes that are designed, not surprisingly, for Scandinavian winter. There are multiple shoe reviews on this website, two stand outs are theVJ Xeroand theIcebug Route. Ironically, the Route was a very much entry level shoe (which I believe they do not make anymore) and despite some flaws it was my ‘go-to’ shoe in the winter of 2020 and early 2021 and the VJ Xero my shoe for shorter runs. I had constantly been enticed by the ASICS Gel Fujisetsu 3 G-TX but a very good friend advised me against using them, they didn’t like them… Turns out they had used a previous version and not the third incarnation of the shoe.
Cut to the chase, they are superb!
Every winter shoe I have used, and in particular the ones I have liked have always been about 80/85% perfect. The VJ Xero not cushioned enough and a touch narrow, the Icebug route great comfort, grip and feel but a cold shoe.
The ASICS Gel Fujisetsu 3 G-TX has hit my 100% mark. It really has been a revelation and surprisingly, for me, Asics have produced a really incredible winter shoe.
The shoe is cushioned and has great comfort with front and rear cushioning that provides the right amount of ground feel in either soft snow or hard ice. I have struggled to find the exact measurement of front/ rear cushioning but have been informed (tbc) it is 18mm front and 28mm rear. FlyteFoam and layered GEL offer the protection and it works great.
A 10mm drop is high these days and just like the VJ Xante (same drop) I had concerns it was too high. Not so. The drop has not even been a consideration. On a recent 23-mile run in fresh snow and hard ice, the ASICS Gel Fujisetsu 3 G-TX performed perfectly with great comfort.
The upper is Gore-Tex and yes, I am am well aware of the downsides of Gore-Tex in a run shoe. But 6-hours of running in -10 in thick snow and I had warm feet all-day. Just make sure you use excellent socks such as Merino. In addition, I also use a barrier sock such as SealSkinz. Getting socks right is personal, the above works for me.
The outsole is the star of the shoe with 14 studs placed strategically from front to rear. There is no missing grip despite run style. I have had top-notch grip on every run and complete confidence the shoe will do its job. In snow and ice, there is definitely a gait change when running and most certainly, the flatter you can place your foot, the more grip you will have as you will engage more studs. But, running uphill, when just the forefoot is engaged, and the 8/9 front studs really provide incredible traction.
The 5 rear studs work exceptionally well for heal strikers with an emphasis on the outer of the shoe, 3 studs on the edge, 1 in the middle and the other to the inside middle.
The tongue has a sock-like fit and and is well padded adding the overall comfort of the shoe. It also has a lace garage at the top to stowaway the lace after fastening. Five sets of eyelets and good laces allow the shoes to be pulled tight with really excellent foot-hold, added to with a plush and comfortable heal area that gave me no slipping. There is no option to lock-lace or similar. The toe box is wider, definitely a 3 and edging to a 4 on a 1-5 scale, 5 being wide. Importantly there are no seams or stitching in this area so comfort is top-notch, especially in the propulsive phase. A good toe bumper adds to the protection.
Weight is on the heavier side, this is typical on a winter shoe as they need to be more robust, plus you have the addition of the studs and a more substantial outsole to hold them, my EU45 were 338g. A note on sizing, I am always EU44 but for the Asics I chose EU45. The shoe does size a little smaller BUT I also knew I would be using Merino and SealSkin socks. The EU45 is perfect.
The shoe is neutral.
Colour-way is black and red which works really well, it’s a nice looking shoe.
Conclusion
Designed to enjoy running in the dead of winter, the ASICS Gel Fujisetsu 3 G-TX is equipped with several technical components that enhance the running experience in complex and demanding terrains. I have waited sometime to find a shoe that ticks all my winter boxes and this pair of Asics does that. There are no more excuses, it may have taken 3 versions to get it right but the features all combine to make this a stunning shoe: outsole studs, optimal grip, protection, comfort and great feel for the ground. Highly recommended.
Please support this website. I believe everyone deserves to read quality, independent and factual articles – that’s why this website is open to all. Free press has never been so vital. I hope I can keep providing independent articles with your help. Any contribution, however big or small, is so valuable to help finance regular content. Please support me on Patreon HERE.
I was notified of the horrific incident in China over breakfast whilst on location in the mountains of Norway.
I immediately typed ‘China’ into a Google search and the headline was everywhere:
“Twenty-one dead as extreme weather hits ultramarathon in China”
The Yellow River Stone Forest 100k, held at Yellow River Stone Forest Park in Gansu Province in northwestern China was organized by the Baiyin Municipal Committee, Sports Bureau, and local branches of the Communist Party of China.
It was clear that a horrific tragedy had occurred and I, like everyone else asked, ‘How could this happen on such a huge scale?’
On the start line 172 participants toed the line, ahead 100km. Reports outlined cool and breezy conditions at the start. But by 1pm in the afternoon, conditions had changed considerably, and the race was hit by freezing rain, gale-force winds and dropping temperatures. With most participants somewhere between 20 and 32km, the weather continued to become more severe, runners were ill prepared and defenseless against the conditions resulting in the death of 21 souls, the main cause hypothermia.
‘The runners were racing along a very narrow mountain path at an altitude of about 2,000-3,000 meters.’
The race was halted at 2pm after messages were sent out by emergency trackers, cell phones and some runner’s posting on social media. Search and rescue efforts were put in place and somewhere between 700 and 1200 rescuers were called in to action – the exact figures vary depending on which news outlets one uses. Using state-of-the-art technology such as drones, thermal imaging, and radar, 151 runners were eventually confirmed safe despite harsh conditions and delays due to landslides.
There has been much debate, many questions asked, and a great deal of blame fired around on all media platforms. The deaths prompted outrage in China, with many questioning the preparedness of the Baiyin Municipal Committee.
In ultra-running circles, worldwide, Twitter, Facebook and other social outlets had continuing heated debates that pointed blame, questioned mandatory kit and the overall experience level of runners, and organising team. To clarify, Jing Liang was one of the poor souls to lose his life, an experienced athlete who has raced at UTMB and Hong Kong 100, so, not a novice. And the Baiyin Municipal Committee had organized previous editions of the race without problem.
“The tragedy in China has weighed on me heavily. It could have been any of us out there pushing through with the ultrarunner mindset,” said Camille Herron. “Part of being an ultra-runner is being able to trouble shoot.”
The Global Times on May 24th published an article titled Deadly cross-country race exposes hidden yet common safety problems in China’s red-hot marathon pursuit – It was an article that did not hold back.
‘While it’s the hypothermia that directly caused their death, several insiders in China’s marathon business said the organising committee should shoulder the main responsibility for failing to provide enough organisational, tactical, rescue, and security support for the event.’
It is only correct questions are asked, and without doubt there is much to learn here, not only by those who organise races but also for those who run them.
As many running friends have commented to me personally, ‘shit happens’ and sometimes you cannot plan for freak occurrences. After all, this is why they are called freak – ‘An incident, especially one that is harmful, occurring under highly unusual and unlikely circumstances.’
However, the required ‘mandatory’ equipment for the Yellow River Stone Forest 100k was at best minimal – cell phone, whistle, water container, headlamp, race bib, GPS tracker, GPX file (I assume on watch or phone) and timing chip.
A jacket, trekking poles, water, energy supplies, first aid, petroleum jelly and Buff were considered ‘recommended’ but not mandatory.
Anna Cometi at Everest Trail Race, Nepal.
It’s fair to say, that even with the ‘recommended’ items, in the freak weather encountered in China, maybe the outcome would have been no different due to the severity of the storm. However, we will never know the answer to this and at best, we should all use this as a lesson to be better prepared.
Remember though, while we tend to associate danger with cold, wet, wind, altitude, snow and ice, the opposite; heat, humidity and sun can be equally as dangerous and fatal. Take for example, The London Marathon. In 2018 the race was hit with 24-degree temperatures which caused havoc; one runner died after collapsing during the race and 73 were hospitalized. Now for some, 24 degrees may be considered a warm day, however, for many British runners who trained through a UK winter, it was exceptionally hot and something they had not trained for.
While mandatory kit is useful, being specific and training for an event is equally, if not far more important than the equipment you will or not wear. An understanding of the event, the challenges it can bring, and the dangers are all part of the process.
“It is essential to adapt yourself and your equipment to your reality, to test it during training outings in various conditions and to bring everything that will be useful and necessary to you for the race.”
UTMB
The nature of an ultra-running event is to push boundaries, go to the unknown and find a new personal level. Safety, to some extent, is an illusion and to assume that because you have entered something ‘official’ does not mean that you are safe. UTMB sum it up well (and they have a great deal of experience in managing route, runners, and weather):
“Choose clothing that really provides good protection in the mountains against cold, wind and snow, and therefore gives better safety and performance. In the event of an incident, your equipment must also allow you to wait for help in sufficient safety conditions.”
UTMB
The above sums it up for me, and quite simply I would summarize:
Know the event.
Understand yourself, your limits, and your expected time on the course.
What are your strengths and weaknesses?
Prepare and plan meticulously with training that simulates the event and conditions.
Don’t compromise.
Imagine the worst conditions possible and then plan for them to deteriorate even more. Remember, shit can happen!
Act quickly and quite simply, be prepared to turnaround and understand (in advance) what exit routes and speedy options exist.
Physically prepare so that you are in the best position possible to achieve your desired goal – be realistic.
Be mentally prepared for the highs and lows and accept that YOU are ultimately responsible for your own safety.
Understand that yes, one day, you may not return from an adventure… And to clarify, there is no guarantee on what day you will die, it could be tomorrow crossing a road, next week through illness or on the top of the mountain in a race – life is a risk we manage daily.
I personally see mandatory kit implemented to protect runners from themselves. The educated, experienced, and knowledgeable know what to bring, I most certainly do, and I usually carry far more than would be required.
However, racing does change the mindset, particularly at the elite level when every gram of additional weight could be seen as a disadvantage.
Jason Schlarb in Costa Rica at The Coastal Challenge, mandatory kit here is liquid and electrolytes.
Good friend and elite runner, Jason Schlarb posted on May 24th, ‘This sounds like something that could happen in many, many races or in my own adventures. I know I go as light as I can in races and don’t really prepare to be able to stand around in the cold… it’s a race… I’m embarrassed it took me realizing how this could totally happen to me,’
Choosing the lightest weight clothing possible to gain a few grams is not always the best option, opting for clothing which really offers good protection in the mountains against the cold, wind, and snow, provides better security and ultimately, a better performance.
Therefore, a no compromise approach to mandatory kit levels the playing field and means that every participant should be carrying the same and therefore carrying similar (+/-) additional weight. As UTMB states, ‘All runners must have the mandatory equipment with them at all times or face a penalty.’
In addition, UTMB go one-step further and have options based around kit lists for heatwaves, cold conditions and finally bad weather scenarios. They would implement the necessary list based on weather forecasts pre-race and it is the responsibility of the runner to have all items available.
Contents for ‘winter’ conditions.
Standard UTMB kit list:
Pack destined to transport obligatory equipment throughout the race.
Mobile/cell phone with international roaming allowing for its use in the three countries (load into its memory the organisation’s security numbers, keep the phone on, don’t mask your number and don’t forget to leave with the battery fully charged)
Personal beaker 15 cl minimum (bottles or flasks with lids are not accepted)
Supply of water of 1 liter minimum
2 torches in good working order with spare cells/batteries for each torch
Recommendation: 200 lumens or more for the main torch
Survival blanket of 1.40m x 2m minimum
Whistle
Self-adhesive elasticated bandage which can serve as a bandage or strapping (minimum 100 cm x 6 cm)
Food reserve, recommendation: 800kcal (2 gels + 2 energizing bars each of 65g)
Jacket with hood which will withstand bad weather in the mountains and made with a waterproof* and breathable** membrane – the jacket must, imperatively, be fitted with an integrated hood or one which is attached to the jacket by the original system designed for that purpose by the manufacturer – the seams must be sealed – the jacket must not have sections of fabric which are not waterproof, but air vents fitted by the manufacturer (under-arm, in the back), since they do not damage in any obvious way the impermeability, are accepted.
It is the runner’s responsibility to judge, with these criteria, if their jacket fits the regulations stated and so bad weather in the mountains, but, during a check, the judgment is made by the person in charge of the check or the steward.
Long-legged trousers or race leggings OR a combination of legging and socks which cover the legs completely
Cap or bandana or Buff®
Additional warm second layer: a warm second layer top with long sleeves (cotton excluded) of a weight of a minimum of 180g (men’s size medium (M))
OR the combination of a warm long-sleeved underwear (first or second layer, cotton exclude) of a minimum weight of 110g (men’s size medium (M)) and a durable water repellant (DWR protection) windproof jacket*
The wind-proof jacket does not replace the obligatory waterproof jacket, and vice versa
Hat
Warm and water-proof gloves
Waterproof over trousers
ID – passport/ID card
You may read the above and consider the list to be an overkill. I personally do not. On considerably more than one occasion, I have encountered conditions where the above was completely required. Please don’t cut corners, technically compliant does not always equate to useful.
Ultra-distance and mountain races are designed to push boundaries, but personal responsibility and self-awareness goes a long way. The above, without a doubt, can help should a situation turn badly, but ultimately, a good understanding of one’s ability is a great place to start. Maybe (?) to stand on certain start lines in the first place is already a bad decision.
Luis Alberto Hernando at CCC
Will Gadd, a prominent Canadian ice climber, paraglider pilot and mountain guide summed his thoughts up so well in a recent article:
‘If we go into the mountains, we are taking a larger-than-daily-life risk. The only way to totally avoid that is to not go… I’ve spent decades in the mountains and have had three serious accidents in my groups in all that time. Pretty good odds, no? But, to my guest who got hit in the arm by a rock while I was guiding her, and to my partner who I dropped a rock on, that record means very little. I also reviewed the avalanche forecasting where, the next day, an amazing woman, who was very close with my family and deeply loved by hers, died. I didn’t’t think any of those outcomes would happen, but they did. I really can’t keep us—you or me—completely safe. That’s my painfully learned truth after thousands of personal and professional days in the mountains. Days sometimes end badly, even with the best practices and motivations.’
The debate will continue and there are no simple answers, but the situation in China should be a learning curve for all and wake-up to a greater understanding for race organizations and runners. Maybe we will see more in-depth mandatory kits imposed on races worldwide? Also, maybe there will be greater vetting so that races can understand if runner has the required experience to participate.
A good friend, Graham Kelly said recently, ‘I am sitting wondering where personal responsibility, vetting and experience sits in the sport we all love. I am at best mid pack these days (more often chasing cut offs). There are races I won’t enter (that I used to enjoy) knowing the burden on race staff/volunteers could be unacceptable in my mind.’
Hillary Gerardi at Glen Coe Skyline
Vetting in races of an extreme nature, such as Glencoe Skyline already happens, ‘The organisers have an obligation to ensure that the Salomon Glen Coe Skyline® is as safe as possible, but without diminishing the nature of the challenge… The nature of the challenge is very severe and there is a risk of serious injury or death whilst participating in this event… Our route features long and sustained sections of scrambling terrain, which is roughly equivalent to ‘moderate standard rock climbing’. Be under no illusions that a slip or trip on these serious sections of the route could result in death.’
In the above scenario, equipment alone is not enough, so educate, understand and asses.
I for one, like to think I am prepared for most scenarios when going out. I constantly adapt my pack and its contents for the planned adventure, terrain, anticipated conditions, and my expected time out. I also know, through bitter experience, whatever I have planned for, I can expect it all to go wrong, and I then add additional items for the ‘freak’ scenario that unfortunately our runner friends experienced at the Yellow River Stone Forest 100k. I am also never worried about turning around and going home, it can be frustrating for sure, but the trails and mountains will be there for another day.
We can try to plan for every scenario, we can educate and anticipate the worst-case scenario so that we increase not only our individual opportunity to return home but maybe those around us.
Ultimately though, shit happens, and when it does, I want to be as prepared as I possibly can be, I hope you do too.
Please support this website. I believe everyone deserves to read quality, independent and factual articles – that’s why this website is open to all. Free press has never been so vital. I hope I can keep providing independent articles with your help. Any contribution, however big or small, is so valuable to help finance regular content. Please support me on Patreon HERE.
Runner’s strive for the best of all worlds in one shoe – lightweight, feel for the ground, cushioning, support, lack of support, grip in mud, grip on rock, low drop, high drop, grip in the wet and the list goes on and on. The reality is, there are few run shoes that will be a ‘one stop’ package and this why so many variables exist.
When possible, we choose specific shoes for a specific task.
Boots are not something that a runner would usually look at unless going on a specific hike. Even then, if moving fast and light, a good durable run shoe is usually preferable.
G370 boot at the summit of Galdhøpiggen, Norway.
In 2018, I was once again planning a fastpacking trek in the Himalayas but this time, my journey would take place in December. Previous trips had taken place in November and more often than not I had used the inov-8 Trail Talon which was perfect for long days. December in the Himalayas and I knew I would encounter snow and on occasion would need to use micro-crampons. I was reluctant, very reluctant, to use a boot, especially for long days… Too heavy, too cumbersome, too stiff and the list goes on.
I was introduced the Roclite 345 GTX with Graphene grip and the 325 GTX boot. These boots were a revelation providing all the feel, grip and upper of a conventional run shoe but with the addition of ankle support that was designed in a way that would facilitate running with very little compromise.
In 2019 and in 2020 I have been using the Roclite G370 for specific trips, by way of example, the Himalayas in November, Toubkal in Morocco (January) and the mountains of Norway for occasional trips when snow and tough conditions would challenge. A prime example being the highest summit of Norway, Galdhøppigen at 2469m with snow conditions. With 6mm studs, 9mm drop, 9/18mm cushioning front and rear and only weighing 388g for an EU44.5 (I went 0.5 size bigger than usual to allow for winter socks.) These have proven to be great boots when I needed more warmth, grip and comfort in extreme conditions without compromising a run shoe feel. They are highly recommended!
When I heard about the Roclite Pro G 400 I was immediately interested.
On first impressions this version of the Roclite does not look like any previous Roclite that has come before, the look and feel is completely different, especially in the stealth black look. Almost looks like a boot for the SAS or Special Forces.
Weighing in at 421g for an EU44 the boot is also more substantial than previous incarnations. But I need to clarify here that the new Roclite Pro G 400 is designed for a different purpose in my opinion. It is much more akin to a normal hiking boot but at a fraction of the weight.
The fit scale is 4 just like the Roclite G 370 listed above, however, I would disagree here. The G370 is more of a 3 fit and the new G 400 a 4. There is a distinct difference in feel between the two boots, the G400 most definitely allowing for more toe splay.
Drop is 8mm which is ideal for long days, the lugs are 6mm which provide great grip on a multitude of surfaces, especially with the addition of Graphene which extends outsole longevity. Cushioning is notably plush with 12mm at the from and 20mm at the rear.
Like the G 370, the G 400 is Gore-Tex and this does a great job of protecting against the elements, especially wet, mud and snow. The weak point is always where the shoe stops and quite simply, if water or snow goes over the top of the shoe, you will get wet feet. This is where Gore-Tex can be a problem; there is no way for the water to escape! Therefore, a key recommendation, from experience, is to use Merino socks that manage to retain heat and warmth when wet. Use Nylon socks and you risk cold/ wet feet. Merino wicks sweat excellently too… Also, a risk with a Gore-Tex product as they are obviously warmer.
The upper uses Schoeller® ceramic-coated fabric which is an abrasion-proof, heat resistant fabric which sees ceramic particles – said to be as hard as diamonds – coated onto polymers for applications in the likes of protective, outdoor and military apparel. In simple terms, this fabric is incredibly durable to the wear and tear that one would encounter in extreme and harsh environments.
NOTABLE POINTS
There are many notable differences in comparison to the G370 and like I said previously, I see the two boots having different uses with some crossovers.
The G370 for me still feels like a run shoe. It laces up like a run shoe, feel for the ground is like a run shoe and the overall structure is more shoe like – there is less shoe if you know what I mean.
The G400 is considerably more robust in key areas:
The toe bumper is harder and more substantial.
The laces start higher up the shoe keeping the all-important flex area behind the metatarsals free.
The lace eyelets are solid/ robust metal with 5 on each side, the upper 2 have the inov-8 foot on, a nice touch!
The tongue is gusseted and maybe(?) a little more padded.
The heel protection is more substantial and padded.
Support for the heel area is considerably more reinforced and spreads down the left and right side of the shoe.
Cushioning is increased.
The outsole is completely different.
The G400 is a lightweight hiking boot that manages to combine all the great features of the previous models and then beef them up in a more robust package.
IN USE
The G400 works alongside one of the other Roclite boot models, be that the G 286, G 335, G 345 or the G 370 but does not replace them. Important to consider that the choice provided (G 286, G 335, G 345 or the G 370) all have different drops, fit, uppers and cushioning, so, that is also an important factor.
The G 400 is just a great all-round boot that is light enough for fast hiking, fastpacking, daily jaunts and day-to-day adventures. It manages to combine all the features and support of a boot double the weight. By way of example, I have a pair of lightweight Haglofs which are still over 100g heavier per shoe without the level of protection the G 400 offers.
I have been using the zero drop Terraultra G270 run shoe and although the outsole configuration is different, the grip is comparable with comprises coming in very sloppy mud – the lugs are just not aggressive enough for these conditions and I would not expect them to be. This outsole needs to perform on a multitude of surfaces, and it does that exceptionally well.
The cushioning is very notable and on a couple of long days this proved to be really welcome, especially with the 8mm drop.
The shoe has ‘Meta-Flex’ which is designed to allow the front of the shoe to bend behind the metatarsals for that all-important propulsive phase. In the G 370 this works really well with plenty of flex. The G 400 less so. The sole is much stiffer, and it is here that there is a notable difference between say the G370 and the G 400 and why the G 370 feels more like a run shoe and the G 400 like a boot.
Sliding one’s foot into the shoe, it feels plush and the room in the toe box is notable. The lacing is fixed for the first 3 eyelets and the top 2 are open allowing ease for tightening, loosening or different lacing configurations. With the laces pulled tight and adjusted around the ankle, the foothold is spot on and the padding is superb. The back of the shoe drops away slightly avoiding risk of irritation on the achilles.
The back end of the shoe is beefy with a great deal of support to help reduce ankle roll. This is really noticeable to the G370 which has minimal additional support. Again, this is the run shoe v boot comparison.
CONCLUSIONS
The G 400 is a really great boot that is absolutely ideal for long mountain days when you need all the support and features of a traditional boot but in a considerably lighter package. It has great grip, durable upper, great comfort and superb weight. It’s hard to find a fault, especially when one compares to the competition.
Despite all of the above, the G 400 would not replace my G 370’s which feel lighter, faster and more like a run shoe.
Quite simply, I am in the fortunate position to have both and I can gladly mix between the two.
So, if you can only buy one, which should you go for?
If you are primarily a runner looking for a durable winter solution for all elements that will allow you to still run and cover ground fast, then one of the G 286, G 335, G 345 or G 370 models will more than likely be preferable. Make sure you check cushioning, drop and other key features.
If you are a hiker or fastpacker who will do a little running, the G400 would be a better choice and serve you for a multitude of uses.
Ultimately, whichever way you go you will win. The inov-8 boots have worked well for me for the last 2-years and the new G 400 is working exceptionally well now alongside my G 370’s.
Please support this website. I believe everyone deserves to read quality, independent and factual articles – that’s why this website is open to all. Free press has never been so vital. I hope I can keep providing independent articles with your help. Any contribution, however big or small, is so valuable to help finance regular content. Please support me on Patreon HERE
IAN CORLESS 