Thursday, 24 January 2013

Inov-8 Road X-Treme 138 or Inov-8 f-lite 232- preview

Ok, so a disclaimer here :) If you're after the inov-8 Road Extreme 138 or the f-lite 232, so was I. I've since bought the inov-8 f-lite 252 If you're looking for a review, I have only written this post as a preview.

 But... I reckon the 252 will be very similar to the 232. 

 The big difference being the 3mm drop in the 252. Here's the link to my review post of the 3 mm drop f-lite 252. 

To read my original 138 or the 232 post, keep reading on..

Inov-8 you tempting mistress. Your subtle curves, sheer mesh and alluring style. Why do you do this to me? Is is because you make the best running shoe?




I am incredibly tempted by the new Inov-8 Road X-TREME 138 which is touted as their lightest ever shoe. It weighs in at 138g and is touted as a barefoot shoe. 
Road extreme 138 sole

 Why am I tempted? Well it weighs in under my Inov-8 155s and has the fusion sole + the additional grip of the road x on the sole that will afford a little more traction and confidence in the wet. It is zero drop - which will compliment my Inov-8 Trailroc 235s that I use off road. While the reviews of the Inov-8 Bare X 180s (which I have been hanging to buy but have waited foe these) are all incredibly positive I feel that I want a little more grip on the road, particularly when it's wet. 

What is holding me back? 

Inov-8 state that it has no midsole. What does this mean? Well my Inov-8 Road X Lite 155s have a 3mm midsole as do the trailrocs. These appear to have no midsole which means minimal, if not no foam padding at all. That scares me - would I be able to truly run barefoot? 

However, later research has found a new f-lite with the anatomical last (wider fit to allow great toe splay or just more room for normal to wider feet like me) 

What is it? I introduce the Inov-8 f-lite 232
http://www.inov-8.com/New/Global/Product-View-RoadX-233.html?L=26
f-lite 232 



f-lite 232 sole
It's a handsome beast. This f-lite 232 (So you're tempted, pick up a pair from the awesome retailer on this link) has a 3mm footbed and the f-lite sole that offers a load more grip than the extreme and bare X range. But, it's also zero drop.

 This could be what I am looking for. Or it was, in late August I purchased the f-lite 252, with the 3mm drop. Follow this link to the review post, or keep reading my preview/wish list post below... 

So, the Inov-8 Road Extreme: I would use them as a weekly trainer and perhaps keep them as a 5-10km race day special. 

 The Inov-8 f-lite 232: A weekly trainer up to 12km and comfort pending the half marathon training and race distances.

Readers, I open this forum up to you all. 

Which will be the best running shoe?

Who has the Inov-8 Bare X range and is looking forward to the upgrade? Why are you going to upgrade and to what? 

If I can run 28km in the zero drop Inov-8 Trailroc 235s on a gravel/hard pack running/walking/riding trail should this be an easy transition? 

Any feedback and thoughts would be greatly appreciated and responded to. I'd love to get the word out there make sure we runners can make the right choice. 

Perhaps I might be sensible and look at the Inov-8 Road Extreme 178 as a safer option and leave the barefoot running for the trails where it is really needed. 

The Aussie f-lite 232 and road extreme range will be in from March 6th, 2013! 

Use the fish followers code fish10 to get 10% discount on Inov-8 shoes and the rest of the range at barefootinc!



Cheers and happy running, Lachie




Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , ,

15 comments:

  1. Stan (9run.ca)7 February 2013 at 08:49

    Awesome post Lachie. You know I'm getting these as soon as they come out :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unknown7 February 2013 at 18:24

    I am thinking so, which ones will it be? I am now leaning back to the 138s. It's a good thing they're not out just yet...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous24 February 2013 at 23:32

    Have you decided which is the better way to go? I am trying to make the same decision.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous24 February 2013 at 23:39

    I think I am going with the 232s.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unknown25 February 2013 at 01:17

      Hey, thanks for reading.

      At the time of posting the release date was early to late Feb, now it seems sometime in March.

      I've been in contact with the Australian suppliers and we may not get the 138s. If this is the case, I'm also looking quite heavily at the 178s, or possibly some of the Merrell or Skora range as well. Having been running in the 233s again I quite like just a little something under the foot again. The 178s are just 3mm (1 shock zone). I have the zero drop trailrocs which I loooooove on the trails and I'll keep working on my barefoot strength with them.

      To answer, perhaps I'm leaning towards the 232s as well. They seem to have it all, just a matter of how the grip goes on pavement/asphalt in the wet.

      Please keep in touch and let me know if you do get the 232s. I'd love to know how they go.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous25 February 2013 at 20:18

      Ya just got a pair of 232s, ill try them on wet road and let you know what I think.

      Delete
    3. Unknown25 February 2013 at 20:35

      Fantastic. Do keep in touch. We just had a bucket load of rain - hoping it will stay wet for a few days so I can get out and have a good run in the rain. So sick of 30C plus when I run!

      Delete
  5. Emil10 May 2013 at 04:30

    Hi,

    I am also thinking of the f-lite 232:s. Tried them on in a store the other day and they were fantastic. I am currently running in the Merrel trail gloves but have found that I'm wearing them out when running on tarmac or asphalt. Do you have any experience of wear of the inov 8:s compared to Merrells? Am also thinking of maybe buying out the lighter version road X-treme 138 or 178. what is the main difference between these except for the wheight? Which one would you recommend?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unknown10 May 2013 at 04:47

      Hi Emil, great question.

      I haven't any experience with the Merrells so can't answer your question there. Wish I could though.

      The big difference between the 138 and 178 is the heel drop. The 138 is your racing flat or inov-8s natural running zero drop. The slightly heavier 178 has a 3mm drop, so a slight heel lift. The 178 also has 3mm of cushioning compared to almost nothing on the lighter 138s.

      Which would I recommend? What use do you want them for? If it is the trail, go the f-lite 232s. They will give you the advantage of having sensational grip. They will also transition to the road very smoothly. It's also got the same zero drop as your Merrells.

      As I've got the Bare X-lite 150s (check the review if you like) I would now most likely get the 178s for my tempo and slower days and keep the 150s for speed work.

      Delete
    2. Emil10 May 2013 at 05:04

      Thanks for you quick answer. I mainly need a good alternative for my asphalt running and would like some more cushioning than my current NB minimus. I also need to go up a half i size since I have been experiencing blisters benieth the balls of my feet when doing longer (>20k) runs. This fall I'm planning to participate in a 30k trail race (gravel roads/trails). Currently I am on parental leave and am doing a lot of running on asphalt with a baby wagon(?). (I'm a swede and my english vocabulary is not the best). On the trails I'm very satisfied with my Merrell trail gloves.

      Delete
    3. Unknown10 May 2013 at 05:40

      A pleasure. Your English is great :) I'd go the f-lites if you're looking at the trails. I ran the Two Bays 28km on gravel and trail in the trailroc 235s (check my review again :) and had no trouble over that distance in those shoes. The f-lites are a slightly less aggressive tread pattern and should serve you really well. They will also work just as well on the roads, which is where the trailrocs fail slightly. Good luck and keep me posted. I want to read a your review :)

      Delete
    4. Emil10 May 2013 at 11:06

      I read your review on the Bare-X 150:s, seems like a superb pair of racers. What is the wear on those? I reckon it would wear quite fast since there is no rubber sole? I think I'll go for the f-lites 232 but I am also thinking of the bare-x. You have to wait for a review however. I have bought 4 pairs of minimalist running shoes the last year. Somehow my wife thinks that it is enough for a while, I don't know why she thinks that. ;-)

      Delete
    5. Unknown12 May 2013 at 19:10

      Hi Emil, I cant comment on the wear just yet. Mine have done about 50km and seem great so far. I must say I'm beginning to prefer them for faster sessions though. A quick search on them shows that people are getting between 500-900kms out of their pairs. I dont think you'll have too much to worry about durability on the 150s. What ever you get you'll enjoy :)

      Delete
  6. nopoles28 May 2013 at 03:40

    Hi!

    You wrote "[Inov-8 Road X-Treme 138] has no midsole. What does this mean? Well my Inov-8 Road X Lite 155s have a 3mm midsole as do the trailrocs. These appear to have no midsole which means minimal, if not no foam padding at all. That scares me..."

    However, it the stack height of this model seems to be 11 mm overall, while the stack height of Road X Lite 155 is 10 mm in the heel and 6 mm in the forefoot.

    So, I suppose Road X-Treme 138 is actually *more* padded than Road X Lite 155 (or Bare-X 180 which has 6 mm stack height overall). Only the padding of this model is not in the midsole but in the (EVA + rubber) outsole.

    -Mikko

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unknown28 May 2013 at 14:18

      Hi Mikko, what a great point. As you write it looks like the 138 may have more padding, although as pointed out it may just be a thicker sole. I had not seen the stack heights before.
      I was looking at it from the midsole point of view where in the midsole is traditionally where the softer, more cushioning padding is. These may be closer to my Bare X-Lite 150s which also have nearer 10mm underfoot, although most of this is in the midsole.

      Cheers and thanks for the great perspective. I'll have to see if I can get an answer on that one.

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)