Hoka One One, Mafate Unisex Trail Shoe Review: If you're gonna go for it, go for it

I'm no expert. I couldn't explain what EVA is beyond "squishy stuff" vocabulary. I can't remember which side pronates and which supinates. And I certainly couldn't contribute much to the debate over minimalist shoes versus traditional. BUT, I have sold shoes. I sat through a four hour seminar on socks. I can measure a foot six different ways, including with a Brannock device. I'm a trained boot modifier and I can mold custom corkbed Superfeet to your foot after aligning your metatarsals.  Mostly, however, the reason I have something to say about running shoes is I've worn a lot of them. I know what works for me and for the past three weeks, a pair of Hoka One One Mafate Trail Shoes have worked for me.


 I should probably be wearing a US men's 11.5 but because I've had experts in the field use ME as the funky foot model, I have some unique characteristics in my little digits downstairs. For one, my feet are almost two sizes different when measured sitting (unweighted) versus standing (weighted). That's significant, and it causes the soles of my feet to move back and forth like a sanding belt with each stride. After a 40 mile run, that's a ton of movement. It also means that my toes will stick forward that much more when weighted, causing them to bump into the end of the shoe, which leads to black toenails, blisters on the toes, and other fun bloody experiences. To compensate for this, I've usually just gone with a slightly bigger shoe. You can start by getting a shoe long enough, then make up for the extra girth that comes in that longer shoe by wearing thicker socks, stuffing foamy things under the tongue or replacing the insole with something thicker. Over the years, I've learned that Nike's are way too narrow for me. I've got a standard width foot with a neutral running stride. I started running in middle school in Asics, then moved on to Brooks and Saucony in high school. I continued with those through college until finding the world of trail running shoes around 2000. The Brooks Cascadia shoe worked great for me. And most recently, I've enjoyed the Mizuno Wave Ascend. When I say, "enjoyed" I mean I've run through some five pairs of them.

When I picked out the Hokas at a store recently, they didn't have size 11.5 for me to try on and though I always recommended customers try on a size above and below their own size for comparison, I bought the 12's without any comparison. I just loved the spring in my stride so much, I didn't really care that they weren't a great fit. There was enough toe room and that was all I was really concerned about.

You do stand a little taller wearing the Hokas. Even if it's only an inch or so, the difference in perception of things is immediately noticeable when you slip on a pair. Then there's the squish factor. If for no other reason, I love that Hoka is out there advertising a shoe that oozes with squish, when so many others are purporting the benefits of minimalist footwear.

There's a bit of a rocker design to the sole so you're already taking your next step before you even realize that it's happening.

For constructive criticism, the fit of the shoe feels wide to me, particularly in the lacing and heel areas. Perhaps that's only because I'm wearing a shoe that's overall bigger than my foot needs, but if I were still fitting shoes for people, I'd classify this one as a good fit for a "meatier foot" (even if that was a description I'd keep to myself).  The wider heel cup makes it hard for me to run uphill without slipping out of the shoe almost completely. And the sales clerk who sold them to me commented that the Hoka shoe sizes run small, so I found my slippage especially surprising given that they should have been a good fit for me. So, while, going up hills, making turns, and stomping downhill all show me a bit more movement than I'd like, I can't get over the bounce I feel at all other times. It really is an incredible experience. Also, I understand that Hoka is trying to get maximum surface area with their large sole footprint, but I was surprised that there wasn't an instep for gaiter (leggings) straps. Most people who use these leggings now go with a design that hooks to the laces and affixes to velcro glued to the heel cup, but there are still some of us who occasionally put a strap under our shoe.

Cost: at nearly 3 times what I could find on the sale rack, and double the cost of a mid-range shoe, these aren't cheap. With tax I was out $179. But there's a reason they say, "You get what you pay for."
And if you're paying to make your legs, joints, and body last longer, what is the price of that? Current knee replacement in the US is around $40k.

Looks: Back when I used to sell hiking shoes, we had a phrase that we tried to help customers understand: "Function over fashion." Perhaps they don't look like something you'd pick out for yourself. Does that mean you won't even try them on in the store, just for curiosity's sake?

Perhaps the best thing about these is their ability to minimize stress on joints. I've read that they are lighter. I believe that. For how huge they appear, the feel like nothing. For the past four months, as I've ramped up my mileage to 40 mile runs, I've begun to experience a range of adjustment phases. For instance, when doing a big series of back-to-back long days, the second, third, and fourth day start off with very sore feet. I usually have to kind of shuffle along for the first mile before I realize that 30 miles isn't come to come easily at that pace and force myself into an awkward joggle. Then, once I've found my rhythm again after about three miles, I seem to do well until the 90 minute mark. I've timed it and it always seems to creep up then. The joints of my right toes always got painfully sore at 90 minutes.  So much so that I had to stop and stretch and let my toes relax for a moment, and then I'd be fine for the rest of the run.

I've chalked this pain up to the fact that my two feet are more different in size from each other than most people, and I've always compensated my right shoe for my left because (so far) shoe manufacturers aren't keen on selling one shoe of each size (any others out there in with me on this?)

Most soles have a "breaking point" where the metatarsals are expected to be and the shoe should flex there with the toes. So perhaps my right toes are bending at a place not in line with the breaking point in my shoes.

Whatever the case may be, I have yet to experience any pain in my toes when wearing the Hokas. As I get ready to start this crazy 500 mile trip next week, the question is not, will I run in my Hokas, but rather, how will I adjust to running in something else when conditions dictate?

UPDATE (8/16/2011): Well, I wore the Hokas on my 500 mile trail run across Nevada and I came away with some insights worth documenting. The clerk who sold me the shoes told me that one way to justify the higher price tag was because they are supposed to last longer than other running shoes. I forgot the mileage he mentioned but I think it was something like 800 miles. As with all other running equipment, the life of the product totally depends on the type of use it receives. From the get-go, my Hokas have been terrific right out of the box on all flat trails and roads. With well-groomed trails, they handle well on the downhills and aren't much of a problem on the uphills. The only thing I'd note about uphills in Hokas is to try and remember to pick your feet up. I found myself stubbing my toes more often in them as I guess the sole under the toes is thicker and therefore can hit rocks and roots more than what you might be used to in other shoes.

I wore the Hokas for the first five days of the trip on all flat sections and had good success with them (45+ miles per day). I learned to switch out of them whenever my route went over a mountain pass. Since my Hokas were a little bigger than they probably should have been (see original post above), I found myself swimming in them more on the up and downhill sections of the mountains. This caused some sores on my feet which then had to be tended to for the remainder of the trip.  One day I forgot to keep my other pair of shoes (Mizuno Wave Ascend) in the support vehicle and and had to cross two ranges in my Hokas instead. This caused two problems. The first was the sores on my feet from the extra rubbing. The second was more unexpected. As I came down an overgrown canyon filled neckhigh with stinging nettles and thorns, I had to stay to the edge of the thicket, which meant hiking on a steep rocky slope for a couple of miles. When I checked out my shoes the next morning, the instep of the right shoe was completely compressed so that when I stood normally in them, my right foot was severely turned in, as though I'd had a serious pronation in that foot. The only problem with that diagnosis is that I've never had any pronation in either of my shoes and I've gone through dozens and dozens of shoes over the last 24 years of running. I tried giving the shoes a rest for a few days (as I also didn't want to further injure myself in their deformed shape). After two days, the sole sprung back some but when I put them on, there was still an obvious roll in my foot, causing my entire crew to ask why I was standing weird.

I've been on all kinds of trails and surfaces in all kinds of shoes but I've never had a pair change like the Hokas did that day. I'm thinking about calling them and asking if they've heard of this before. At the least, I believe my experience confirms my first beliefs, that Hokas (even the trail version) are really best meant for flat running, be it on roads, or smooth trails with groomed surfaces. Will it keep me from buying another pair? Probably not. The comfort and feel of them on the flat is incredible and if that means I have less stress on my joints and can go farther with less fatigue, I'm still sold. Just be aware of potential problems when the going gets rugged.