XC shoes - Mudclaws?

HI there ... I joined a club this week and run my first XC in the cold and rain - it was on grass and very muddy and gooey, especially having had several other races on the course beforehand. My XC shoes were no good in this, especially on the downhills - being a V45 not sure I want to go down the spikes route (don't feet/calves ache after?), a couple of fellow racers recommended Inov8 Mudclaws - looked and sounded good.

 

Any views especially on the difference between the 272 and the 333 ? Or other options. Go Outdoors have the 333s very cheap, but not doing delivery (bit of a schlep to go there but could do a reserve and collect if they're the ones I opt for).

 

Cheers ... Simon.

Comments

  • Check that Go Outdoors stock your size before you head out. I checked the nearest store online and they only had size 4.5. Not much use for my size 9s.

    Both these models are older ones so you may pick up a bargain online if you can find the right size. 

    The shoes with 'sticky'  soles rather than the 'endurance' soles (their description) seem to be better on wet rocks and tree roots which is why I opted for the Roclite 295. The trade off is they wear down a bit quicker.

    In my Mizuno trail shoes I almost ended up in the river when I went flying on a wet rock. Only worn the Roclites a couple of times so far but this included a steep rocky descent with tree roots (but it was dry) and they were excellent. 

    There are a number of comments on threads on this site saying how good the Mudclaws are, but I wanted a pair that I can also use for walks here in the Cairngorms.

    Loads of info on the inov-8 website

  • I used to wear mudclaws but go for the la Sportiva Crosslights now! Slightly less grip in mud but much comfier in my opinion!
  • thanks guys, living in Kent I don't need anything for mountains really (settle for  hiking in Lakes/Highlands/Snowdonaia a couple of time a year) just shoes to deal with muddy gloopy grassy slopes (and to match my Joy Division oven gloves while I'm checking out the Quantocks image )

  • They are also no frills and handy for the hills if you have restless legs image

  • yeah, under bridges, over bridges to my destinationimage

     

    PS despite above frippery still interested in Mudclaw etc. advice!

  • Sorry dont know much about the differnce between the two types of Mudclaw (believe number is weight in grams?), but just want to say I have some 333s and love them. Use them for XC races, offroad Marathons (ie Beachy Head). Nothing stops them they are brilliant. Wouldnt want spikes. Got mine for £50 odd online, believe from Start Fitness.

  • There will be some bargains around at the moment as the 272s and 333s are bothe being superseded by the 300s. The 272 is lighter - the main difference is the last and the uppers. The new 300 is more like the 272 - just slightly beefed up.

    All are great shoes and my preferred fell shoe. Will out perform anything IMO in wet mud/grass/snow etc. Sticky rubber too so pretty good on wet rock though will wear down relatively quickly to the harder compound.

  • If I was buying a fell shoe I'd get the 272, but for XC you would benefit from spikes. A few newbies at our club have all taken to them no problem (I'm 48, so don't go playing the age card!). There's always bargains around - a mate got some for a tenner recently. No use for a 5 mile walk around the Ogwen Lake though image

  • Whether or not to wear spikes seems to be very much a personal preference. I can only say that I've worn my Mudclaws on some very muddy x-country courses in the last couple of seasons and have never even skidded, let alone fallen over. I'm 6ft 3ins and fall over very easily image. I feel very secure wearing them.

  • Have you looked at Walsh shoes at all? They're designed for fell running, but they're pretty good for xc as well.

  • Oh yeah, I wouldn't bully anyone into spikes as the One True Way, but they can be a fairly cheap experiment. First couple of XCs I did were in Walshes or Swoops, which were ok. But not as good as the spikes I've used since ...well worth the 17.50 I paid. Just ordered some 12mm spikes actually for the real filth like we had this weekend. 

  • A vote for Mud-Claw 330's (333) from me too!!
    Truely superb in the slippery stuff, never clogged mine up, even in the peatiest fell-races

    Only thing is watch them if there's any tarmac paths to negotiate, I jiggered my knee up badly by slipping on a corner (but it was also covered in mud, & some frost)

  • thanks all.

    Are the 272/300/333s okay on wet bridle-way type paths as opposed to grass?

  • Simonx9 wrote (see)

    thanks all.

    Are the 272/300/333s okay on wet bridle-way type paths as opposed to grass?


    Mudclaws work best at the extremes of conditions I guess, but are suitable anywhere where its going to be wet or muddy. I wouldn't use them regularly on any dry hard pack stuff - better off with a trail shoe such as a Mizuno Harrier/Ascend or Inov-8 Roclites/ Flyrocs etc. 

  • thinking the new Mudclaws, but still nto sure, maybe some spikes, a very good runner has suggested Brooks Mach 12 xc spikes - basically welcome some more opinions image

  • Simonx9 wrote (see)

    thinking the new Mudclaws, but still nto sure, maybe some spikes, a very good runner has suggested Brooks Mach 12 xc spikes - basically welcome some more opinions image


    Not sure about your leagues races, but ours invariably have some gravel/tarmac paths at some points, so spikes may not be the best around here 

  • excuse my ignorance .... (obviously spikes aren't) but are studs such as Mudclaws okay on firmer terrain such as bridleways??

    All my formal XC races will be spike sutibale I think (excepting for ice perhaps)

    Probably going to do Wildman 15k could be the clincher.

     

  • Well all my bridleways are ankle deep mud at the moment! Mudclaws are ok on a bit of dry stuff but probably better in something a bit more cushioned.
  • they are ok on bridleways and toe paths etc, but they suck on tarmac if you need to any road miles to get to the trails. and are comedy bad on things like wet wood if you have to cross any bridges.

  • Marc.S wrote (see)

    they are ok on bridleways and toe paths etc, but they suck on tarmac if you need to any road miles to get to the trails. and are comedy bad on things like wet wood if you have to cross any bridges.

    Agreed!
    Especially the 'banana skin on wood' aspect of their soles


     

  • cheers guys

  • which would the appropriate Walsh shoe to throw into the mix?

  • Simonx9 wrote (see)

    which would the appropriate Walsh shoe to throw into the mix?

    Any of the PB trainers/racers really - try a few on.

  • I was wanting to get the 272, but they seem to have been discontinued as has been said, so most places only have a couple of tiny or huge sizes left in stock.

     

    Mail ordered some Walsh PBs, and they're the weirdest fitting shoes I think I've ever seen. I have narrow feet, but they pinched at the sides, were too long at the front and had an ultra-low heel cup that I was practically stepping out of on the carpet. Totally useless as mud-shoes for me, so sent them straight back.

  • Yep - you really need to try walshes on before you buy.

    The new Mudclaw 300 is not too dissimilar from the 272.

Sign In or Register to comment.