Inov-8 past experiences welcome......



  • Purplepig - Just bought the Trailroc 255. I would normally have gone for something lighter like the 245 or maybe the 235 but also doing and Ultra soon so wanted to play safer. Been on 2 runs of 9 and 14 and love them. Plenty of room in front dure to anatomical last and a bit more robust around the area near the little toe that seems to be causing problems. No heel counter which I love -nice and soft all round. Decent grip too

  • purplepigpurplepig ✭✭✭

    That's interesting HP (;0)

    What was the terrain like on your runs so far? Have you tested them on mud or scree yet? 

  • Tried on both mud and scree and they grip very well


  • Trailroc 235s were great for me on Ambleside to Coniston Lakeland 50 recce - I felt very secure on those paths, including downhill, and they were good in a muddy parkrun last Saturday as well.

  • I run in X-talon 212's and I love them.  Light, tough and they dry real quick.  Hugely stable, better than average grip and a balanced ride.  On the down side they are pricey but once you know your size you can get them newish off ebay for about £50 or slightly less.

  • Minion - Just an observation but in the picture 2nd from bottom you can see how much the foot is hanging over the sole of the shoe just standing still, the extra pressure of running on it and I am not too surprised the upper failed. The f-lite 195 is a narrow performanc fit, I have a similar issue but have just got a pair of the 232 anatomical fit and there is far less pressure on the outside.

    The little toe area is a common weakness apparently so I would like to see that amended. Maybe bring the rubber on the end of the toes round just a little further?

    The sole of the shoe is advertised as soft, they list that will wear faster. The little nobble bits do go pretty faster but the actual block of the tread has lasted over 500 miles easily on a couple of pairs. I think your photos show the actual blocks of tread still well in tact.

  • WiB: Yes, I agree, doesn't look good. But hopefully the anatomic fit will work. Inov-8 are replacing our 195s with 252s that should give a lot more room for toe splaying.

    I can understand they are a narrow, performance fit, but these are also marketed for running and trails (not heavy ones!). In one of the videos I posted above, the Inov-8 guy can be heard stating that they definitely want to be thought of as a runner's company as well as cross training, so I presume this is why the focus this year has shifted toward anatomic fits.

    Once we've had a chance to try out the new trainers I'll post back with some feedback.

  • Good stuff Minion. I have just got some f-lite 232s which I will start using soon to help avoid the same issue that you have highlighted.

  • I bought a pair of Trailroc 245s at Christmas and was dismayed to see that two holes had developed in the webbing on the right shoe after only 120 miles; one just above the little toe, the other next to the hard plastic in the motif/logo. This is put into sharp contrast to a pair cheap Addidas Kanadia shoes I bought in a rush after forgetting my Salomons one weekend. They were a third of the price of the trialrocs and lasted well over 600 miles. I've sent the Trailroc's back to the vendor and am awaiting their assesment on whether they deem it to be a manufacturer fault. I also sent a message of complaint to Inov_8. They replied saying the uppers were being modified in later models. Sounds to me like they know there's a problem, with these shoes at least.

  • jonathan curtoys wrote (see)

    I've sent the Trailroc's back to the vendor and am awaiting their assesment on whether they deem it to be a manufacturer fault. I also sent a message of complaint to Inov_8. They replied saying the uppers were being modified in later models. Sounds to me like they know there's a problem, with these shoes at least.

    Has the vendor responded yet? I had the European Marketing Manager try and get all high and mighty about how I was not prepared to accept their terms and conditions by returning to the store I purchased them from and that the vendor would have a better idea about damage, and oh yes, he was concluding the conversation!

    What a load of b****x I told him, surely Inov-8 would be best placed to comment on the damage, not the vendor, and it was, in fact, the vendor who told me to take it to Inov-8. And we are talking about someone who sits down daily at the executive office and is saying they are not best placed to deal with the problem. Fair play to their returns team though, they dealt with it and replaced the trainers FOC, just wish some of that common sense and initiative worked its way up to the manager emailing me.

    Don't let them get away with it. I have never had a pair of trainers do that. And certainly not so quickly. The Gore-tex has a lifetime warranty on their website, so if it rips due to poor manufacture, then what? So many people have suffered from this and the retailers have to replace the trainers free of charge due to the fault in the shoes. Thing is, big companies like this bank on people doing nothing and just buying more or going elsewhere. 

  • Just heard back from Wiggle. They have agreed that its a manufacturer's fault and have credited me! I am frankly amazed, but pleased. I can see that the later Inov 235, 245 & 255 shoes have a different kind of webbing on the upper.

    Talking of poor performance, how does everyone get on with gore-tex socks? My last pair of Seal Skinz only lasted 6 months. The pair before lasted over 3 years.

  • jonathan curtoys wrote (see)

    Just heard back from Wiggle. They have agreed that its a manufacturer's fault and have credited me! 

    Good skills. All it takes is an email or two!

  • 252s arrived as promised by Inov-8, but the same size as I had in the 195s is too tight, so going to try some on at the nearest Ellis Brigham and see what fits best.

  • My first and only pair of Inov8 are 312's. Great fit and do what I want of them. I have only 35 miles on them though.

    It may be an old saying "but they really don't make stuff like they used to".

    I had a very early Timberland shoe many years ago and had been made in the USA. Still have those shoes. Bought anothe pair made in SE Asia somewhere and the difference in quality is like chalk and cheese.

  • Following my problem with the 245s I chose some 295s but was a bit concerned when they arrived about possible drainage issues as it doesn't look like there is anyway for water to get out. Does anyone have any experience with them?

    On the other subject of my goretex socks: sealskinz replaced them with no fuss. You are right, it just takes a few messages....
  • jonathan curtoys wrote (see)
    Following my problem with the 245s I chose some 295s but was a bit concerned when they arrived about possible drainage issues as it doesn't look like there is anyway for water to get out. Does anyone have any experience with them?


    I use the roclite 295s regularly. Not really noticed any problems with drainage but probably don't clear as quickly as some of the lighter mesh shoes. However the payoff is the more robust upper which stands up well to quite a lot of abuse. I tend to use a mudclaw when its really wet anyway....

  • I run in Bare grips and the upper in these gets ripped pretty quickly. It does not really bother me as they always get muddy and dirty, I didn't even notice until one day I ran in pouring rain and they got cleaned up nice and noticed then, usually really crusty with mud.

  • Oh dear. My Trailroc 255s have a hole in similar position along the crease in the forefoot. Only 200 miles. Inov8 said to send them back to the shop I bought them from. We'll see what happens

  • SSLHP: was that on the inside or the outside of the foot? At the recommendation of the shop where I bought my 235s, I put a layer of polyurethane shoe repair gel on the outside of the foot from the rubber toe bumper back to the first reinforcement, for about 1/2 inch up the side. If I need to do it on the inside as well I'd like to know now, while I have plenty of time to doctor them before I wear them for the Lakeland 50 recce weekend later this month...

  • /members/images/294090/Gallery/holeinmyshoe.jpg

     You shouldn't have to be messsing with your own reinforcements, especially when these retail at £110

  • Okay, so on the outside - reinforced that already (hopefully for far enough up the side). Re. "shouldn't have to be messing with your own reinforcemeent" well no, but I wanted the shoes for Lakeland 50 even with a known weak point, so it seemed more sense to protect against a known problem than not to protect. I alo make a point of washing them (in plain cool water) after each run to avoid any acid eating into them.

  • Since my previous post, I've bought another pair of Inov8's - the 255. Both my pairs of Inov8's are supremely comfortable and grip like nothing else I've used.

    I do think they are made 'flimsy'. I can live with lightweight shoes as long as they don't let me down. I have a cheap pair of New Balance MT610's and despite 400+ miles and a lot of abuse, they still feel and look like new - when washed in a machine.

    Not sure I would put any of my Inov8 shoes in a machine.

  • Well, just got an instant refund from the retailer for my Trailroc 255s.

  • Already posted this on another thread though I feel it's also relevant to this thread:

    Dissappointly for my Road-X 233 I noticed there's a small localised area on the upper sole behind the little toe that's starting to fray and a hole will appear soon enough. Other than that for 300 miles they still look relatively new.

    The 255 feels a much more rugged shoe.

  • 300 miles from a £50 233g shoe without any signs of wear. Moon/stick.

  • Ok I must admit that I'm still hankering for my old Brooks ST3 which I got not far off 2000 miles in a year. Sadly no longer available and I really thought I'd finally found a true replacement in the 233s.



  • Delighted to have found this thread.  I searched around in Feb when I first had problems with my Flite 195s and found a few hints of similar problems but not alot, so I'm glad to see there is a groundswell of people complaining.

    I'll be back with pictures in a bit, but I've had 3 pairs of flite 195s fail in less than a year and all of them began to show wear at about 100k and were well split by 200k.  In all cases there was very little wear to the rest of the shoe.

    The latest pair is on it's way back to wiggle and so we'll see how it goes, but the pair I'm returning are a replacement pair in themselves.

    I'd be really interested to hear how people are getting on with the new anatomic fit versions (which I read about here), because the f-lite 195s have become my favourite shoe in every other regard, I just wish the toe box didn't split.

    Also, I should say that apart from a pair of VFFs, all my running shoes are now inov-8, and in particular I've been hugely impressed with the X-talon 212s.  I've owned 4 pairs of them and put them through hell, both running ultras here in the uk and then when I retire them from running I've worn them to death trekking through rainforests.  They even resisted the hugely acidic mud in peat swamp forests for a while.  It's only the 195s that I've had trouble with.


  • Hi everyone, my first post.

    Bought Roclite 295's 3 months ago and, after 190 miles of trail and fell running/walking, the uppers are splitting in the usual place near the toe. It's my first purchase of "proper" running shoes for around 30 years after deciding to stop hiking in big heavy boots and go "light and fast" Consequently I researched before I bought and did realise there was a potential issue with the Inov-8's. Naively though I thought I'd get 12 months out of them which I could have lived with.

    Most of the stuff I've been doing is on trails and fells in the Yorkshire Dales, including the 3 peaks, but that was explained at the shop when I bought them and they did recommend the 295's.They've been hosed down regularly and dried out naturally as recommended so they've not been neglected. £30.00 a month for shoes seems a bit steep to me! (I've got a car which stands me less than that for insurance, tax and servicing.) 

    I'll take them back to the retailer this week to see what they say and post again with the results.

  • Update on the last post.

    Today I took my split, 3 month old, 190 mile, Inov-8 295's back to the retailer and, after trying quite a few different makes, swapped the shoes for Adidas Response Trail 20's which appear a lot more substantial. Yes they weigh in at 400gms and are Goretex, which is not really my first choice, but I'm sure I'll get more than 3 months out of them on the rough tracks that I'm doing. Time will tell.

    My local shop is run by runners with a lot of experience and they totally agreed that no shoe should be wearing out in such a short time. They were fantastic and didn't hesitate in swapping the shoes and refunding the difference.

    Inov-8, please sort these out. You've got a product that is not fit for purpose and you don't appear to be listening!!

  • I have had inov8 shoes for a number of years with minimal complaints...until now! Utterly disappointed with the quality these days. I run in Mudclaws and Flyrocs most of the time. My Mudclaws 330's were GREAT. Durable, good fit and grippy. Lastest many months of use particularly in deep snow and general Alpine life. I bought a pair of 300's a month ago...they are trashed. The rubber part on the toe box has come away from the material, the outsoles are completely worn (due to the softer compound) lugs are missing even from minimal use on rocky singletrack and holes appearing in the uppers already. The lacing system now used is rubbish, laces slip despite tying in triple knots, I am a fan of the old style material hole loops which definately reduced lace slippage etc... 

    I emailed inov8 and wiggle to complain and although Wiggle were happy to accept them back etc... I never had a response from inov8 despite emailing at least three times. I feel that it is another example of a company going global and forgetting that the reason they got there... because they started with a remarkable product which was fit for purpose and worth the money tailored to the fell runners needs now lost in trying to appeal to the masses in a consumerist bubble...sad times.

Sign In or Register to comment.