Trail Shoe Suggestions Wanted - Alternative to Brooks Cascadia?

INOV8s rule, check them out.

Salomon Crossmax neutral or Speedcross would both be good alternatives to the Cascadia.

What do you mean by "aggressive" when you are referring to the sole?

follow up wrote:

What do you mean by "aggressive" when you are referring to the sole?

Sorry, I should have been more specific.

I am looking for an aggressive tread pattern, both on the forefoot AND the heel. It seems common to have somewhat aggressive forefeet and a flat (road shoe-ish) heel, which makes descending quickly a disaster. I'd like reasonably large lugs with decent spacing, to help the shoe clear mud. However, I don't really care what it looks like, as long as it work.

The Cascadia 4/5 (which I have) has a good tread pattern. The Saucony Peregrine also looks quite good, although I have not actually seen them in person.

Definitely give the 101s a good look. They've never been too little shoe for me, but they're still very light and fun to run in (that is, they don't make you feel like you just put on ankle weights). The rock plate is solid, and the heel lugs are pretty decent for descending. Forefoot traction is not insane, but if you need a wide forefoot it's definitely the way to go over inov8. Inov8 is good, but runs pretty narrow.

I'd basically agree with all of 101 addicts comments.

They did seem very minimal for me at first, but once I got used to them I found I was running much lighter and quicker on my feet on the trails. I could even get away with them on paved sections if need be.

I think it depends a bit on what kind of trail runner you are. I have a couple of friend who swear by Mountain Masochists, but as far as how they handle obstacles/rough terrain they are more like plodders - they slow down and negotiate carefully. I tend to do the exact opposite, bounce, hop, hurdle - basically springing through the terrain as efficiently as possible. For that reason I love the 101's and frankly even something like the Cascadia feels like too much shoe to me.

For what it's worth, I'm just outside Philly, so I know the terrain you are talking about.

cascadia to the 101 is a big change. 101 doesnt have a really aggressive tread, but if you are light on your feet (which you really need to be in this shoe) they are a nice shoe.

mizuno ascend is somewhere in between and has a pretty good grip pattern, but it feels a little clunky to me, but may be good substitute for the cascadia.

innov8 have some good shoes. some are very light and narrow (like the f195) and some are much more substantial with some really meaty tread.

I've run some pretty technical stuff in the Peregrine and have not been bothered by the lack of a shank. The outsole rubber is thick enough that it kind of does the job by itself. I run in the 101 and the Peregrine and feel more protected in the Peregrine, but the profile and weight of the 101 is nice.

The Peregrine is a bit wider, though, which is actually less than ideal for me.

Hard to go wrong with any of those three, though, even though they are pretty different on the surface.

Enjoy.

i fourth the 101s. enough shoe to not jank up your feet but low enough profile to maintain good ground feel and promote midfoot strike. i've like them a lot so far

The trail Pegasus is the truth, and the Inov8s are awesome as well!

Another vote for the 101 - I thought they might be too minimal but the still rock plate seems to make up for the lack of cushioning.

Nobody makes trail shoes as well as Inov-8. They have whatever fits your needs, whether you want just a "sticky" sole (~f-lites, 195s, 230s) or an aggressive tread for mud/climbing (X-talon 190s, 212s; Mudclaw 272; Roclite 285; Oroc 280, which has metal studs). I've tried on the NB 101s and thought they were too stiff and didn't fit snuggly/comfortably-- thought the 790s was a better shoe.

Agree on the 101s, although I did have to trim down the sides to prevent rubbing. And I'm interested to check out the NB Minimus line, esp. the Trail ones.

I liked the 790 fit a bit better than the 101 but I find the performance the same.

The minimus feels great on, but unlike the description of the Peregrine (thicker rubber taking place of a rock shield) the Minimus feels too soft underfoot for my liking for rocky technical trail.

I use the MT101s a lot and I like them, but there are a couple things to keep in mind. The MT101s have improved on the MT100s, but they didn't 100% fix the infamous Achilles problem. Lots of people, on really long runs, will experience some irritation and rubbing in the Achilles, which can get incredibly annoying and painful after awhile. It's a really stupid problem and something that they could've/should've easily fixed, but if you ever run many hours at a time, there's a decent chance you're going to notice it bugging you, even with socks on. I haven't had a chance to run a long enough run in my MT101s to know for sure that it's going to get outrageously , but even in about 3 hours or so (the longest I've done on my 101s), I've found the back of my heel/Achilles to be slightly irritated. Other than that, I find them to be great shoes, so if you're just looking to do some marathon or shorter distance runs in them, you should be OK.