I wanted to try them but after receiving the Solstice in the mail the fit was not right for me.
It was okay in the forefoot as I have a wide foot.
It was too tight in the midfoot area though. I usually wear a 4e width running shoe.
I had to send them back. If you don't need a 4e width shoe in other brands and your foot is not too wide then these might be a decent shoe.
Others have commented that the Solstice wears out fast though. Possibly shoe goo would lengthen the life of the shoe.
Durability is zero on this shoe which is a shame because I really like it. I honestly get less than 100 miles before the lateral edge of the sole is completely worn away. I am a forefoot striker (which is what zero drop shoes promote...) so maybe they work better for a heel striker. At $90 MSRP they are a complete ripoff, at $60 sale they are a ripoff, $30 should be about what they sell these for. Until they start doing that I'll take my business elsewhere.
Wonder if they last longer if one is a heel striker, like I am? Anyone with a heel strike tried these shoes?
I am a midfoot striker and find you can get your money's worth out of this shoe if you have an efficient gait
Dromano19 wrote:
I am a midfoot striker and find you can get your money's worth out of this shoe if you have an efficient gait
Yeah, to give you a idea of my running form, it is similar to Dick Tayler.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m0_Q7sH2i0Olympians don’t wear Altras.
Altra is slow wrote:
Olympians don’t wear Altras.
Very close to the shoes Lydiard recommend(and he trained a few Olympic medalist). He recommend a light weight shoe, like Japanese racing flats as trainers.
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=737216&thread=737019I wore the solstice last track season,I liked them for faster days and longer track workouts. The problem is that they only lasted about 250 miles before my big toe had completely worn through the insole and outsole, and was making direct contact with the ground. So it's a good, lightly cushioned shoe, but it definitely isn't durable. Some other Altra's are much more durable, I got a good 850 miles out of my pair of Escalantes this cross country season.
I purchased the solstice before a marathon last fall and wore them right out of the box (2:52). They reminded me of the nike free 3.0 v2 with mesh upper and flexible outsole. The forefoot is accommodating as in all altras. I have a slightly underpronated midfoot strike, and the wear is noticeable along the outside of the shoe. The only bit of rubber is on the heel which seems silly, but the nike 3.0s did the same thing.
I trained for (on roads) and ran a 50 miler (on trail) in them, and have easily accumulated 1000 miles on them. I just threw them away, but might be able to fish them out of thr dumpster for a picture.
Escalante Racer > Solstice in every way, including the price per mile you will get out of them.
theJeff wrote:
Escalante Racer > Solstice in every way, including the price per mile you will get out of them.
Yes, the Escalante Racer is a very comfortable and well constructed shoe. The upper is one of the best I've tried. Very breathable and strong. Certainly won't prematurely rip like many of the other Altras are prone to. TPU midsole + rubber outsole should be a very durable combo as well.
I used the Solstice. It was pretty firm at first but loosened up quite a bit after a hundred miles or so. But like others have said, they had absolutely terrible durability.