misanthropist
09-11-10, 20:33
Salomon Quest 4D GTX Field Report
Several days ago I purchased a pair of Salomon Quest 4D GTX boots, based in part on advice given on this forum. In general I do not like to review items after owning them for a few days, and that is why I am calling this a field report rather than a review. I will describe what I have done with the boots so far and their relative performance compared to my reference footwear, Montrail Hard Rock trail runners.
First, technical details:
The boots
Salomon Quest 4D GTX
http://www.nevisport.com/images/prod-img/833561_quest_zoom.jpg
Copy/Paste blurb:
Weight: 1.36kg (9 Medium)
This trekking boot’s progressive design borrows the most comfortable concepts from Salomon®'s trail-running program, and works them into a rugged boot built for challenging terrain. The result is ideal for day-hiking or multi-day backpacking trips over steep, rocky and untamed country.
Uppers combine synthetic fabric with waterproof suede and leather. A rubber heel and toecap protect from impact and abrasion, while the gusseted tongue keeps out pebbles and trail debris.
GORE-TEX® waterproof-breathable bootie construction provides a layer of dry protection.
Midsoles are Salomon’s 4D Advanced Chassis to provide a comfortable, stable, resilient ride in a tough, durable structure. They feature an upper layer of EVA engineered for superior underfoot cushioning, and a TPU stability plate which is layered onto and wrapped around a second full-length EVA layer that is higher in density and more resilient.
Outsoles use Salomon’s proprietary high-wear, abrasion-resistant, trekking Contagrip® rubber, for exceptional grip and durability in rugged terrain.
I put about 15km of break-in walking on these boots before taking them to the trail. They initially left my Achilles tendons and shins a little sore just from being stiff around the collar. This stiffness wore off after the second 5k walk.
The user
I am a moderately experienced hiker, 33 years old. I move pretty fast – I generally shoot for whatever the standard trail time listed on a given hike, divided by two. I am six foot two, just over 200 lbs, roughly 17% body fat (beer). I run fairly regularly, 6km, including a 100m elevation gain over a bridge. I am in pretty good shape aside from the beer. My feet are what I call “triangle feet”. I have kind of wide feet, except for the heels. I have a couple of pairs of custom work boots because I always used to ruin the lasts of any boots I’d buy, because my heel would move around and wear them out. I have to get size 11 lasts in my custom size 12 Vibergs.
The trail
The trail was Mount Seymour Trail. 4.5km, 450m elevation gain, average hiking time 2.5 hours, one way. Most sources recommend 4-5 hours round trip. BC Parks rates the trail as moderate to difficult. In good weather it is fairly safe although easy to get turned around in some spots. In bad weather it is somewhat dangerous for the unwary – some areas are very steep, some are very slippery, most are very rugged. In places the trail becomes indistinct and careful attention must be paid to keep track of trail markers. Wandering off the trail is not for the faint of heart or the ill-prepared.
Terrain is classic coast mountains: there are three basic types of ground.
Type 1 is the majority of the trail: granitic rock broken into sharp sections ranging from shale up to small boulders by freeze-thaw cycles. This trail has a lot of very sharp, harsh rock between softball and volleyball size. It is very tough on the feet and ankles!
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0463.jpg
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0464.jpg
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0467.jpg
Type 2 is the temperate rainforest, although up here you’re getting the sub-alpine version in sandy, rocky soil. This makes up maybe 30% of the trail and includes a lot of rooty sections.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0459.jpg
Type three is glacial rock, or what we called “whaleback rock” when I was a kid. I don’t know if that’s a local term – the smooth humps of rock were everywhere in the region I grew up in.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0454.jpg
These three types of terrain make this trail an excellent test bed for boots. Type 1 is punishing for any footwear, of course. Type two features a lot of slippery wood and underbrush. Type 3 makes for smooth rock surfaces. Altogether a wide range of problems for a boot to encounter.
Finally, the weather
It’s the coast mountains, in September, so…wet conditions and moderate temperatures, slight wind. At low altitudes, rain; at high altitudes, heavy fog. In fact the clouds pack up on the mountains and you walk up in to them, so less rain and more fog as you go. I was totally socked in at some points; visibility around 30m. This made keeping track of the trail a little tricky at times, particularly on the barren sections. Also, the generally soaked nature of the trail meant that everything that was ordinarily a little slippery was now greased and looking to kill. Finally, the wet underbrush in what I’ve called “type 2 terrain” – the forested sections – gave the boots a good hard test of their waterproofing.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0458.jpg
Let’s hit the trail!
The parking lot was nearly empty in the rainy mountain weather. I brought along a pack weighing between 8 and 10 kg, partly out of interest for the test hike, and partly because the poor conditions made a bit of emergency gear worthwhile. Also I had a good lunch I intended to eat at the summit.
Immediately it was obvious just how much shock the boots were absorbing. I had come up this trail the week before in a pair of Montrail Hard Rocks; I had to pick my foot placement carefully on the whole trip but especially throughout the broken rock sections. No matter what, the sharp rocks made my shoes uncomfortable. The Salomons, however, were pitch-perfect. I paid special attention to the position of my arches and found I had enough room to flex and relax them as I hiked, but overall the boots provided excellent support all the way around.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0465.jpg
The first stage of the trail is broken rock and I was very satisfied on this terrain with both the fit of the boots and with the grip I was getting on the rock. I was more concerned about smoother surfaces, though: I had read that these boots were not sufficiently grippy on wet rock or wood. The broken rock was wet, but so jagged that anything would have gripped fairly well. At about the 1km mark, there are a few small wooden bridges to cross, and all had been soaking for hours and were as wet as they would get. I was looking forward to trying the boots on them.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0460.jpg
What I found was very pleasing: I had to work to make these boots slip on even soaking wet softwoods. They were impressively sticky even on what is ordinarily a very slick surface. Clambering up the roots was no problem. I never felt like my footing was anything but secure. It was a big change from the Montrails, which were never bad but were basically running shoes. I was about 2km in at this point, and began to think I was moving a little faster than I had the previous trip. That’s pretty good, because last time I had running shoes, perfect weather, and a 3kg pack on, not boots, rain, and an 8-10 kg pack. I expected to be a little slower, and in fact I felt like I was going faster. I think the grippy soles and extra protection on the sharp broken rock were making a positive difference, although I wouldn’t be sure until I made the summit.
Furthermore, the waterproofing was holding up well, despite constant soakings from the underbrush. A couple of times I thought the boots were soaking through at the outside point where your little toe meets your foot – you know where boots tend to crease etc. But eventually I discovered that what was happening was that the outer would eventually soak a little bit of water up, and then that spot just felt a little colder than the rest of the boot.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0455.jpg
Next up were the glacial rocks. Again, no problem. As you can see, everything was wet, but I had no problem walking in small steps down fairly steep faces. I read a review where a guy complained about the performance of these boots on wet rock but I’m left in the dark by that complaint…I thought they were great, both uphill and down. The last stretch of glacial rock got me to the summit, and I checked my watch: 1h15m. I had definitely beaten my previous time of 1:23 despite the weather and pack (and heavier clothing, slightly). I include the time partly because I thought that it would be useful to know the speed at which I am moving: this is a trail that should take the average hiker 2.5 hours. I did it in half that, so I am really moving. I sat down and had lunch with a raven that showed up.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0435.jpg
You will note how wet my pants are – I was really soaked from the ankles up at this point. But the waterproofing of the boots was indomitable. You can’t really tell, but raindrops were still beading on most of the boots.
Here is a close up of the boots as well – you can see water soaking in to the leather a tiny bit, but the only thing getting my feet wet is condensation, and I haven’t found a way to avoid that yet.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0434.jpg
The raven was initially hostile.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0437.jpg
I gave him a piece of my sandwich. He became very friendly after that and I took a lot of pictures of the big, glossy bird. I think he was fairly young. His feathers were a beautiful, oily black.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0453.jpg
The trip down was interesting as well. I found that the low volume of the boots compared to everything else I own was a little hard on my toes in sustained fast downhill mode. I imagine that is mostly an individual thing, but it was significant for me. I’ve always been a little prone to mildly ingrown big toe-nails, so the lower volume toe box was putting a bit of pressure on my outside left big toe (my left foot is my larger foot, not by much though).
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0466.jpg
I stopped briefly at a little tarn to dunk my head in the clear, still water. It was dead silent up there. I saw no other human beings. It was very calm and very beautiful.
I checked my watch on arrival at the parking lot. Total round trip time: 2:14:31. That is half or less the recommended hiking time, so I was moving fast the entire way, up and down. My feet felt great. When I came down after the last trip, I felt a little bruised up for two or three days; now my feet felt great. The incredible shock absorption of the Salomons just shined on this harsh ground.
Again, this is a field report, not a review. I have done what I would consider to be the equivalent of running a single thousand round training class with these boots. I am not an expert on them. But they are very, very nice to wear. I will be extremely surprised if I am back here in a couple of months with negative comments. But that is possible and I do not yet know enough about the boot to give them an unqualified recommendation.
My current assessment is as follows:
1) the boots are incredibly comfortable
2) they are sufficiently waterproof to withstand coastal weather
3) they are warm enough for coastal winters, but probably too warm for hot climates
4) they are very, very grippy on every terrain I have tried them on
5) the toe box is a little small
6) I notice today that the areas soaked in yesterday’s hike still appear slightly wet on the outside, but the inside seems fine, protected no doubt by the gore-tex layer.
7) I am very, very satisfied with these boots.
Several days ago I purchased a pair of Salomon Quest 4D GTX boots, based in part on advice given on this forum. In general I do not like to review items after owning them for a few days, and that is why I am calling this a field report rather than a review. I will describe what I have done with the boots so far and their relative performance compared to my reference footwear, Montrail Hard Rock trail runners.
First, technical details:
The boots
Salomon Quest 4D GTX
http://www.nevisport.com/images/prod-img/833561_quest_zoom.jpg
Copy/Paste blurb:
Weight: 1.36kg (9 Medium)
This trekking boot’s progressive design borrows the most comfortable concepts from Salomon®'s trail-running program, and works them into a rugged boot built for challenging terrain. The result is ideal for day-hiking or multi-day backpacking trips over steep, rocky and untamed country.
Uppers combine synthetic fabric with waterproof suede and leather. A rubber heel and toecap protect from impact and abrasion, while the gusseted tongue keeps out pebbles and trail debris.
GORE-TEX® waterproof-breathable bootie construction provides a layer of dry protection.
Midsoles are Salomon’s 4D Advanced Chassis to provide a comfortable, stable, resilient ride in a tough, durable structure. They feature an upper layer of EVA engineered for superior underfoot cushioning, and a TPU stability plate which is layered onto and wrapped around a second full-length EVA layer that is higher in density and more resilient.
Outsoles use Salomon’s proprietary high-wear, abrasion-resistant, trekking Contagrip® rubber, for exceptional grip and durability in rugged terrain.
I put about 15km of break-in walking on these boots before taking them to the trail. They initially left my Achilles tendons and shins a little sore just from being stiff around the collar. This stiffness wore off after the second 5k walk.
The user
I am a moderately experienced hiker, 33 years old. I move pretty fast – I generally shoot for whatever the standard trail time listed on a given hike, divided by two. I am six foot two, just over 200 lbs, roughly 17% body fat (beer). I run fairly regularly, 6km, including a 100m elevation gain over a bridge. I am in pretty good shape aside from the beer. My feet are what I call “triangle feet”. I have kind of wide feet, except for the heels. I have a couple of pairs of custom work boots because I always used to ruin the lasts of any boots I’d buy, because my heel would move around and wear them out. I have to get size 11 lasts in my custom size 12 Vibergs.
The trail
The trail was Mount Seymour Trail. 4.5km, 450m elevation gain, average hiking time 2.5 hours, one way. Most sources recommend 4-5 hours round trip. BC Parks rates the trail as moderate to difficult. In good weather it is fairly safe although easy to get turned around in some spots. In bad weather it is somewhat dangerous for the unwary – some areas are very steep, some are very slippery, most are very rugged. In places the trail becomes indistinct and careful attention must be paid to keep track of trail markers. Wandering off the trail is not for the faint of heart or the ill-prepared.
Terrain is classic coast mountains: there are three basic types of ground.
Type 1 is the majority of the trail: granitic rock broken into sharp sections ranging from shale up to small boulders by freeze-thaw cycles. This trail has a lot of very sharp, harsh rock between softball and volleyball size. It is very tough on the feet and ankles!
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0463.jpg
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0464.jpg
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0467.jpg
Type 2 is the temperate rainforest, although up here you’re getting the sub-alpine version in sandy, rocky soil. This makes up maybe 30% of the trail and includes a lot of rooty sections.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0459.jpg
Type three is glacial rock, or what we called “whaleback rock” when I was a kid. I don’t know if that’s a local term – the smooth humps of rock were everywhere in the region I grew up in.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0454.jpg
These three types of terrain make this trail an excellent test bed for boots. Type 1 is punishing for any footwear, of course. Type two features a lot of slippery wood and underbrush. Type 3 makes for smooth rock surfaces. Altogether a wide range of problems for a boot to encounter.
Finally, the weather
It’s the coast mountains, in September, so…wet conditions and moderate temperatures, slight wind. At low altitudes, rain; at high altitudes, heavy fog. In fact the clouds pack up on the mountains and you walk up in to them, so less rain and more fog as you go. I was totally socked in at some points; visibility around 30m. This made keeping track of the trail a little tricky at times, particularly on the barren sections. Also, the generally soaked nature of the trail meant that everything that was ordinarily a little slippery was now greased and looking to kill. Finally, the wet underbrush in what I’ve called “type 2 terrain” – the forested sections – gave the boots a good hard test of their waterproofing.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0458.jpg
Let’s hit the trail!
The parking lot was nearly empty in the rainy mountain weather. I brought along a pack weighing between 8 and 10 kg, partly out of interest for the test hike, and partly because the poor conditions made a bit of emergency gear worthwhile. Also I had a good lunch I intended to eat at the summit.
Immediately it was obvious just how much shock the boots were absorbing. I had come up this trail the week before in a pair of Montrail Hard Rocks; I had to pick my foot placement carefully on the whole trip but especially throughout the broken rock sections. No matter what, the sharp rocks made my shoes uncomfortable. The Salomons, however, were pitch-perfect. I paid special attention to the position of my arches and found I had enough room to flex and relax them as I hiked, but overall the boots provided excellent support all the way around.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0465.jpg
The first stage of the trail is broken rock and I was very satisfied on this terrain with both the fit of the boots and with the grip I was getting on the rock. I was more concerned about smoother surfaces, though: I had read that these boots were not sufficiently grippy on wet rock or wood. The broken rock was wet, but so jagged that anything would have gripped fairly well. At about the 1km mark, there are a few small wooden bridges to cross, and all had been soaking for hours and were as wet as they would get. I was looking forward to trying the boots on them.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0460.jpg
What I found was very pleasing: I had to work to make these boots slip on even soaking wet softwoods. They were impressively sticky even on what is ordinarily a very slick surface. Clambering up the roots was no problem. I never felt like my footing was anything but secure. It was a big change from the Montrails, which were never bad but were basically running shoes. I was about 2km in at this point, and began to think I was moving a little faster than I had the previous trip. That’s pretty good, because last time I had running shoes, perfect weather, and a 3kg pack on, not boots, rain, and an 8-10 kg pack. I expected to be a little slower, and in fact I felt like I was going faster. I think the grippy soles and extra protection on the sharp broken rock were making a positive difference, although I wouldn’t be sure until I made the summit.
Furthermore, the waterproofing was holding up well, despite constant soakings from the underbrush. A couple of times I thought the boots were soaking through at the outside point where your little toe meets your foot – you know where boots tend to crease etc. But eventually I discovered that what was happening was that the outer would eventually soak a little bit of water up, and then that spot just felt a little colder than the rest of the boot.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0455.jpg
Next up were the glacial rocks. Again, no problem. As you can see, everything was wet, but I had no problem walking in small steps down fairly steep faces. I read a review where a guy complained about the performance of these boots on wet rock but I’m left in the dark by that complaint…I thought they were great, both uphill and down. The last stretch of glacial rock got me to the summit, and I checked my watch: 1h15m. I had definitely beaten my previous time of 1:23 despite the weather and pack (and heavier clothing, slightly). I include the time partly because I thought that it would be useful to know the speed at which I am moving: this is a trail that should take the average hiker 2.5 hours. I did it in half that, so I am really moving. I sat down and had lunch with a raven that showed up.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0435.jpg
You will note how wet my pants are – I was really soaked from the ankles up at this point. But the waterproofing of the boots was indomitable. You can’t really tell, but raindrops were still beading on most of the boots.
Here is a close up of the boots as well – you can see water soaking in to the leather a tiny bit, but the only thing getting my feet wet is condensation, and I haven’t found a way to avoid that yet.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0434.jpg
The raven was initially hostile.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0437.jpg
I gave him a piece of my sandwich. He became very friendly after that and I took a lot of pictures of the big, glossy bird. I think he was fairly young. His feathers were a beautiful, oily black.
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0453.jpg
The trip down was interesting as well. I found that the low volume of the boots compared to everything else I own was a little hard on my toes in sustained fast downhill mode. I imagine that is mostly an individual thing, but it was significant for me. I’ve always been a little prone to mildly ingrown big toe-nails, so the lower volume toe box was putting a bit of pressure on my outside left big toe (my left foot is my larger foot, not by much though).
http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq133/misant666/camping/Hiking%20Mount%20Seymour/DSC_0466.jpg
I stopped briefly at a little tarn to dunk my head in the clear, still water. It was dead silent up there. I saw no other human beings. It was very calm and very beautiful.
I checked my watch on arrival at the parking lot. Total round trip time: 2:14:31. That is half or less the recommended hiking time, so I was moving fast the entire way, up and down. My feet felt great. When I came down after the last trip, I felt a little bruised up for two or three days; now my feet felt great. The incredible shock absorption of the Salomons just shined on this harsh ground.
Again, this is a field report, not a review. I have done what I would consider to be the equivalent of running a single thousand round training class with these boots. I am not an expert on them. But they are very, very nice to wear. I will be extremely surprised if I am back here in a couple of months with negative comments. But that is possible and I do not yet know enough about the boot to give them an unqualified recommendation.
My current assessment is as follows:
1) the boots are incredibly comfortable
2) they are sufficiently waterproof to withstand coastal weather
3) they are warm enough for coastal winters, but probably too warm for hot climates
4) they are very, very grippy on every terrain I have tried them on
5) the toe box is a little small
6) I notice today that the areas soaked in yesterday’s hike still appear slightly wet on the outside, but the inside seems fine, protected no doubt by the gore-tex layer.
7) I am very, very satisfied with these boots.