Gear

I have had tents on the brain quite a a bit lately, especially in light of our last backpacking trip. I thought it coincidental then that Ryan Jordan posted his thoughts on what he thinks is a good group shelter, the GoLite Shangri-La 6/8. It so happens that we have one of those too, however while I like it a lot, I am finding my satisfaction waning. Am I just not seasoned enough in the backcountry to fully appreciate its greatness, or is there something else to it?

We appreciated our tent's wind-worthiness during our last
car-camping trip on the coast of the Gaspe Peninsula.

I was thinking back to when we lived in Alberta, and the terrain and climate of the Rockies. The air was generally pretty dry, and the nights could get fairly chilly. Although there were trees, there were also many exposed places, including those above-treeline where the storms could get intense/nasty/windy. The main bug we had to contend with was the mosquito.

Thinking about that context, I see how a floorless shelter like the Shangri-La would be quite ideal. You stake it to the ground, kill the mosquitoes, and away you go. The heavier-weight silnylon fabric, the sturdy poles, and guy-line tie out points make it a very mountain worthy shelter for a larger group.

Then I thought about our current playground, the east coast. Here in Maine the air is generally humid, and the summer nights can be quite warm. The land is mostly dense forest everywhere, with the (infrequent) open areas being on the rocky peaks of mountains (there is a reason the AT is sometimes referred to as the Green Tunnel). There can be a lot of rain, but wind is less of an issue due to all of the trees. The bugs we have to contend with are mosquitoes, blackflies, and ticks. While living in Alberta I had heard of blackflies and never knew what a tick or Lyme disease was until we moved East.

You would never know it, but in this photo our tent is setup over a nicely leveled tent
pad in the White Mountains. Our shelter was so large that it covered the entire
pad, including the logs that were placed around it's perimeter.

Our current shelter configuration consists of a Shangri-La 6 with a Shangri-La 4 Nest underneath. It's actually a pretty cool combination that allows us to have full protection from the ticks and flying bugs, a decent sized vestibule, and the ability to open up the doors at either end for good ventilation (even in the rain to keep the humidity down). The downsides to this setup are the weight (10 lbs = 2 lbs per person), and the fact that there is NEVER (OK, rarely) a good backcountry location to set up a tent of this size.

Considering the density of trees where we are, sizable clearings are hard to come-by. When we do find one, it is guaranteed to have huge roots, rocks, or fixed objects sticking up into the bathtub floor - there is just no way to avoid it considering the Nest covers over 90 square feet. Proper site preparation for keeping the floor protected from puncture would require bringing some form of excavator. It is only a matter of time before the floor will be riddled with holes; no matter how gently I tell the kids to tread.

At a glance, this may look like a nice clearing for setting up a tent. What
you can't see here are all the huge roots and rocks throughout.

I have been thinking through some possible solutions:

• Use multiple tents: This would certainly open up our available options for selecting a tent, as most manufacturers top-out their light-weight tent capacities at 4 people (we need 5). This would also make it easier to find suitable tent sites because we wouldn't need such a big area to setup on. On the flipside, this is not ideal from a togetherness standpoint. I like it when we are together under one roof, and I like being able to reach over and help out a child if they wake-up in the night with some sort of issue.
• Have a custom-made, lighter-weight bug shelter made: This option could certainly save some weight (but probably not more than 1.5 lbs). The downside would be that we would still have the issue of site selection, and the lighter-weight materials would probably make the floor even more prone to holes.
• Go floorless: This would certainly allow us to save a lot of weight; using our Shangri-La 6 without the nest would shave off over 3 lbs.  This would also give us more options for selecting a lighter-weight shelter by going with a single-poled pyramid/tipi styled design from a company like Oware, Titanium Goat, or Kifaru. Site selection would be much less of an issue because we woudn't have to worry about puncturing a floor. It wouldn't really matter what the ground was like and we could even setup over small shrubs if we needed to. The downside of course we be that this would afford us little protection from bugs because we keep the door open for ventilation, and even if we did close the door we still wouldn't be protected from ticks.
• Go floorless with light-weight bivy sacks: From a weight standpoint, using the Shangri-La 6 with bivy sacks would save us about 1.25 lbs. Using a single pole tipi-style shelter as described above could save more. Since bivy sacks would be carried by everyone, the shelter weight would be more evenly distributed in our packs. One downside of this configuration is the cost: 5 bivy sacks cost a lot more than a single bug nest. Another is the added complexity for the kids. The upside is that the bivys could also be used without the tent when sleeping in shelters along the AT during bug season.
• Lighter poles: The poles for the Shangri-La 6 weigh about 14 oz each, that is almost 2 pounds in poles alone. For strength, you really don't want to go with anything lighter as it would most certainly be too weak for a shelter of that size. The best bet to save pole weight would be to try to find a single-pole shelter instead. Perhaps some sort of hooped/tunnel design may work as well (i.e. Hilleberg, Warmlite, Integral Designs, etc.), but that would require more investigation.
• Use a tarp: This certainly would solve the ventilation problem, but I have no experience with using group-sized ones. Anyone have any insight on that?
• Other options? I am open for ideas! If you have any, please share!

So where does this leave us? I am not sure.

At the moment I am leaning towards a light-weight pyramid shelter with bivy sacks as it seems (in theory) to solve most of the problems for the least amount of weight. I am open to change however, and will be spending some time exploring the possibilities over the coming year to see what I can find.

A couple of weeks ago my family and I had the opportunity to visit the New England Footwear headquarters in New Hampshire - the company responsible for the design/production of GoLite footwear. This article is not intended to be an endorsement or criticism of GoLite shoes as minimalist footwear. It is intended to be informational, to explore what they are doing as a company, and to see what this new BareTech line is all about. A week before my trip I asked readers to post their questions and also did the same on the huaraches mailing list so that I could be prepared with something intelligent to ask.

At the table for the meeting was Douglas Clark (CEO), Vivian Lefebvre (Director of PR and Marketing), myself (shoe geek), my wife (photographer), and my three kids (eager learners - you could also call it a home-schooling field trip). Doug has a fascinating background, being in the shoe business his entire career. After graduating from college he got his first job working in the Nike research laboratory where he described it as the equivalent of doing graduate work. They studied, poked, prodded, and collected reams of data on runners using all of the available technology at the time to figure out how they could use footwear to improve athletic performance. Out of this research came all of the technologies minimalist footwear proponents love to hate: elevated heels, cushioning, motion control, etc. You might call it the golden age of running shoe development at Nike, and he was there right in the middle of it all as it unfolded.

Your next question is probably this: what does he believe about all of that research today?

Doug's perspective on footwear is this: it should be designed such that it does not hinder the foot's natural movement in any way. There should be room in the forefoot/toebox. Everyone's feet are built differently and thus shoe designs need to be able to account for variation in foot shapes. The normal strike pattern should be a heel strike, but close to a midfoot strike such that there is little to no foot slap. In order to achieve a foot strike like that, there should be no difference in height between the heel and the forefoot. He also believes that all of this forefoot strike business that the barefoot crowd is preaching is going to backfire and get people injured with fractured metatarsals and such. He said that some form of arch support is necessary to prevent the foot from collapsing when under impact. So, with that in mind as the foundation for their shoe designs, lets move on to the questions...

Inspired by the huarache design, this prototype of the Tara Lite (to be released next spring)
has no laces, but an elasticized strap that runs through the top of the shoe between the big toe
and the second toe. This strap can be tightened using the velcro tab across the top.
Changes for the final design will include a lighter-weight and stretchier upper.

John Sifferman asks "What separates these shoes from the competition and how has the GoLite BareTech line of shoes improved upon the minimalist footwear concept?" and "What considerations have been involved with the shoe design in regards to optimal running/walking technique?"

Whether or not they have improved upon the minimalist footwear concept remains to be seen once the new line is released (at the time of our meeting they didn't have any available for testing). With that in mind, these are some of the features that define the BareTech line:

• BareTech shoes feature a completely flat sole, that is to say there is no difference in height between the heel and the forefoot. In fact, Doug said - in what I thought was a fairly bold statement - that he can't see any reason why GoLite would develop a shoe with a raised heel ever again (they still have original models with raised heels that will remain in production). They truly believe that a raised heel negatively impacts the natural biomechanics of the body.
• While most running shoes have a flared sole at the heel in an attempt to increase stability, BareTech shoes have no flare and are rounded at the heel. A flared heel causes the body to heel strike early on the the stride. A rounded heel removes this tendency, delaying the foot strike until it is closer to the mid-foot.
• BareTech shoes feature soft-against-the-ground technology. Where most running shoes are designed with a layer of cushioning over a stiff sole, GoLite reverses this putting a stiffer layer close to the foot and a softer layer underneath. This is done to improve stability - the soft layer is better able to contour the ground, and the stiffer layer provides a stable platform for the foot.
• The shoes feature wider toeboxes and flexible uppers to allow the foot to move naturally and expand as required for physical activity.

The Flash Lite, their performance trail running shoe features offset-lacing and
has a design inspired by the tendons and ligaments in the foot.

Joe from the huaraches mailing list asks "My concerns would be, is it too much cushioning, is the toe box wide enough, and is the upper breathable."

• All of the shoes in this series feature 12mm of foam. Doug says that this foam is not for cushioning, but for stability. If you are looking for intimate ground feel, than this will probably be too much for you. I see a lot of potential for this shoe in winter where you need insulation between your foot and the ground.
• The uppers are all made of a breathable material, but not quite as aggressive as some other brands/models on the market (i.e. Inov-8). I will reserve judgment on this question until I have spent some time with a pair.
• The toe-box question will be answered later.

Harry from the huaraches mailing list asks: "I'd find out the weight, heel differential (if any), amount of cushioning (mm), and flexibility (can you bend the shoe from the forefoot to the heel)."

• The shoe weights are as follows:
  • Mens trail runners (size 9)
    • Tara Lite: 10.7 oz/303 grams
    • Flash Lite: 11.6 oz/328 grams
    • Amp Lite: 11.8 oz/333 grams
  • Womens trail runners (size 7)
    • Micro Lite: 9.4 oz/267 grams
  • Mens fast packers (over the ankle style - size 9)
    • Carbo Lite: 12.7 oz/359 grams
    • Surge Lite: 13.7 oz/387 grams
    • Timber Lite: 14.1 oz/400 grams (waterproof membrane)
• As stated previously, the heel differential is zero. This is a pretty bold move in my mind, I think that GoLite should be commended for this!
• From my testing of the prototypes, they aren't as flexible as many other minimalist shoes. I suspect this is because of the stiffer platform layer they put over the softer stability layer. I don't know that extreme flexibility is what they are shooting for with these models.

Luc asks "Can you bend it also laterally like Inov-8 sole?"

• GoLite doesn't add anything to stiffen the shoe laterally, however the stiffer platform layer of the sole does limit lateral flexibility. Comparing these to an Inov-8 shoe depends on the model. I would say they feel similar in stiffness to my Flyroc 310s, but not nearly as flexible as my F-Lite 195s.

A VERY popular question, John Sifferman, Ginger, Joe, Harry, Luc, The Jerm, and Tsedee ask "What about width in the toebox?"

This question started a very interesting conversation. When we started talking about differences in foot size and shape, Doug pulled-out a couple of foot molds - molds that were cast back when the GoLite footwear division was owned by Timberland. They had taken a survey of all the Timberland employees with a size 9 foot and cast a mold of the biggest and smallest foot they found (and to think that we neglected to take a picture of these - sorry!). The results were visually shocking to see, I know that there are differences in foot size, but the molds that were sitting in front of us at the table were incredibly different.

What they found was that for the same length of foot, the size of the heel did not vary significantly, but the variation of width of the forefoot was tremendous. Using this information, they attempted to figure out ways that they could accommodate such a vast array of foot shapes in a mass-produced shoe.

Kids checking out the wide foot mold.

What they came up with is what they call PreciseFit. The way it works is that the insole of the shoe is constructed out of two layers in the forefoot area. The lower layer can be removed or replaced with a thinner layer, or a thicker layer, depending on whether or not the person needs more or less volume. The flexibility of the upper also adds a little more room for people with wide feet.

With this system, GoLite claims to be able to fit 96% of the population without having to produce multiple shoe widths. What is especially interesting about this system is that you can configure each foot differently if you have significant differences in size between your feet. One downside I see with this system is that while the shoe may have more or less volume in the forefoot, it will also potentially have a positive or negative heel lift, depending on the insert being used. I explained to them that forefoot/toebox width is incredibly important to the minimalst footwear crowd.

I told them about how as barefoot/minimalist runners develop their foot muscles, their feet expand and the need for a wide toe box becomes even more important as time goes on (as can be seen by Luc's excellent transition photo).

The PreciseFit insole system has three settings, Narrow, Medium, and Wide depending
on the insert used.

Where these shoes fit for people who are trying to go more minimal will depend largely on what it is they are looking for. Having a wider toebox and no differential between heel and forefoot are a huge plus (I just hope we can eliminate the arch support by removing the insole). For myself, I am interested in finding something with a little more insulation under foot for use in the colder months and with a bit more stiffness for snowshoes and crampons. Others may be seeking more ground protection from rocks for long distance runs. For some minimalist shoe folks these may not meet any needs at all and that's ok too.

Doug had this final word to say about the new line:

We have done extensive fit, wear and performance tests on our BareTech models that are being delivered this month, including Amp Lite, Flash Lite, Micro Lite, Timber Lite and Carbo Lite. The feedback we received in the beginning led to a few more refinements, and the feedback we have received over the last three months has been quite positive in terms of performance and fit.  In addition, the shoes are holding up well even after hundreds of miles of wear in pretty extreme conditions as well as a fair amount of road running/racing.

Overall we had a great meeting, Doug and Vivian were great hosts, we learned a lot, and I look forward to testing some of the new models when they are released later this summer. Thanks guys!

Update 10/11/2020: GoLite just sent me this photo of the updated version of the TaraLite. The new version features a thinner lycra upper and no sidewalls. The expected weight is 10.5 oz for a men's size 9.

This weekend was planned for months. Our family, along with John Sifferman and a host of other family and friends were supposed to be hiking up Mount Katahdin - Maine's highest peak. Unfortunately the weather didn't want to cooperate, so rather than risk taking a group above the treeline in potentially heavy rain and lightning, we decided to cancel :-( Now of course, it looks like tomorrow may have been OK, but oh well, we had a lot of factors and had to make a decision before the forecast changed. We will have to plan another attempt, as the first trip had thwarted our goals as well.

About a month ago I wrote a brief post highlighting GoLite's new BareTech line scheduled for release this summer. Perhaps it was the skepticism in my voice - I'm not sure - but whatever the reason GoLite contacted me and invited me to see what they they have cooking.

This coming Friday I will be heading to the New England Footwear headquarters in New Hampshire for a show-and-tell session on the GoLite BareTech line of shoes. I would like to go with a pile of questions from the minimalist footwear community, so that is where you guys come in. What do you want to know about GoLite's new barefoot line? Do you have any thoughts, suggestions, or special requests? If you do please put them in the comments of this post. I will bring them with me when I go on Friday and write a follow-up post with the answers.

Before you comment, be sure check out Peter's excellent summary of the new lineup at Runblogger.