Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Fellraisers v Mudclaws?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    411

    Fellraisers v Mudclaws?

    Doing the Mournes Skyline, so lots of mud, presume it'll be wet in October, stretches of granite slabs etc.

    Walsh PBs fell apart a couple of weeks back, which was a pity as I liked them. Was thinking XTalons, but the general reaction seems to be that they are better on shorter races, maybe a bit more of a thoroughbred. Friends doing it in Mudclaws, but they seem that bit more expensive than Fellraisers. Anyone got any idea of the 2 and how they compare, are they remotely comparable? And within the Salomon range, is the Fellraiser more aggressively soled than the Speedcross?

  2. #2
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ambleside
    Posts
    5,515
    Fell raisers are more comfortable, and wider in the forefoot. Both have very good grip, with the Mudclaws that bit better on wet rock.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Guildford, Surrey
    Posts
    42
    I am led to believe that X-talons are a good trail/fell hybrid shoe and am looking at them myself for similar sorts of events. Strangely my Walsh PB are also on the way out but the high stack height makes my dodgy ankles feel unstable so I probably wont replace them.

    I've always been a bit dubious about the really aggressive Mudclaws for anything other than close to pure fell running, they are just so aggressive.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    99
    The new fell raisers have "contigrip", it feel softer and looks like it will provide better grip on wet rocks as a result. I've yet to try myself.

  5. #5
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ambleside
    Posts
    5,515
    Despite the "contagrip", the fellraisers are not quite as good on wet rock as mudclaws, though they might be better than contagrip-less fellraisers.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Alan Lucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LANCASTER
    Posts
    712
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T View Post
    Despite the "contagrip", the fellraisers are not quite as good on wet rock as mudclaws, though they might be better than contagrip-less fellraisers.
    Contra grip less Fellraisers are truly awful on wet rock, even steep wet roads! Mudclaws would be my preference, even if they have improved the Fellraises grip.

  7. #7
    if you liked the Walsh PB, why not buy some more??

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by obrienk View Post
    if you liked the Walsh PB, why not buy some more??
    Was looking at that...but the way they fell apart kinda put me off.

    Now, I should say in fairness to Walsh I got them from another person, so not sure how long they were used. The soles seemed perfect, was happy out with the grip on them on the few times I used them (though the shoe did seem very flat so not sure how my feet would stand up to 35km/3400m in the Mournes in late October), and then the sole just came away from the upper!
    Last edited by Conor74; 18-09-2015 at 12:42 PM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    184
    How can i identify the new version with contragrip?

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyros76 View Post
    How can i identify the new version with contragrip?
    The grip is black. if you zoom in on this picture, it says in on the side of the shoe.
    http://www.wiggle.co.uk/salomon-fellraiser-shoes-aw15/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •