Quote Originally Posted by PeteS View Post
Shoes arrived today. First impressions are very favourable. Much more supportive than a straight X-talon and the stud pattern is completely different - heading more towards the mudclaw with some bigger central studs. Good thick rand which should offer some protection and they are very roomy in the toe box whilst being nice and snug in the heel and midfoot. Seem to have adequate cushioning and don't feel too dissimilar from the trailroc in that respect.
A bit soon to answer Noel's query but the soles are not graphene and made from the same sticky rubber as the mudclaws so I would assume similar wear and tear there. My last 2 mudclaws lasted reasonably well - lost studs on the first but the latest ones went in the bin when the sole came away from the upper at the toes. We'll see how well these last...
I'd be interested to know how you get on Pete - are these the XT Ultra 260 mk II? They haven't been out long and I'm intrigued to know if they have improved on the mk I which, as was mentioned earlier, is a rehash of the original X-Claw 275 (the sole is identical btw). I've got through about four pairs of the X-Claws and am on my 5th pair of Ultra 260s, but that doesn't really tell the story of what I think is a flawed shoe - the 260 mk I has a sloppy and loose heel that's cut very high, awful for contouring. I buy them because the accommodate my fat feet and the lightweight orthotic I'm obliged to wear, but am hoping the mk II has addressed these issues.