Revision as of 18:13, 19 July 2016

The Hoka Clayton builds on the success of the wonderful Hoka Clifton. The Clifton is one of the best selling shoes, and I feel the Clayton is remarkably close in its function and design. Both shoes have stunning cushioning for their weight, with the Clayton coming in about an ounce lighter than the Clifton, but with slightly less cushioning. Using the RMAT foam as the outsole material works rather well, and I think the Clayton shows Hoka's growing maturity with this advanced material. Their initial attempts to make a shoe using RMAT for the midsole produced a heavy and hard shoe that seemed remarkably pointless to me. However, they found that RMAT has great grip on a wide variety of surfaces, and makes an outstanding outsole as it combines this grip with better cushioning than a traditional rubber and better wear characteristics than an exposed midsole. They've used RMAT to great effect on the Hoka Mafate and my favorite hiking boots, the Hoka Tor Ultra. When you run in the Clayton it feels a lot like the Clifton (both the first and second versions), though I found the upper to be slightly less comfortable. My main quibble with the Clayton is in the shape of the toe box, but this is a problem with virtually every running shoe on the market. I have some minor concerns with the way the midsole extends out from the outside edge of the forefoot, as noted below under "structure". The Clayton is rather pricy, so if you're after something with similar cushioning, for less money and with less weight then check out the Asics Gel Hyper Speed. Overall the Clayton is an outstanding shoe, and I've rated it as "The Best of the Best." (I use The Science of Running Shoes as the basis of how I test running shoes and what you should look for in a running shoe.)

Hoka Clayton top	Hoka Clayton bottom
Hoka Clayton inside	Hoka Clayton outside

1 Characteristics

• Cushioning . The Clayton has the massive cushioning that made Hoka famous, and in a shoe that is remarkably light. The cushioning-to-weight ratio is nearly as good as the Hoka Clifton, which is about the best of the Minimax shoes. You can get better cushioning-to-weight ratios, but only in much lighter shoes like the Asics Gel Hyper Speed, New Balance RC5000, or the amazing New Balance RC5000v2. The Hyper Speed has similar levels of overall cushioning to the Clayton, though the Hyper Speed has more cushioning in the heel and less in the forefoot.
• Drop. The Clayton has about a 3-4mm drop which is close enough to zero-drop for me.
• Structure. The Clayton has two types of foam, a traditional EVA foam used as the midsole, and a much tougher RMAT foam used as the outsole. The combination of these two foams does not interfere with your biomechanics in the way that would occur with a medial post. In the midsole cups the heel of the foot, which tends to create a little unobtrusive stability. The midsole does arise up under the arch, but I didn't find this will cause enough to cause any planter fasciitis issues. I found the taper at the front of the Clayton when the midsole thins between the ball of the foot and the toes to be quite smooth and natural (Hoka refers to this as the "rocker ".) One thing that did trouble me a little was the way that the midsole extends out from the outside edge of the forefoot. If you are a forefoot or midfoot runner, then this extension is a little uncomfortable and creates additional torsional stress on your ankle. Even though I tend to be a rear foot strike my forefoot lands on the outside edge, and I found this a little helpful. If you look at the picture of the Clayton from above you can see the bright green midsole extend out from the outside edge of the forefoot. I may try a little surgery to cut away some of this excess; if I do I'll post an update.
• Flexibility. The Clayton is reasonably flexible for shoe of this thickness, and the practical flexibility is a little greater than my metrics might suggest. The softness of the midsole allows the ball of your foot to sink in and creates some effective flexibility for your foot.
• Outsole. The Clayton uses RMAT as the outsole material. This is not as hard wearing as a true blown rubber outsole, but because it's a lot more cushioned than rubber, the overall cushioning-to-weight ratio is much better than you might expect in a shoe that has an outsole covering virtually the entire contact patch. The RMAT material also has remarkably good traction, far better than the traction you'd get in a traditional rubber outsole. Depending on your running surface, it's arguably comparable to the hard plastic nubs found in ultralight shoes like the New Balance RC5000v2.
• Shape. The Clayton has the typical Hoka shape, which includes a horribly constricted toe box. A superficial inspection might make you think the Clayton is a little wider, but I think this is an optical illusion created by the wider midsole. I've noticed at Ultras the Hoka toe box causes a distinctive pattern of blisters, so it's critical to cut open the toe box of any Hokas. (I recommend cutting open the toe box of virtually all running shoes, with the exception of a few shoes like some Altra shoes. When you have some worn out shoes, you should try cutting open the toe box. I've found that it's a big improvement, allowing my toes to move naturally and engage for toe off, as well as reducing the possibility of blisters.)
• Upper. The upper is largely seamless, with moderate to poor breathability due to the number of overlays. There is a one seam in the midfoot where a small amount of padding is added to the rear of the shoe. There is far less padding in the Clayton than I'd have expected, and vastly less around the ankle opening than a shoe like the Hoka Clifton. I actually found the ankle opening to be slightly uncomfortable, even compared with unpadded ankle openings that you get in shoes weighing half as much is the Clayton.
• Tongue. The Clayton has a classic tongue rather than a tongue-less sock style of upper. The tongue has a small amount of padding.
• Lacing. The Clayton uses thin flat laces which stay tied. The laces have a slight bit of elasticity in them, improving the overall comfort of the shoe. (They appear to be the same lace that Hoka used in the Clifton.)
• Heel Counter. I could not detect any Heel Counter in the Clayton, though the upper has an overlay in that part of the shoe that ensures it maintains its shape when you're putting it on.

2 200 Mile Update

I was surprised just how quickly my MilestonePod reached the 200 mile mark with that the Clayton. It's always a good sign when I don't realize how many miles I'm putting on a shoe, rather than having to force myself to wear a pair that I don't really enjoy. The RMAT outsole has stood up to the wear remarkably well, with not much more abrasion than you'd expect from a hard rubber outsole. The upper is quite thin with limited padding, but it never felt uncomfortable. I had to cut open the toe box early in my testing, as of the shape was crushing for my toes. With the toe box open, my toes were free to move naturally and my running was much better. The midsole has compressed, as you would expect over 200 miles. My measurements indicate that to the forefoot had compressed ~4 mm, and there is a slight indentation where the ball of my foot goes. By comparison, the heel has only compressed by ~1 mm. Personally, I suspect that this indentation under the ball of the foot is one of the better indications that a shoe is wearing out. As the cushioning under the ball of the foot collapses, it causes the foot to rotate inwards as you run.

This is the sole of the Clayton after 200 miles. The image has been heavily enhanced to highlight the texture and wear of the RMAT outsole. There is a little wear on the extreme back of the heal, and a little wear over the forefoot.

2.1 Midsole Trimming

During the testing period I have also been running in the Hoka Tracer which appears to be a much narrower shoe. However, I realized that the two shoes are exactly the same in terms of the volume that holds your foot, and only differ in their midsole shape. The midsole in the Clayton extends outwards to the side of the shoe creating what I can only describe as a small "snowshoe effect". I also noticed that when running in the Tracer and the Clayton back to back I could feel the difference that this snowshoe effect made, as it creates extra twisting force on my ankle as the outside of my foot lands first. I took an electric knife to the midsole, and iteratively removed more and more of the midsole. I found this allowed me to run rather more naturally than the original shoe allowed.

This is an enhanced image showing where I have trimmed the midsole to remove the "snowshoe effect."

Please support this site This review was made possible by readers like you buying products via my links. I buy all the products I review through normal retail channels, which allows me to create unbiased reviews free from the influence of reciprocity, or the need to keep vendors happy. It also ensures I don't get "reviewer specials" that are better than the retail versions. Buy Hoka Clayton at Zappos Buy Hoka Clayton at Road Runner Sports Buy Hoka Clayton at Kelly's Running Warehouse Buy Hoka Clayton at Charlotte Ultra Running Company

3 Cushioning and Shoes

It's intuitively obvious that the cushioning in a shoe will reduce the impact on your body when running. However, The Science of Running Shoes indicates that the reality is rather more complex. While slight cushioning may reduce the effort needed to run by improving your Running Economy, most scientific research indicates that more cushioning does further improve Running Economy. In addition, cushioning does not generally reduce impact and may actually increase it. This is counterintuitive, but is likely to be due to the way a runners mind and body adapts to softer cushioning. Unfortunately, the scientific evidence is far from complete and it's hard to give clear recommendations. I believe that some runners will prefer more cushioning, while others prefer less, and typically those running further have a fondness for greater cushioning. I also believe that a shoe should be as light as possible, and a shoe should justify its weight with the cushioning it provides. My advice is to decide what level of cushioning you're looking for, and then find the lightest shoes that also fit well and are comfortable.

4 Visualizing the Attributes of the Hoka Clayton

How Hoka Clayton compares showing rearfoot cushioning against the performance penalty of its weight. Upper right is better.	How Hoka Clayton compares showing forefoot cushioning against the performance penalty of its weight. Upper right is better.
How Hoka Clayton compares showing the price against the benefit (cushioning/performance penalty). Upper left is better.	How Hoka Clayton compares showing the loaded drop against the benefit (cushioning/performance penalty). Upper left is better.

5 A Comparison with other Recommended Shoes

If you're looking for "the best of the best" running shoe, here are my top picks. Of course, the answer will depend a little on what you're looking for, so I have recommendations for various categories. Best All Round Shoe. The Altra Escalante is my current all-round favorite. It has plenty of cushioning for its weight, it has a very springy midsole, it lasts well, and it has a shape that's closer to the shape of a human foot than most shoes. It's a great shoe for any runner, including those Starting to run. It's also a fairly easy shoe to find due to its popularity. Best Maximalist Shoe: If you want something massively cushioned, then I'd recommend the Saucony Kinvara 8. It's remarkably light and remarkably cushioned, beating Hoka at their own game. Best Optimal Shoe: For those looking to trade cushioning for speed, the Nike Zoom Streak LT 3 was my top pick, but the latest version (LT 4) falls short of it's predecessor. There are lots of great optimal running shoes, which provide just enough cushioning with light weight and minimal frills, but all have their weak spots. Probably the best option at the moment is the Altra Vanish-R, which offers great cushioning for just over 5oz/150g. Fastest Shoe: If you really want speed, then check out the Nike Vaporfly 4%. It's light, massively cushioned, and has a carbon fiber plate. Nothing comes close, not even the now defunct New Balance RC5000‏‎ or New Balance RC5000v2‏‎. There are a number of caveats; it's really expensive, it's really hard to find, and there's a significant injury risk. Best Minimalist Shoe: Merrell Trail Glove. I recommend the trail glove for road running in spite of the 'trail' moniker. It's not a fast shoe by any means, but it's comfortable and will last well. All Terrain Shoe. For trail running, I've become a fan of Altra, and I think their best shoe is the the Altra Timp, though the Altra Lone Peak is really close. Honorable Mention: It's not really a running shoe, but the Vivobarefoot Ra is comfortable, minimalist and can more or less pass as a dress shoe. I've worn mine to weddings with a suit and they've not looked out of place. You can run in the Ra, but the leather means it doesn't breathe well.

For a more detailed on running shoes see the Recommendations for Best Running Shoes. This table lists the key attributes of What to Look for in Running Shoes. For more detailed information, on the shoes see detailed shoe comparison.

It's not a running shoe, but I love the Hoka Tor Ultra hiking boot and I've tested the Altra Lone Peak Boot, the Hoka Tor Speed 2, and the Inov-8 Roclite 325 hiking boots
Older shoe reviews: Saucony Hattori Review, Mizuno Cursoris Review, Skechers GO Bionic 2 Review, Hoka Clifton Review, Saucony Virrata 2 Review, Brooks PureCadence 3 Review, Brooks PureConnect 3 Review, Brooks PureFlow 3 Review, Skechers GO Bionic 2 Review, New Balance 980 Review, Brooks Transcend 2 Review, Hoka Huaka Review, Patagonia EVERlong Review, Asics 33-DFA Review, Hoka Conquest Review, Saucony Cortana Review, Puma Faas 100 R Review, Saucony Fastwitch Review, Nike Free Review, Asics Gel Lyte 33 Review, Skechers GOmeb Speed Review, Skechers GOrun Ultra Road Review, Nike LunaRacer Review, Altra Paradigm Review.