The Shoe(s)
The GS:TAM is, unquestionably, the best pair of shoes I've ever run. Not just trail shoes. Best of any kind. Now, they aren't great outside of their intended purpose - which is trail running, but they aren't meant to be. But in terms of a shoe that excels at the thing it was designed to do, the Speedland GS:TAM is without equal in my experience.
I'll talk through each component first, because that mimics the way that the shoe was designed. But really, it's the total package that is what's so incredible. The shared ideal that I have with Kevin and David, Speedland's founders, is that "engineering at its best allows you to just enjoy running." The thought that went into every decision is remarkable. But the end result is just a shoe that you can throw on and forget about in the pure bliss of running on the trails.
My first run in the GS:TAMs, I intended to run an hour. That turned into 10mi, which then turned into a half, and ultimately 15 miles that reminded me everything I love about running, particularly on the trails, which is what drew me to where I live, on the edge of a 1500 acre state park. In total, I ran just over 200 miles in the GS:TAMs in a period of just under two months, including a self-supported 50Km that I did to celebrate my 43rd birthday. In that time, the shoes continually exceeded my expectations, though really I mostly just forgot they were there until the time came to pop the BOA dials rather than unlacing them.
Speedland calls specific attention to some of their partners. They choose partners when they think someone else can do something better than they can. I've carried these references over, because it's representative of the way they approach development. Just like a high-end automotive companies and tuners will call out the premium parts they use, Speedlands expertise and value lies not specifically in each of the individual components - though something like the last itself and the overall fit and design of the upper are Uniquely theirs - but in bringing them together such that the total package is greater than the sum of all parts. I really don't want to make it seem like these things are just "off the shelf" parts cobbled together. Kevin and Dave certainly do that with existing shoes and parts with the Speedhacks projects, and this shoe is not that. They think of themselves like automotive tuners - and their Speedhacks show reflects this, but Speedland is definitely a shoe (or, rather, "equipment") company, albeit a very non-traditional one. But this is almost universally true. Very few shoe companies have their own factories. Speedland is just more vocal about highlighting where they do not have expertise - carbon fiber manufacturing, for example - as well as where they do - how a carbon plate should feel and perform.
Speedland also can never sell enough shoes - nor command what would necessarily be an astronomical price - to follow the model of a Ferrari, where everything is manufactured in-house. But that also doesn't really make sense. Again, the car company here that they remind me of the most is Lotus, rather than a "tuner." Critically, Lotus offloads engine development. While they have made their own engines, for nearly two decades, they've relied mostly on Toyota engines, though recently they make use of a Mercedes AMG engine and gearbox. Like Speedland, this allows Lotus to focus on what it does best - weight and handling. Lotus is more than a tuner, but it exists as a car company because it knows what it shouldn't build equally well as what it should.
While this is somewhat atypical in the shoe industry, it is slightly more common in trail shoes in one specific area - outsoles. Many manufacturers that would never advertise another brand on their own shoes use - and highlight - the use of Vibram rubber for outsoles. Adidas has partnered with Continental for outsoles on its road shoes, and so perhaps there is a growing sense that as shoes become more technical, finding - and recognizing - partners with specific expertise is a critical part of making higher and higher performing shoes.
Pebax Insole And Midsole
Interestingly, Speedland themselves benefit from this type of explicit recognition. Arkema - the company behind Pebax, which is the tradename for one version of the high-rebound polymer that, along with carbon plates, has revolutionized running shoes - highlights Speedland in a similar article about technology partnerships.
According to Speedland, Adidas really deserves credit for kickstarting this revolution with their variant of this foam, called Boost. Boost really revolutionized the industry. The original recipe was relatively heavy, looked cheap - that sort of pellety-styrofoam-esque appearance, and was only available in white. But the energy return was incredible. The weight came down; solutions to color were developed; and energy return went up. But it's impossible to overstate just how remarkable the impact of Adidas's introduction of boost - ousting the EVA which had been the standard midsole material essentially for as long as "modern" running shoes have existed.
For an interesting history that I mostly agree with, Gear Patrol has an awesome article on The Most Innovative Running Shoes of All Time, which covers the Brooks Villanova - the first shoe to use EVA in the midsole, which was developed based on feedback from the legendary Marty Liquori.
The GS:TAM has a lot of this plush material. With a stack (at the heel) of 37mm, it's a high-stack ultra-oriented shoe. But really, the stack is part of what Speedland calls the GS platform. The GS platform is joined by the lower-stack SL platform, which is what the SL:PDX - Speedland's first shoe - and SL:HSV are built on.
This Platform:Model approach is reflective of Speedland's attention to detail. The platform is a macro philosophy - say high-cushion - and then the model makes explicit tweaks to suit its specific purpose. In the case of the TAM - named for Mt. Tamalpais - that's typical Northern California conditions such as you might find at the iconic North Face Endurance Challenge in San Francisco. This is in contrast to the soon-to-be-released GS:PSG, named for Mt. Pisgah in Oregon. The shoes look very similar, but Speedland's founders assure me there are important differences that allow each shoe to excel in its specific territory.
Speedland's approach to achieving 37mm of stack is quite different from basically anyone else. Rather than a thick midsole - with embedded plate - a lot of the stack height comes from a Pebax insole. This does mean that Speedland's shoes are entirely incompatible with orthotics. But Kevin and David are okay with this. They actually believe that a lot of the need for orthotics comes from under-spec'd insoles. But for people for whom that's a non-starter, they are willing to accept that they can't please everyone. They believe this is the right way to make a shoe, and I appreciate the conviction. That I happen to agree with it certainly makes things easier, but I think it's great to see them acknowledging that explicit design choices in the name of performance is going to mean the shoes don't work for everyone.
The best part of this design is that it resurrects what was the killer-feature of the original Hokas - the Bondi B and Mafate - which is that your foot was "within" the shoe. The lateral stability that comes from this design - imagine your foot being on the second or third deck of a cruise ship where the cruise ship is your shoe. Especially for trail shoes, this offers incredible lateral stability. I think this may even supplant the need for orthotics in some runners, but that's really a fairly overwhelming tangent. In any case, I think this is the correct way to build trail shoes, and it was a joy to go bombing around on trails in a pair of high stack shoes that felt even more stable than a pair of XC flats. It offers a ton of both medial and lateral support that helps keep you upright - and your ankles intact - even when the trails get tricky.
Carbitex Plate
As with most current plated shoes, the plate is sandwiched between thick layers of high-return polymer. But the Speedland plate has three important differences. The first is that it's removable - which also highlights the second point - it's reusable. The plate costs extra, but it's an extra cost you don't have to pay repeatedly. While I am sure the plate will wear out eventually, it'll last a whole lot longer than any one pair of shoes. This also cuts down on waste.
The third most important aspect is the design. The plate is split at the forefoot, to allow good independent movement laterally, which is important for off-camber terrain. And the specific carbon layup also allows for good lateral flex while keeping responsiveness and rigidity front-to-back. These specific design choices were key to making a trail-specific plate and highlight why just taking a road shoe and adding lugs isn't enough to make a great trail shoe. It also speaks to some of the very specific challenges in translating the performance gains seen on the road into similar gains on trails.
For me, personally, without a plate, the shoe is still very good, but not magical. It reminded me of what was missing in the original Bondi B. The shoes were comfortable, but had no pop. They didn't *feel* fast. Even for an easy run, the plate is great. At least for me. But it does feel different. Knowing what the emerging research is saying about training with a plate, I may use it less often. But it's hard because I really just enjoy the feeling so much. It makes the shoes feel alive. I wouldn't give it up because of any sort of training performance benefit - though there does seem to be some; but the potential for injury risk from the carbon plate does make me appreciate that I have the option to take it out, and I probably will do so more often - it's very easy - especially on easier runs.
BOA Laces And PerformFit Upper
The true wisdom of the BOA lacing system was evident on my first run where I realized I had left them a bit loose for technical running. I Just reached down and made a few clicks. It was easy to do one-handed. And it was really fast, taking only a few seconds. Compared with relacing a pair of shoes, I was like, "oh, this is way better."
I had piloted some BOA-lace shoes when I was at Zoot, but they weren't nearly as refined. Those shoes had only a single dial and the overall upper design wasn't explicitly built with BOA dials in mind, and I think that kept it from being as effective as the BOA on the GS:TAMs.
There are two BOA dials per shoe. The forefoot dial hooks into two wide bands and the upper band connects into a pyramid shape band that offers a ton of medial arch support. The straps are made of PerformFit, which is a proprietary material developed by BOA specifically for use with their dials. The forefoot has some TPU around the outer perimeter, fairly standard for a trail shoe. It's a wide half-circle - or maybe a rounded box - that offers a lot of room, especially for your pinky toes. This is not an upper that's going to become cramped if - and when, during an ultra - your foot swells. It's possible to run it quite loose on double-track, but you'll want to tighten it up for technical descending, especially if you have relatively narrow feet. I'm a B-width, and I found my foot would slide laterally if I didn't remember to tighten the dials down before descending. Even when run tight, it's still very comfortable, and the BOA dials are so fast to adjust that I think it makes sense to go a few clicks in either direction to suit the terrain. Though you'll have no problem leaving them tighter for a more technical run or leaving them looser if you find yourself mostly on fire roads.
Overall, the upper itself is purely a Speedland creation. PerformFit is both a material (or, really, materials) and approach designed to work well when replacing traditional laces with BOA dials. If you look, for example, at La Sportiva's Jackal or Altra's Mont Blanc, they are some obvious similarities to the GS:TAM's upper. But they are not the same. Each shoe has distinct features, defined both by the overall last but also things like toebox reinforcement - the GS:TAM has the common-on-trail-shoes TPU layer over the front.
The tongue-less design and elastic-knit collar do a great job of keeping out debris; you won't find yourself stopping to shake out stray pebbles or grit. And I doubt you'd need gaiters except on super gnarly runs. The roomy toe-box meant I could comfortably wear slightly thicker socks, and I mostly ran in Injinji toe socks in their standard weight, so I could take full advantage of the roomy toe-box. If you're an Altra fan, I think you'll love the Speedlands. It's a similar anatomically sensible toebox, especially for trail running. And the upper is designed around the BOA dials, both ensuring that the thinner "wires" - which appear to be a high-strength textile (Kevlar or similar?) rather than actual metal wiring - never cut into your foot. And the broad straps also ensures that you get a much more supportive fit - more similar to a full lace-up - than you'd expect from just looking at the dual-dial system.
Michelin Outsole
The trails that I run are not overly technical. Certainly not in comparison with what serious trail runners may encounter. Accordingly, I wouldn't say the outsole was of particular importance to me. I'd actually prefer something slightly less aggressive, as the GS:TAM is not great on the paved sections that connect some of the trails I run. It's fine, but it's not a shoe I'd ever choose for anything even remotely close to a paved run. Likewise, I don't think I ever really stress what an outsole needs to do - no wet roots or rocks, no loose scree. The sole has held up relatively well over 200 mi+. But I've had road shoes - including racing flats - that have performed entirely adequately in terms of traction on these same trails, so this just isn't something I expected to be remarkable. I'd have confidence in the outsole for treacherous conditions because Michelin has proven they know sports - Michelin bike tires are superb, especially when it comes to grip - and because Speedland is just so obsessive about the details. But I can't speak directly to this aspect of the shoe with any sort of experience.
Reuse And Recycle
Uniquely, the shoes are also meant to be "recyclable." Certain components - like the BOA laces and dials - are reusable and/or repairable. Other materials may be recyclable, if they are properly separated out and sent back to the correct facility. This was something that I didn't cover with them in-depth, but it's yet another area that shows Speedlands unique approach to shoes. Along with donating 10% of all sales to the charity of choice of the elite athlete for which each shoe was designed, it's reflective of a sense of purpose that extends beyond just performance. Their motto is "Run With The Land," and it's important gestures like this that reveal the depth of this commitment.
The Total Package
Each individual component is selected to be the best choice for its given role. But the GS:TAM is certainly meant to be more than just the sum of its admittedly superb components. And it is. More than anything else, it's fun. It's a shoe I want to run in. And every time I ratchet - rather than lace - them up, I head out the door with a smile on my face.
photos 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 © Speedland. photos 2, 9 © Slowtwitch.com
[edit: a previous version of this story incorrectly noted that the PSG is named for Mt. Pisgah in Tennessee, for which the Litespeed mountain bike is named, as it's an offroad haven. Turns out there's *another* Mt. Pisgah - in Oregon - which is the one for which the shoe is named.]
