The X Ultra 2s, and then the 3s, worked functionally the same with little differences in the overall design.
They reminded me of the legendary Montrail Hardrocks – A “do it all trail runner” meant for rugged terrain, takes a beating, and works for many different environments.
In the Salomon Ultra 2s and 3s, I found a shoe reminiscent of the Hardrocks that worked on talus and scree, stood up to off-trail abuse, and was comfortable enough on trail use.
Alas, all good things come to an end.
Salomon “revamped” the shoe, came out with the Ultra 4, and made a shoe more similar to a low-cut hiking boot in many ways.
In this case, Salomon decided to revamp the shoes and make something much different looking and less sleek than the trail running pedigree of the earlier shoes— like Keens and less like Salomon’s other offerings. I also liked the X Ultras as they had wider toe boxes versus the more traditional running-focused shoes.
Though, per specs, the new shoes weigh the same at 13 oz/ 368g versus the older models, I seemed skeptical of how they’d fare versus the shoes I used for many days in the backcountry.
I bought three pairs of Ultra 3s, used them up, tried various new shoes with limited success, and, reluctantly, bought a pair of (non-Goretex) Ultra 4s.
After ~300 miles of travel (local hikes and this recent one), I now have enough data to review my experiences using these shoes.
Comparing the Ultra 3s to the Ultra 4s
As mentioned, I find, despite the similar weight, that the Ultra 4s look more like hiking boots than their trail running past.
The back of the shoe, in particular, goes up higher against the back of the foot versus the past models.
The soles of the shoes have similar deeper lugs and similar stiffness that work well for off-trail endeavors.
Upon initial fit and wear, I found the shoes slightly wider, and I had to tighten them somewhat more versus the Ultra 3s.
Otherwise, they felt similar to the Ultra 3s and had similar performance. However, I did notice the back of the shoe by the Achilles heel dug in slightly.
After approx 300 miles of travel, these shoes went kaput—and not unexpected for the conditions I use for these shoes.
The shoes wore out in the place where other Utras wore out, meaning the flex of the toe box. The shoes, naturally, packed out after about 300 miles of hiking, backpacking, and packrafting.
The soles themselves still had good tread on them.
The backs of the shoes held up well, but the rubbing against the back of my foot and the wear of the back of the socks became noticeable.
In fairness, if I had swapped out the shoes earlier before they broke down as much, the back of the shoe issues may not have become as noticeable.
Overall? These Salomon X Ultra 4 low hiking shoes work well enough and have characteristics similar to their predecessors. However, they run a smidge wider, feel more like low-cut hiking boots versus previous iterations, and the fit feels a little off versus the earlier versions of these shoes. The Ultra 2s and 3s seemed similar to each other. The Ultra 4s seem almost, if not entirely, different shoes versus the Ultra X 3s and 2s.
I like these shoes, but I don’t love them. My hunt for a new favorite shoe continues.
Disclosure – I purchased these shoes with my funds.