| Miles / km's | Cushion | Bottom line |
| Discount Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
75+/120+ | High | Best for super long hours of standing, walking, hiking or trail running. | |||
75/120 | Avg-high | 2-in-1 one: Trail running and backpacking. | |||
50/80 | Avg | Safest bet. Closest you get to a typical running shoe anatomy, versatile. | |||
30/50 | Avg-low | More of a minimalist, performance shoe. | |||
10/16 | Low | Really performance oriented pick. |
|
These are only approximate values assuming typical settings. If you think you;
- Are heavier than the average person,
- Relatively less conditioned for longer runs,
- Will mostly be running on trails more rocky than average, etc...
...then always opt for the more cushioned option when in doubt.
Altra Lone Peak 4.5's in their natural habitat.
A short answer first:
The most important difference is the extra cushioning the Timp 2.0 offers over the Lone Peak 4.5's.
A summary around the cushioning:
- The Lone Peak is the closest you can get to a typical running shoe anatomy: Average cushioning, and hence also average underfoot protection and average ground feel. It's your safest bet.
- The Timp, on the other hand, is more cushioned than the Lone Peak, but not by a huge amount - so the ground feel is sacrificed just slightly in return, and the underfoot protection is ended up being a little superior.
I have posts regarding the changes going from Lone Peak 4.0 to 4.5, and the changes going from Timp 1.5 to Timp 2.0. So check them out if you're considering the previous versions.
I also contacted the Altra Customer Service about this, and shared the chat history at the bottom of this post, but the information given until that part also includes all the Rep's worth mentioning comments.
Altra Timp 1.5's.
Cushioning
Cushioning is an objective parameter, and the winner is clearly the Timp in this department.
If you were to line up all 5 Altra trail running shoes by the amount of their cushioning, Lone Peak's would be right in the middle.
And the Timp's, having a little more cushioning than the Lone Peak's, would be placed right next to the them.
So how does this cushion difference play out in practice?
If you're either:
- Quite a bit on the heavier side (say, more than 190 lbs),
- New to running/hiking,
- Running/hiking on a relatively more rough and/or rocky trails,
- Planning to run/hike mostly for long distances,
- Prioritize underfoot protection and cushion over the ground feel,
- Wishing to go easier on your joints (for any reason),
- Not really wishing much traction...
...then the extra cushion in the Timp's are highly likely to make a positive difference for you - but not by a huge amount, because the Lone Peak's are also equipped with a fair amount of cushion.
Traction
This was my main beef with the Timp 1.5's, and it certainly is improved in Timp 2.0, but Lone Peak 4.5's are still a little bit superior in this department.
The traction performance of the Lone Peaks 4.5's isn't exceptional either, (especially when you consider a trail running shoe with mad traction capabilities such as this one), it's still noticeably better than the Timp's.
Outsole base of the Timp 1.5 (at the top) could have really used a more aggressively rough surface to ensure better traction - which most users also complained about. Seems like Altra heard of this and decided to update the Timp 2.0 from DuraTrac to MaxTrac.
So called "DuraTrac" traction technology of Timp 1.5 is outdated as of 2020 - especially compared to the "MaxTrac" traction technology of most recently updated Altra trail running shoes, including the Lone Peak 4.5's.
But still, although the outsole technology of the Timp 2.0 seem to catch up with the Lone Peak 4.5, due to the stack height it's still more prone to slippage.
First cushioning, and second traction performance is really how you should base your decision primarily off when having a dilemma between Timp's and Lone Peak's.
So I'd recommend you to make your decision based on this chart:
| Miles / km's | Cushion | Bottom line |
| Discount Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
75+/120+ | High | Best for super long hours of standing, walking, hiking or trail running. | |||
75/120 | Avg-high | 2-in-1 one: Trail running and backpacking. | |||
50/80 | Avg | Safest bet. Closest you get to a typical running shoe anatomy, versatile. | |||
30/50 | Avg-low | More of a minimalist, performance shoe. | |||
10/16 | Low | Really performance oriented pick. |
|
These are only approximate values assuming typical settings. If you think you;
- Are heavier than the average person,
- Relatively less conditioned for longer runs,
- Will mostly be running on trails more rocky than average, etc...
...then always opt for the more cushioned option when in doubt.
Now let's talk about some other relatively minor things to consider.
Underfoot protection & durability
Due to the extra cushion, all the Timp revisions will offer greater underfoot protection than all the Lone Peak revisions.
Fit
The Lone Peak 4.5's fit slightly narrower compared to the Timp 2.0's in the upper. Width of the soles are the same (as it's with all the Altra shoes).
As far as the size are concerned, though, they both size up as expected.
Conclusion
If you're either:
- Quite a bit on the heavier side (say, more than 190 lbs),
- New to running/hiking,
- Running/hiking on a relatively more rough and/or rocky trails,
- Planning to run/hike mostly for long distances,
- Prioritize underfoot protection and cushion over the ground feel,
- Wishing to go easier on your joints (for any reason),
- Not really wishing much traction...
...then Timp 2.0's can be a really good choice. If your situation doesn't tick these boxes much, than Lone Peak 4.5's can be a great choice.
Also, here are two good video reviews:
For Lone Peak 4.5:
For Timp 2.0:
I hope this post was helpful for you to learn more about the trail running shoes in your mind.
Feel free to ask me any questions or provide feedback and I'll be happy to respond in the comment section below.
Thank you for reading!
