Merrell Alverstone 2 review

We recommend the Merrel Alverstone 2 as a great choice for: 

• Hikers looking for a stable and grippy shoe that can tackle difficult, rocky terrains
• Cold-weather adventures looking for a warm hiking shoe that performs consistently no matter how frosty it gets
• Those with broad feet looking for a roomy toebox that provides a comfy and secure fit

Our smoke test reveals the Alverstone 2 to be quite a stuffy shoe that turns into a sweatbox on hot summer hikes. For those in warmer climates in need of a more breathable shoe, we recommend checking out the KEEN NXIS Speed. 

While it is water resistant, the Alverstone 2 isn't meant to be dunked or submerged in water. For a waterproof alternative that can take the occasional shallow riverbed crossing without soaking our feet, we suggest checking out the Gore-Tex lined Merrel Moab 3 GTX instead. 

The Alverstone 2's midsole is quite firm, making it a good and stable option for traversing tricky, uneven terrains. However, for hikers who prioritize comfort and want a pillowy shoe that feels like gliding over the trails, we recommend the Hoka Skyline-Float X as a comfier alternative. 

Hikers with narrow feet may find the Alverstone 2's toebox to be a little too spacious and feel themselves shifting within the shoe, especially during tricky descents. For a more snug option, we recommend looking into the Merrel Moab 3 instead. 

We put the Alverstone 2 through our state-of-the-art smoke test to see how breathable it is. Despite featuring so much mesh in its upper construction, the shoe turns out to be very well-insulated, with only little wisps of smoke managing to escape around the tongue. This leads us to give it the lowest breathability score of 1 out of 5. As such, the Alverstone 2 will feel far too warm come the summer months and is much better suited to colder hikes. 

The KEEN NXIS Speed, on the other hand, is a much breezier alternative that keeps our feet fresh on hot summer hikes.

This is further confirmed when inspecting a cross-section of the shoe over a backlight. While the mesh seems rather porous and airy, the light isn't able to shine through any part of the shoe. 

The culprit of this substandard airflow, apart from the heavy use of suede in the upper, is the solid internal lining material that prevents the perforations from going all the way through the shoe. While this is meant to help with the shoe's water resistance in the event of rain or a light splashing, it also means that the shoe won't drain and will take some time to dry if soaked. 

Even when looking at the upper under our microscope, we could be led to believe by the many little gaps that the Alverstone 2 is a breathable shoe. However, the proof is in the pudding whenever we take them out on a warm day and the shoe becomes a sweat bucket by the time we're back. 

For what it lacks in breathability, the Alverstone 2's toebox more than makes up for with strength. We fired up our Dremel to 5K RPM and set it against the suede portion beyond the protective toe bumper with 3.2N of force. 

After twelve seconds, we were impressed, though not entirely surprised, to find that our tool had merely grazed the suede and only left a minor scuff in its wake. This earns the Alverstone 2 a perfect 5 out of 5 for toebox durability, 

Next, we turn our attention to another part of the shoe highly susceptible to wear and tear, the heel collar. 

After a quick four-second bout with our Dremel, the Alverstone 2 was left with a rather large hole in its lining and had some of its padding compromised. This leads us to give it a below-average heel padding durability score of 2 out of 5. While this means we don't recommend going sockless while hiking in this shoe, it shouldn't be an issue when it comes to normal use. 

Pressing our durometer against the outsole rubber yields a harder-than-average reading of 91.6 HC. As this is the first part of the shoe to make contact with the ground, it initially makes our landings feel rather firm before the midsole cushioning kicks in. This not only feels protective when we're traversing harder terrains but also bites into softer surfaces quite nicely. 

This time spinning at 10K RPM, we pressed our Dremel against the Alverstone 2's outsole for twenty-two seconds of grinding. 

While our findings in the lab generally show that a harder outsole is more durable, the Alverstone 2 reminds us that there are exceptions to any rule. With 1.1 mm of rubber lost according to our tire tread gauge, the Alverstone 2's outsole performs about the same as the average hiking shoe. This isn't bad per se as the shoe should still last the expected 800 miles before any major deterioration.

There's quite a healthy amount of protective rubber underfoot, with the outsole measuring 3.8 mm thick. This is thicker than average and, including the lugs below, gives us a good amount of material to wear through before the shoe is out of commission. 

At 13.4 oz (380g) according to our scale, the Alverstone 2 is about as heavy as the average hiking shoe. 

Using our caliper, we measured the Alverstone 2's stack to be 30.6 mm thick at the heel. This is about as high as our current lab average and gives us a good amount of foam and rubber underfoot to effectively dampen our landings. 

The heel stack also features a little pocket of softer foam right under our heel. This further adds to our sense of perceived cushioning as our foot sinks into the midsole more in that part of the shoe. 

At only 16.6 mm thick according to our caliper measurements, the Alverstone 2's stack is lower than average at the forefoot. While this part of the shoe doesn't feel nearly as cushioned, it does feel quite grounded and stable.  

The difference in our stack measurements leaves us with a rather steep offset of 14 mm which means that our heel is quite elevated in comparison to our forefoot. In practical terms, this presents us with a good mix of well-dampened rearfoot landings and intuitive toe-offs while testing this shoe. 

The Alverstone 2's midsole foam is significantly firmer than average, giving us a durometer reading of 35.4 HA. 

As such, the midsole isn't just protective but quite stable too as it doesn't feel too squishy underfoot. This means that we were able to confidently traverse rocky and uneven terrains while testing this shoe, even when laden with a heavy pack. 

We placed the Alverstone 2 in our freezer for twenty minutes to see how cold conditions affect the midsole. After twenty minutes, we pressed our durometer against the foam once more and found that it only became 8.8% firmer. This is a much more consistent performance than the average hiking shoe and means that the Alverstone 2 won't feel too different underfoot no matter how frosty it gets. 

That little piece of foam under the heel we mentioned earlier is a little softer than the main slab, giving us a durometer reading of 27.3 HA. Its placement right under our heel means that our foot really sinks into the midsole in that part of the shoe as it compresses under our weight. 

At 3.7 mm thick according to our caliper measurements, the Alverstone 2's insole isn't nearly as thick as our current lab average. This offers us a somewhat soft footbed within the shoe that, like the midsole, doesn't feel overly cushy. 

With its firm midsole on a well-grounded stack, the Alverstone 2 feels rather stable underfoot. This stable feeling is further bolstered by the shank that's embedded within the foam right under the arch. This not only provides us with strong arch support during our test hikes but helps distribute our weight throughout our stride.

The dense midsole and the aforementioned shank lend the shoe a level of torsional rigidity that we scored 3 out of 5 on our subjective scale. This middle-of-the-road score implies a good balance of comfort and stability as the shoe doesn't resist the natural movements of our foot too much while still leaving us with a relatively level landing platform. 

The heel counter is also moderately stiff, earning another 3 out of 5 in our manual assessment. This means that the shoe feels well-structured and supportive at the rearfoot without being too constrictive on our tendons.  

We measured the midsole to be 109.3 mm wide at the forefoot which is on par with our current lab average. This is more than enough of a platform for us to push-off of with confidence without feeling too chunky or blocky on technical trails. 

Back at the heel, the midsole is significantly narrower than our current lab average at only 81.1 mm thick according to our caliper. This is good for rocky trails as it means that we're able to fit our foot into tighter spaces without it getting caught or snagged as we pull away. However, for hikers more accustomed to having a broader landing surface we recommend checking out the Adidas Terrex AX4 instead. 

Despite the shank we mentioned in the previous section, the Alverstone 2 is significantly more flexible than the average hiking shoe. We found that only 20.8N of force is needed to bend the shoe to 90 degrees after securing it to our workbench. This factors into the shoe's rather comfy and natural feeling ride as it doesn't put up much resistance to the flexion of our foot.

We also repeated the stiffness test after leaving the Alverstone 2 in our freezer for twenty minutes. As with the midsole, we're impressed with how consistently it performs; becoming only 6.5% stiffer when exposed to the cold. As such, the shoe should feel just as flexible and easy on the foot all year round. When combined with the similarly consistent midsole and the toasty upper, the Alverstone 2 makes a great option for hikers in colder climates who need a warm and reliable shoe. 

Using our caliper, we measured the lugs to be 4 mm thick which is right on par with our current lab average. 

These are extremely grippy, with their flat and rounded profile making them ideal for traversing rocks and smoother surfaces during our test hikes. Even damp conditions after a smattering of rain didn't shake our confidence and surefootedness while hiking along the trails in this shoe. 

The Alverstone 2's toebox is significantly roomier than average, measuring 106.3 mm wide at its widest point. This means that the shoe will comfortably accommodate even those with very broad feet. On the other hand, hikers with narrow feet may find this a little too spacious, especially during descents, and will be better suited with the more locked-in fit of the Merrel Moab 3 instead. 

The toebox tapers to 82.5 mm wide at the big toe. This is within range of our current lab average and gives us a more locked-in feeling in that part of the shoe while still leaving us with enough room to splay out comfortably. 

The Alverstone 2's tongue is fully gusseted on both sides which not only keeps it secure in place but also prevents any bits of grit or debris from entering the shoe. 

The tongue is 9 mm thick according to our caliper measurements. This is about as thick as average for a hiking shoe which leaves us with a nice and comfortable buffer between our instep and the laces. 

There's a little finger loop at the heel of the Alverstone 2 that makes sliding the shoe on a little quicker and smoother. 

The Alverstone 2's insole isn't glued in so it can easily be replaced with an aftermarket alternative or a custom orthotic if needed. 

The Alverstone 2 doesn't feature any reflective elements whatsoever, so we don't recommend hiking along dimly lit roads at night without any additional high-vis gear.