1 lb. 10 oz. (men’s size 9)
Yes (non-GTX available)
Great mix of lightness, durability, and on-trail performance.
Gore-Tex model runs warm.
Rating: (4.8/5)
check price on amazon
Salomon’s X Ultra line of hiking footwear is one of our long-time favorites for all types of uses from day hikes to lightweight backpacking trips. We tested the low-top shoe version through everything from early winter conditions in the Pacific Northwest to summer in Patagonia and feel that Salomon hit the mark: The shoe is light, nimble, grips well on just about any surface, and will hold up through extended rough use. Below we break down the X Ultra 3’s overall performance. To see how it stacks up to the competition, see our article on the best hiking shoes.
Performance
Comfort
The first thing I noticed when I put my feet onto the Salomon X Ultra 3 Low GTX was that it felt like a comfortable hiking shoe. It’s extremely lightweight and flexible, yet it also has good padding on the tongue and collar and the sculpted insidesole offers sufficient cushion and support to be “just right” right from the box. The shoe is a bit thinner than a typical hiker such as those of the Merrell Moab 2 or KEEN Targhee III however, I’ve never had a need for greater isolation from the ground, even on difficult terrain or when carrying a 38-liter backpack. In the end the X Ultra delivers what I would like for day hikes and light backpacking The feeling like a trail runner, but with the added protection and comfort you can get from an X Ultra that is specifically designed for hiking.
Weight
Its inspired design of a running shoe is one of the most agressive hiking boots on the market. The scales support the feeling: my men’s size 9 Gore-Tex model weighs at 1 pound, 10 ounces (it’s described as 1 lb. 10.8 oz.). In terms of perspective, it’s less than a water-proof trail runner, like La Sportiva’s La Sportiva Akyra GTX (1 1 kg. 11.4 oz. ) and is priced lower than many of the hiking footwear market. The most popular designs include those of the Merrell Moab2 WP (2 2 lbs. 1 oz. ), KEEN Targhee III Low WP (1 1 lb. 14.8 oz. ) and 14.8 oz. ), and North Face Ultra 111 WP (1 1 lb. 14.2 oz.) They all weigh more and are clunky by the comparison. It is possible to save money by going on the Salomon OUTline GTX (1 1 lb. 8.6 oz. ) However, we discovered the shoe to be a bit flimsy in regards to comfort and durability in rough terrain. In all we have no issues with its weight.
Traction
The X Ultra 3 is based on the predecessor X Ultra 2, Salomon modified the outsoles of the X Ultra 3 to improve traction downhill. It’s evident primarily on the heel, which swaps solid rubber for a number of cutouts that resemble gills. They grab the ground. We’re not sure if the previous X Ultra 2 was ever not grip-wise however, we’ve enjoyed the more modern model’s contagrip soles. They’ve been able to withstand soft dirt, hardpack, and have a fair amount of snow. The most important thing is that it hasn’t degraded or chipped away after trekking on granite.
Stability and Support
The X Ultra 3 won’t supplant a technical off-trail hiking or mountaineering boot in your gear closet, but it offers enough support for just about any day hiking or lightweight backpacking adventure. The shoe is pretty flexible underfoot, but the low-profile midsole and stable platform (Salomon refers to this as their “Advanced Chassis”) offer enough peace of mind for rocky trails. We’ve had our various X Ultras loaded down with 35 pounds of backpacking gear and have never had issues with rolled ankles. If, however, you prefer a stiffer boot for extended climbs or for carrying a heavy pack, we recommend upgrading to Salomon’s Quest 4.
Waterproofing
My X Ultra 3 GTX arrived in early winter, and I’ve had ample opportunities since to test its waterproofing abilities. From strapping it to snowshoes and microspikes to shallow creek crossings, the Gore-Tex lining has held up without a hiccup. One downside of a low-top waterproof shoe in general is that you’ll need to be mindful when stepping into puddles or moving water—if it seeps over the sides, the shoe won’t dry quickly. We’ve tested both the non-waterproof and waterproof versions of the X Ultra, and while we benefitted from the waterproofing feature on a number of occasions, we’d lean towards the $30-cheaper non-waterproof X Ultra 3 Aero for most summer adventuring.
Breathability
One of the primary reasons we like the non-Gore-Tex Aero model of the Ultra 3 Ultra 3 shoe is breathability. The issue wasn’t apparent while wearing them in the frigid temperatures. In fact, the waterproofing gave a great degree to protect and provide insulation from snow. However, a stretch of warm weather during my hike outside from El Chalten, Patagonia, made my feet uncomfortable and hot at the close of the day. It was certainly bearable, and my shoes were more breathable than other membranes with less waterproofing I’ve previously used however my feet that sweat need more ventilation when the temperature rises.
Build Quality and Durability
Along with trail comfort and support, durability is another area where the X Ultra outperforms a standard trail running shoe. Our previous versions of the shoe have had excellent lifespans, and with well over a year of consistent use with the “3,” I’m confident in saying the current model is just as good. The reinforced synthetic upper material protects the mesh from tears, the substantial toe cap has a few scrapes but is in excellent shape overall, and the tread is only just starting to show early signs of wearing down.
Salomon’s Quicklaces
The low-top version of the Salomon X Ultra 3 includes Salomon’s signature Quicklace system. If you haven’t used it before, it’s easy to learn: Grab the rubberized end and push the plastic tab towards your foot to tighten, and reverse the process to loosen (it’s also simple to loosen with one hand by pulling up on the tab). The laces snug evenly around the foot with a single motion, so it’s much faster to use than a traditional setup. Moreover, the uppermost eyelet sits high on the shoe and provides an excellent seal around the top of the foot to keep out dirt and debris.
We’ve worn many shoes that have a speed lace system from companies like Salomon as well as Adidas and have not had any issues with laces breaking or discomfort due to the current models. However, it’s a controversial concept. I was having to tighten my X Ultras several times throughout a full day of walking. This was due to the laces becoming looser. Those who require a more precise fit might not be a fan of the concept of a single pull. It’s certainly convenient present, but I’m not convinced that it will add a lot of value for backpackers and hikers.
Fit and Sizing
I ordered my normal men’s size 9 in the X Ultra 3, and found it provided a snug and comfortable fit. The sculpted heel locks you nicely in place on extended climbs (I haven’t had any issues with hotspots), and the length was great for not jamming toes on long descents. Where the fit may not work for some people is in the toe box, which runs fairly narrow in the standard “D” width. It ended up not being an issue for me even over long trail days and with a heavy pack, but those with moderately wide feet may have trouble. This is a common issue with a lot of Salomon footwear, but the good news is that the low-top and boot versions of the X Ultra 3 are offered in wide sizes.
Other versions of Salomon X Ultra 3 Low
We’ve reviewed the men’s version of the X Ultra 3 GTX Low in this review, however, the range comes in several variations. In the low-top variants are the water-resistant version called X Ultra 3 Aero which eliminates the Gore-Tex membrane, and switches the upper layer for an open mesh style. This results in significantly improved airflow and a savings of 1 ounce for each pair (listed at 1 one pound 9.8 grams). Furthermore, both GTX Aero and GTX Aero models come with female-specific fittings and exclusive designs.
X Ultra 3 Hiking Shoe vs. X Ultra 3 Mid Hiking Boot
As touched on above, Salomon makes an over-the-ankle boot variation of the X Ultra 3 that I’ve been testing as well. In most ways, it’s simply a taller version of the low-top shoe, sharing the traction system, the light-but-tough upper material, and athletic feel. Changes include the extra support and protection that comes with the extended, padded collar, and Salomon has also swapped the Quicklace closure for traditional laces with the boot model. The total change in weight for my men’s size 9s came to 7.4 ounces more for the pair. Those carrying a heavy load or hiking in areas where the extra ankle protection is needed will likely prefer the Mid (for more, see our in-depth X Ultra 3 Mid review), while the low-top is hard to beat for moving fast on the trail with its superlight feel. In the end, we think both are excellent options.
Salomon X Ultra 4
In spring 2021, Salomon released a follow-up to the X Ultra 3 in their X Ultra 4. In testing the low-top version of the shoe, we came away similarly impressed by the 4’s balance of weight, comfort, and on-trail performance. Stacked up against the 3 tested here, the latest version has a modernized look, boasts a slightly higher-volume fit in the toe box, has a bit more of a planted feel (overall stability is pretty similar), and features a winged lace design that offers a great, snug fit (for more, see our X Ultra 4 shoe review). Like the 3, the X Ultra 4 is also available in waterproof and non-waterproof boot and shoe variations.
What We Like
- Both the shoe and boot X Ultra 3s are at the top of their respective classes in lightweight performance.
- Aggressive and nimble, but without compromising trail comfort, traction, and durability.
- Planted feel and solid toe, heel, and underfoot protection for rocky and rough hikes.
- Wide sizes available in the GTX model for both men and women.
What We Don’t
- Gore-Tex version runs pretty warm. Those in dry climates or that don’t mind the occasional wet sock should opt for the non-waterproof model.
- The Quicklace system isn’t loved by everyone, and I found myself occasionally tightening and adjusting it.
- If you’re hauling a heavy pack or traveling over technical terrain, you’ll likely want a more substantial and protective boot.
Comparison Table
| SHOE | PRICE | TYPE | WEIGHT | WATERPROOF | UPPER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salomon X Ultra 3 GTX | $150 | Hiking shoe | 1 lb. 10.8 oz. | Yes (Gore-Tex) | Synthetic |
| Merrell Moab 2 WP | $135 | Hiking shoe | 2 lb. 1 oz. | Yes (M-Select) | Leather / mesh |
| Salomon OUTline GTX | $130 | Hiking shoe | 1 lb. 8.6 oz. | Yes (Gore-Tex) | Synthetic |
| Salomon X Raise GTX | $130 | Hiking shoe | 1 lb. 7.6 oz. | Yes (Gore-Tex) | Synthetic |
| The North Face Ultra 111 WP | $129 | Hiking shoe/trail runner | 1 lb. 14.2 oz. | Yes (Gore-Tex) | Mesh |
| La Sportiva TX4 | $140 | Approach shoe | 1 lb. 10 oz. | No | Leather |
The Competition
There are a lot of hiking, trail running, and approach shoes that aim to duplicate what Salomon has pulled off with its X Ultra line. But for us, the low-top stands out as the best all-around hiking shoe on the market. Among alternatives, Merrell’s Moab 2 is one design that we see again and again on the trail. In testing the Moab, we were impressed with its high level of comfort, reasonable weight, and stable platform. It also has a more accommodating toe box for those that find the X Ultra 3 to be too narrow (and don’t need to step up to a true wide width). We have no hesitation in recommending the Merrell for average day hikes and backpacking trips, but it feels slow and clunky by comparison. The Moab just can’t touch the X Ultra’s mix of athleticism, traction, and weight.
From within Salomon’s own hiking collection, two interesting lightweight models to consider are the OUTline and X Raise. Starting with the OUTline Shoe, the GTX version is about 2 ounces lighter all-in, uses a traditional lacing system, and has a more flexible and airy construction. It also has a cleaner look that translates better to wearing around town. But we found it to be noticeably less comfortable on the trail—both our testers had quite a bit of foot soreness after an extended day hike—and showed signs of breaking down very early on into the test. From our experience, it’s not a close call and the X Ultra easily wins out.
The Salomon X Raise, on the other hand, really impressed us. The shoe has a cushioned, springy feel and is super light at 1 pound 7.6 ounces. It’s more flexible than the X Ultra and doesn’t have as good of traction in the wet, so it’s not as well suited for rough trails. But we love the fast and fun ride that in many ways resembles a trail runner. A decision between the two may come down to fit. Those that prefer a snug shape will like the X Ultra, while hikers looking for a wide toe box should opt for the X Raise.
Another popular hiking shoe is The North Face Ultra 111 WP. Interestingly, it’s advertised as a trail running shoe, but we’ve found the Ultra line performs like a premium hiking shoe in just about every way: The upper materials are tough and durable, it has a burly toe cap for protection, and the semi-stiff platform is comfortable when hauling a full backpacking pack. If you prefer stability over weight, The North Face shoe could be your ideal option. But the Salomon X Ultra 3 undercuts it by about 4 ounces for the pair, feels much nimbler, and doesn’t compromise in toughness.
There are a growing number of quality approach shoes hitting the market, and we’ve been particularly impressed with La Sportiva’s TX4. Despite being designed for climbers, the TX4 shares a number of traits with the Salomon X Ultra 3: It’s lightweight and comfortable, grips well over rocky terrain in both wet and dry conditions, and the full rubber rand offers excellent foot protection. We do have a couple complaints: Grip comes up short in mud and dirt, plus the La Sportiva’s stiffer build feels a bit clunkier than the Salomon. In the end, if you’re spending more time on the trail rather than scrambling on rock, the X Ultra 3 gets the nod from us.
