Preview: Altra Lone Peak 3.5, Timp & King Mountain

Altra's complete trail shoe line-up. From most cushioned (left) to least (right): Olympus, Timp, Lone Peak, Superior, and King Mountain.

Altra’s complete trail shoe line-up. From most cushioned (left) to least (right): Olympus, Timp, Lone Peak, Superior, and King Mountain.

On display at the Altra booth was the next iteration of its best-selling trail shoe, the Lone Peak 3.5, plus two new trail shoes, the Timp and King Mountain.

Preview: Altra Lone Peak 3.5

Expect minor changes from the current Lone Peak 3.0 (my review). The 3.5 will retain the same voluminous last and fit, well cushioned 25 mm stack height, and moderately aggressive MaxTrack outsole.

The mesh fabric in the upper has been changed. Its pores are smaller and it is no longer patterned, but I would not expect a noticeable change in airflow or breathability. The reinforcing exoskeleton of the upper also has been tweaked. It now runs across the toe break. I did not ask for an explanation of either change.

The Lone Peak 3.5 has subtle differences with the current 3.0. Mostly some minor tweaks in the upper.

The Lone Peak 3.5 has subtle differences with the current 3.0. Mostly some minor tweaks in the upper.

Preview: Altra Timp

The Altra Timp is a new addition to the trail shoe line. It has a 28 mm stack height, which puts it between the Lone Peak 3.0/3.5 and Olympus 2.5, which are 25 mm and 36 mm, respectively.

The Timp’s upper is based on the Torin 3.0, which is Altra’s original and most popular road shoe.

The new Altra Timp

The new Altra Timp

Preview: Altra King Mountain

The other new addition is the King Mountain. It is most similar to the Superior 3.0, sharing the same last and a comparable outsole; but it has less cushioning.

Its most distinct feature is the Velcro strap that runs over the laces, designed to lock the foot in place on steep descents, when otherwise the toes can start banging into the front of the shoe. Perhaps we will see this feature added to the Lone Peak 4.0, too, since this has been a complaint of mine with both the 2.5 and 3.0/3.5 versions.

The new King Mountain

The new King Mountain

Posted in , on January 11, 2017
Tags: ,


  1. Susan S on January 11, 2017 at 10:47 pm

    Hey, I’ve climbed all those peaks in the last year but in none of those shoes. Might try out the Superior.

  2. Sniff on January 16, 2017 at 3:24 pm

    Is the traction on the Timp similar to the Lone Peak?

    • Andrew Skurka on January 17, 2017 at 8:33 am

      I’m thinking so, but I don’t recall exactly. If it’s really important to you I can ask their PR person.

  3. Darius Brown on February 11, 2017 at 9:48 pm

    The Escalante is an amazing ride it’s so soft and responsive they really hit the spot on this one. The knit upper is one piece and also comfy. Definitely what I’ll be wearing on my next half

  4. jacob varekamp on March 19, 2017 at 6:02 am

    Any chance they improved the toe box height of the Altra Lone Peak 3.5?

    • Andrew Skurka on March 19, 2017 at 12:02 pm

      Only change is the fabric sub.

      The “low” toebox did not end up being a problem for me, but i was concerned about it at first. After a wear or two my foot had settled into the shoe or the upper had stretched some, and the fit felt right.

      • jacob varekamp on March 19, 2017 at 12:10 pm

        Thanks, the only Altra’s I’ve been able to find that fit comfortably are the Instinct 4’s. All other models I’ve tried haven’t been able to accommodate my awkwardly, upward pointing big toes…

  5. Rich Hollander on April 10, 2017 at 11:08 am

    I understand the Lone Peak 3.5 won’t be available until June/July. I’ve tried the 3.0 and liked it. I’m ready to purchase a new pair now. Are the upgrade worth waiting for the 3.5 or should I purchase the 3.0? Thank you.

    • Andrew Skurka on April 10, 2017 at 11:57 am

      The differences between the 3.0 and the 3.5 are very minor, basically just cosmetic. If you want to buy now, go with the 3.0.

  6. hpinson on April 23, 2017 at 3:02 pm

    I’m looking forward to the 3.5’s. It’s April, and sadly my 2.5’s just failed! Will have to wait.

    The biggest improvement I see will be the move to a fabric with smaller pores. The 2.5’s just sucked sand in through the mesh uppers, and that was the one issue I had with an otherwise wonderful breathable comfortable trail shoe.

    • Andrew Skurka on April 23, 2017 at 3:31 pm

      The 3.5’s will suck in sand just as much. It’s still a fairly porous fabric, and will not filter out Utah-style desert sand.

  7. Jim Sweeney on May 23, 2017 at 12:56 pm

    The Velcro band on the King Mtn. seems like a really good idea. I’ve been using Superior 2.0’s, and never quite get the right balance between having the laces tight enough to prevent my feet sliding forward on descents, jamming toes, and being comfortable the rest of the time.

  8. Alecia on June 22, 2017 at 8:56 am

    I am curious, is the toe box on the Timp the same as the toe box on the Lone Peaks? I love the Lone Peaks and tried to switch to Superiors and the toe box killed my toes. I would like to give the Timps a whirl, but the toe box would be the decision maker. Any help you could give would be great, thanks!

    • Andrew Skurka on June 23, 2017 at 10:14 am


  9. Maury Hall on August 23, 2017 at 8:51 am

    I just finished the AT from Vermont to Mt. Katahdin in Maine in my Lone Peak 3.5’s. I really appreciated the stiff rock plate, and they are the grippiest shoes on rock I’ve ever worn.

    I did notice the toe banging on steep downhills, so I will look forward to the forefoot strap.

  10. Stephen Selting on September 19, 2017 at 12:45 pm

    For OCR racing.. Timps or 3.5.

    Mud rock climbing descent obstacles etc..

  11. Everitt on March 10, 2018 at 1:29 pm

    I have crazy wide feet, I often buy 4E’s and then stretch them wider. I wore my lone peaks out of REI and then hiked 18 miles in them. Only shoe I never had trouble with. Can’t figure out how they fit anyone with normal feet if they fit me but it’s such a joy not having the ball of my fat foot hanging out past the sole of the shoe.
    I find the grip good or good enough on lake ice in cold temps, as well as mud, tree roots, wet leaves, and better than snow boots for shoveling the ice dam off my steep roof.
    I have since realized that shoes that don’t really fit have significantly compromised traction, kind of a shoe/foot system that’s only as good as the fit allows.
    It’s now my go to shoe for snowshoeing because my feet never get cold.
    Not counting the snowshoeing I’m coming up on 300 miles and they’re still in great shape. I’ve had a few trail runners that just blew up with out warning so I hate to predict total longevity.
    I’ve actually come to kind of hate the pillowy softness but I get absolutely zero foot pain in these shoes. On the down side all that squish under my heel annoys my broken and reconstructed left ankle after more than 12 miles of North Jersey ankle twister terrain.
    My takeaway is the odd thought that just as every hiker looks for the ‘perfect shoe’ every shoe is on a quest for the ‘perfect foot’
    May others find they’re golden shoe!

  12. Mark Roberts on June 17, 2018 at 11:53 am

    I have had several Altra Lone Peak versions, and while they are cushy comfortable, they completely lack torsional twisting stability like you would need on steeply angular slopes. If you are hiking on a very side sloping trail or off trail it has a real tendency to want to roll. This has lead to bruising of toes for me when it twists and rolls.

Leave a Comment