You may be primarily a hill or trail runner, but even those of us lucky to live somewhere rural and hilly can end up covering a lot of distance on tarmac and hard-packed tracks as well as the more technical, varied ground of off-road proper. No one shoe does it all equally well, but Scarpa's Golden Gate 2 ATR gives it a good shot. Designed to take you 'from your door to the trails', this is a shoe that's comfortable and forgiving on tarmac while still being capable - within reason - when the road runs out. If you typically run on a variety of terrain, not just the open hills, then there's a lot going for it.

We reviewed the original in 2022. After initial misgivings about how the built-up sole would fare on more fiddly ground, and how I might get on with the fairly minimal drop, I soon found myself won over by the comfort and do-it-all feel, and I've continued to use them ever since. 

Two years on, the Golden Gate ATR (all terrain running) has had a revamp. I've been using this new shoe for several months, from summer through autumn, so it's seen a decent mileage. Do I like them as much as the original? In a word, yes.  

So what's changed?

Cosmetic tweaks have altered the look to a degree, and it has gone up in price by £15 - though that's to be expected these days. More importantly, the sock-like opening of the original has been beefed up to a more conventional padded ankle cuff, while the tongue is also a bit tougher across the top of the foot. This gives the upper a more structured feel. The upper mesh is now more resilient, Scarpa tell us, and this may increase the shoe's longevity if you're using it off road more than on (my version 1.0 is still going strong). You also get a bouncier midsole, Scarpa say.

In use

As with the first version, they have proved ideal for the gravel forest tracks and stony/muddy footpaths that I run on from the doorstep where we live on the edge of the highlands, and they'd be equally at home on pavements, parks and river towpaths for those based somewhere more urban. If your day-to-day running takes you a bit on the road and a bit off, then give them a whirl. But the crossover from tarmac to trail only goes so far; I wouldn't pick them for a proper hill day, or anywhere particularly rough and wet. 

Perhaps you're not a runner? I'd say this shoe still has a use: For long distance trails on predominantly harder surfaces - the West Highland Way or some coastal paths, for instance - its cushioned sole might be ideal.

Fit

Both men's and women's/lower volume versions are available. Like its predecessor, this is a medium-to-wide-fitting shoe, and one with plenty of volume. Its spacious and rounded front end suits my broad-toed foot shape well. However, a word of caution: do try them on if you possibly can, even if you found the original spot on. The new version is significantly larger in all dimensions, at least in my 47s. I like the increased width, but the length and more especially depth/volume are borderline too much for me, and I might have got on better downsizing slightly from my standard fitting - it only comes in full sizes unfortunately. The extra volume might be soaked up by adding a second insole (I've not had much luck with this), or wearing a thicker sock (with winter coming, I'll be doing that soon). 

Like before, the stretchy sock-fit tongue wraps closely around the top of the foot, though it's slightly more protective than previously. If anything I prefer the padded heel of this second generation shoe, and overall I find the Golden Gate 2 ATR as comfy and forgiving on the foot as the original. With no heel rubbing, toe cramping, or pressure from the laces, it's easy to get on with.

Upper

Again it's a thin and highly breathable mesh. This is great in hot weather, when the Golden Gate 2 ATR is one of the coolest shoes I've used. Your socks get instantly soaked in rainy weather or wet grass of course, but the upper is superbly fast-drying since there's really not much of it.

Sole

The deep sole of the original carries through to version two. On less even terrain the obvious disadvantage of this height is the lack of sensitivity to the ground underfoot - and for this reason I wouldn't pick this shoe for a route with more technical terrain. As with the original the upside is that there's tons of cushioning to soak up the impact when you're running on tarmac or hard-packed gravel tracks, and a nice bounce that feels like it helps propel you along a bit. 

Like before, the drop - the difference in sole thickness from heel to toe - is just 4mm, which is as little as I would personally want, especially paired with the overall depth of sole. If you're not used to it, the built-up but flat-footed feel might at first seem odd, perhaps especially if you're more of a heel striker. You can't just change your biomechanics on a whim, so do go easy if this is a departure from your usual footwear. As a heel striker myself it took a while to get used to running in the first version of this shoe. I often found myself consciously trying to land more towards the front of the foot, which was strange. Even now after really quite a lot of use this still feels to me like a shoe better suited to shorter runs from home, up to an hour or so perhaps, not something I'd use on a longer day. Scarpa do say they're for medium to long distances, and no doubt there'll be people for whom that works well thanks to the bouncy and shock-absorbing mega-sole. 

Underfoot, the outsole looks much as before. You don't get loads of bite for really soft ground, but the medium-depth lugs do suit the road-to-trail remit of these shoes, offering decent traction on a range of terrain (to a point). 

Summary

The Golden Gate 2 ATR follows closely in the footsteps of its predecessor, and the modest changes feel like improvements. We may never see a single shoe that's equally capable on tarmac and gnarly hill runs, but as a very useful crossover that can confidently take you from road to trail, with enough grip, cushioning and responsiveness for a wide variety of terrain - if not the most technical ground - this shoe is a real winner. Despite early misgivings about the maximalist sole depth and minimal drop I soon grew to like the original version, so I'm pleased that take two offers more of the same. But do watch that sizing; my '47s' are by some margin the biggest shoes I've ever managed to run in!