I am 5'6" 145 lbs (168cm 65Kg). I wear a 16x34 shirt and have a 38" chest and 30.5" waist. I took this jacket cross country skiing in the Dolomites (Val Gardena, Italy) last week. Underneath, I wore the lightest weight Smartwool longsleeve undershirt, then a medium weight Smartwool zipneck, then a Backcountry Shift softshell zipneck under the Bombshell. It was minus 10C (14F) in the Vallunga valley when I started, and nearly -20C (-4F) when I reached the base of the mountains at the end of the valley, 5Km away from the XC start. I was a little warm, but I then dropped my skis and trekked up a footpath and then up a Backcountry ski path to a saddle on the upper right section of mountains. Weather was good, but windy. Nothing got through the jacket except my own steam. The arms were good and long for reaching while XC skiing and stretching to grab the next rock when ascending trail on foot. The roomier chest was great for mobility with poles. The material did NOT bunch in the armpits while wearing a backpack. On the way back down, I opened the pitzips and vented. I hopped back on the XC skis and was nice and cool the ride home. This jacket met my expectations, and I am an old man who believes that any piece of clothing over $100 better be dang good. It is.

If you are racing a trail marathon or longer, you may need the bladder refilled. Fuggedaboudit. You will lose precious time trying to get that thing opened up and refilled - or you may rip the bladder apart if you try to open it too fast. This is another GREAT idea that just suffers from poor execution. The pack is EXTREMELY comfy (I ran with a Camelbak Flashflo and always got sores on the small of my back, not with this pack). However, like the Salomon Packvest - the idea needs some more fine tuning before it will work in a racing situation. Bottles are still the easiest items to carry/open/refill. But Mountainsmith doesn't make a bottle-holder version with the same suspension system. But, hey, for the SAC price I paid, I will just take this on hikes, but not to the races (unless someone can suggest how to handle this issue). Also - when I lash the drinking tube down using the built-in holders, my left hand keeps whacking into the drinking valve, because the valve is very long and protrudes a long way from the end of the tube. That can get annoying, unless your shoulders are VERY broad compared to your waist, and you run with your arms at shoulders' width (which I have a typical athletic physique - shoulders far broader than waist - but run with my hands close to my waist). We'll see if I can modify this thing so I can race with it. I would love to try.

It's still true that I wish Montrail had not changed the design of the Hardrock, except for the "grab loop" on the back of the shoe. The front lacing loop (like an eyelet, but not a hole) is positioned EXACTLY where you'd fasten a gaiter. So, when you attach a gaiter, you end up pulling on one side of the shoe. A few days before my 100K trail race (Lookout Mountain 100K), I jammed the shoes under a bookcase that stands on legs that are about 8 inches tall. So, the shoes were squashed into a flexed position for a few nights (I wore the shoes all day). On race day, I was determined to give the shoes a try, so I could really write something meaningful for potential buyers. . .
December 20, 2008 was cold and raining in the North Georgia/Southeast Tennesee mountains. So, I slathered Bodyglide all over the tops of my Smartwool socks, hoping that the shoes' tendency to crush downward and forward wouldn't lead to a debilitating set of blisters, or something worse. I mean the socks looked like the tops got dunked in Crisco. . .
After the first very wet half of the race, running through everything without a care, I am pleased to report that the only unhappiness I had about the shoe was that when it gets completely soaking wet, when you run downhill, the insoles got slippery and moved forward, leaving me to run 3 miles with the insole moved an inch forward.
No blisters after 38.75 miles when I retired them. My feet would've hurt with ANY shoes. But, these Hardrocks, while not as perfect for me as the 2006 pair I own, did the job, and left me in good shape to run the remaining 23+ miles in a pair of Inov8 318GTX (another shoe they stopped making, and the "sequel" has a new lacing system that is unfortunately not an improvement, according to me and running buddies who own the 312GTX). I do NOT have tough feet. And I walked away from that 100K with NO BLISTERS. My faith in Hardrocks, while not restored, is stronger.

As we all learn when we grow up. . . when you finally find a product that you really like, they either change it or stop making it. Well, I wish I had bought ten pairs of 2006 Montrail Hardrocks. The newer lacing layout causes the top of the toe area of the shoe to squash downward and forward on my toes with each push-off of my feet - leading to ripping the skin off the tops of my toes.
This is NOT how the old Hardrocks were.
Yes, both models have the same thick and stiff midsole. Yes, I have bent the shoes and left them under pressure overnight to "mold" them into a slightly curved shape that is ready for toe-off. But, wow, the change in design has left me wishing for an unused pair of size 11.5 2006 model year Hardrocks. BTW, I have a positive review for the Hardrocks from 2006, so I am in no way slamming without substance.