Compared: Gen 1 vs Gen 3 Specialized Recon 2.0 Gravel & Mountain Bike Shoe

The Specialized Recon 2.0 clipless mountain bike shoe is a light, comfortable shoe that combines a great tread pattern with sleek XC styling.

This shoe has been through two updates since its first iteration, which was released in 2020. Confusingly, it’s not called 2.0 because it’s the second generation – that’s just how you can tell it apart from the budget Recon 1.0 and the bougie Recon 3.0.

It’s fun getting to try out the newest, hottest, most expensive product (e.g. Canyon’s brand new mountain bike shoe, the Tempr CFR Off-Road ), but it’s also interesting to try out a less sexy item that only promises incremental improvements to something I’ve used heavily for several years. For instance, I had the opportunity to compare the first and third generation of the Recon 2.0, and was even more impressed by how polished the updated shoe is because I knew its roots.

Specialized Recon 2.0 in a Nutshell

• Size Tested: 40
• Sizes Available: EU 36-49
• MSRP: $180
• Closure: BOA dial and velcro strap
• Weight: 282 g (Size 40)

Improvements in Fit and Performance

The biggest improvement in the new Recon 2.0 shoe is the BOA system. The first generation shoe’s closure system was a wire that didn’t effectively cinch down because it got hung up on the hard-molded guides on the shoe upper. As a result, the tongue would immediately scoot off to the side when I was wearing the shoe.

With the third generation, instead of an inflexible wire the closure is actuated with a softer Dyneema yarn, which does a much better job of cinching evenly and holding the (longer, thinner) tongue in the right place. Now the single BOA is the Li2 version, which can be loosened incrementally instead of having to back it out entirely. It seems that the more expensive a shoe is, the more BOA dials it has – the $250 Recon 3.0 and the $450 S-Works Recon both have two – but I’m pretty happy with just the one, now that Specialized has worked out the issue with the wire.

Along with the first gen Recon’s closure system, another shortcoming it had was a pretty sloppy heel hold, which this version has remedied. It’s not quite as snug as the Canyon Tempr heel pocket but is a marked improvement for hike-a-bikes, which I happen to do a lot of when I’m riding gravel. (If you ain’t hiking, you ain’t biking, as the old saw goes.) When I’m taking my bike for a walk, or a sprint up a slick grass hill in a ‘cross race, I also appreciate the tread pattern, which is dialed back on the new version but still fairly aggressive and made up of grippy SlipNot rubber.

The third gen version shaves nearly 70 grams off the first gen, and I think much of the weight comes from those shaved-down sole lugs. On the heel and midsole in particular, the first gen shoes had enormous lugs and a lot of them – Specialized may have decided since then that that’s not really where one needs the most traction for hiking.

The fit is similar but a little better. While I don’t entirely buy the marketing around Body Geometry, I do get along with almost every product that falls under that nomenclature, and Specialized shoes are no exception. The new Recon 2.0 feels the same on the foot but I’ve found over long rides that my feet don’t start to hurt or go numb with the same frequency as with the previous version. (My feet seem to go numb eventually in most other shoes so this is saying something.) And on continuous descents, my feet feel more locked-in, which I really appreciate.

The Recon 2.0 doesn’t have a carbon sole – you have to upgrade to the $250 Recon 3.0 for that. I don’t mind the absence but it could be a dealbreaker for heavier riders who need really stiff shoes. Specialized gives the 2.0 a stiffness rating of 6, compared to the 3.0’s stiffness rating of 10.

What hasn’t changed: the necessity for a cleat shim in order for the shoes to work with SPD pedals (to my eternal annoyance); the reinforced toe for rock hits; and the Velcro closure, which might be superfluous because I’ve never touched it.

Since the shoe construction doesn’t appear to have dramatically changed, I would expect it to share the durability of the first gen, which I’ve put through the wringer in cyclocross, gravel, and mountain bike rides and races in all kinds of conditions. While they might be permanently mud-colored at this point, those shoes don’t show any signs of falling apart, even in the soft rubber tread.

The color choices are the only thing that’s gone downhill. It seems like ostentatious shoes might be a trend that’s fading away, unfortunately, as more brands offer up palettes that range from neutral to violently neutral. I don’t like neon-loud shoes but I hate black. My first generation model had a much more appealing lilac-to-teal ombre with white camo tread.

The Recon 2.0 is competitive in price with Pearl Izumi’s Expedition shoe and Shimano’s XC502, but the latter does have a carbon midsole. While I wouldn’t call $180 affordable, at least it’s not flirting with the $450 price tag of the most expensive shoes out there, and you can probably find a deal somewhere. That said, the Recon 1.0 costs $120, weighs around 15 grams less per shoe (by ditching the Velcro), and still has a BOA (but not an Li2) – in other words, you’re barely giving up anything by choosing the budget option.

Who’s the Specialized Recon 2.0 for?

I’ve used a lot of shoes that inhabit the XC/gravel niche and the new Recon 2 might be my favorite of that genre. It’s a workmanlike, comfortable, light shoe that I think is great for riding fast and far.