It has been nearly eight years since Nike blew apart the run shoe market with the original Vaporfly. Originally including the 4% tagline, it was claimed that the combination of foam cushioning and carbon plating would enhance performance by, you guessed it, 4%.

And a funny thing it happened: it worked. Records across the running and triathlon worlds were first broken, then shattered, thanks in part to shoes like the Vaporfly. Other brands went in hot pursuit, searching for the right mix of soft foam, carbon-plate location, and more. Then Nike raised the bar again with the AlphaFly. And as shown in our recent reporting on the top 10 run splits from Nice, Nike retains that leadership position at the top-end of the field.

Naturally, as age-group athletes seek out so-called “free speed” (I mean, you pay for that speed, but you get the idea), carbon-plated shoes are everywhere. But, well, some of us aren’t exactly efficient when it comes to our running strides. And as a shoe increases in foam stack height, it naturally becomes less stable, unless there is either a.) a broader base under the foot, or b.) the foot sits bucketed by the foam, making the effective height lower.

None of these shoes in this list are what we’d call traditional stability shoes — there isn’t any medial posting to be found on these. Instead, we’re looking for that platform stability that should help you take advantage of the benefits of carbon plates and newer foams. Also, all of these shoes meet World Athletics’ requirements for stack height in a race — meaning HOKA’s Skyward X, for instance, is on the cutting room floor.

HOKA Rocket X 2

The longest tenured shoe on this list, the current generation Rocket has been a staple of triathlon events since it first hit pavement at the two day IM World Championships in Kona in 2022. (Yes, it was technically a prototype then, but all of them said “Rocket X 2” on them.)

The Rocket X 2 was the launch of HOKA’s new PEBA foam, which brought the light, well-cushioned ride to the proceeding, while marrying it to existing work on carbon plates. Couple that with an ultralight upper and you have the recipe for a quick shoe. But what makes the Rocket X2 such a unique shoe is that it, like most classic HOKA shoes, sees your fit sit in the midsole, versus over it. Paired with a broad midfoot base and overall wide footprint, and it’s a very stable shoe — certainly much moreso than the newer Cielo X1. It’s also, unlike most carbon racers, comfortable at nearly every speed.

Saucony Endorphin Pro 4

Saucony, as a company, tends to be the first follower of trends. They were the first to follow the so-called natural running shoe market with the Kinvara. They were the first major manufacturer to abandon 12mm drop. And they were the first to bring out a shoe to compete against the Vaporfly with the Endorphin line.

The Pro, now in its fourth generation, sees a couple of concessions to the mainstream. First, Saucony’s making shoes with a variety of stack heights and drops again, with the Endorphin Pro now at 8 millimeters. What hasn’t changed? A very broad platform underfoot, lower stack heights than most other carbon plated shoes, and plenty of cushioning from the blend of PWRRUN foams underfoot. Although I still prefer the original generation to the newer models, this is a positive step in the right direction, and another shoe to consider.

Asics MetaSpeed Edge

The shoe of choice of IRONMAN World Championship runner-up Kat Matthews, the MetaSpeed Edge is the so-called strider’s shoe — it’s meant for runners who prefer turnover to longer length steps. With that comes a differently shaped carbon-fiber plate and unique midsole geometry. It’s lower to the ground versus the MetaSpeed Sky. By nature, it makes the Edge slightly more stable compared to the sister shoe Sky. And, beating the drum a bit here, but there’s a relatively forgiving profile under the midfoot.

Unlike some other shoes here, though, with both of these you sit on top of the midsole, versus in it. It leans harder into a neutral profile than others. But if you are a person who is faster turnover (e.g., you have no problem with beating 180 strides per minute), it’s another great option.

New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4

New Balance as a brand typically lags a bit further behind the bell curve. When they have a winning formula, it generally sticks with it. Case in point: the 990 line.

New Balance was a bit later to the carbon shoe game, but they brought out two excellent products in the SuperComp Elite and SuperComp Pacer — the latter of which was used to great effect by Laura Philipp to claim the IRONMAN World Championship. The Pacer is technically meant for shorter races, whereas the Elite is their entrant in the long distance racing category. Surprisingly, it is the higher stack Elite that also has a bit more stable profile underfoot. It comes down to, again, midsole width and increasing the total area in contact with the ground at once.

FuelCell, NB’s foam, is one of the softest in race shoes today. Of this list it’s the most likely to be mistaken for a HOKA in terms of pure cushioning. The general trade-off with NB shoes? They tend towards slightly heavier, with a men’s size 9 coming in at 8.4 ounces. For comparison, it’s a full ounce heavier than the AlphaFly, Endorphin Pro, and Rocket X2. Personally, I don’t think shoe weight matters that much, so long as it’s the best match for you, your foot, and your stride. But it’s something worth noting.

Which One Should You Buy?

I’m going to cheat: the one that fits you the best.

Without trying them on, ideally at your local specialty run store, there’s no good way to make a determination of what shoe is best. What works well for me may cause you significant issues, or vice versa. Example: one of the shoes not on this list (the MetaSpeed Sky) is one of my favorite shoes to run in, although the extremely narrow midfoot contact point gives me pause as to how it would hold up for anything longer than a half marathon.

Lead Image: RWBMultimedia / IRONMAN
Shoe Photos Courtesy of Manufacturers

The post Carbon Racers for the Rest of Us first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

We’ve looked at the swim and bike splits. But now, as the old adage goes, it’s the “run for dough” moment. These run splits often reflect the final finishing order — although there were, indeed, a couple of surprises.

Perhaps the biggest surprise is the continued prevalence of Nike’s AlphaFly. Despite Nike having very few triathlon sponsorships, it led the way in the top 10 run splits, worn by 5 athletes — none of whom feature the swoosh on their kits. ASICS was the only other brand worn by multiple athletes in the top 10, while HOKA, New Balance, and On each had one.

#1 Laura Philipp

Philipp, the 2024 IRONMAN World Champion, had a well-balanced performance. But it was her fastest run of the day that allowed her to power away from Kat Matthews to take her first world title.

• Run Split: 2:44:59
• Running Shoes: New Balance SuperComp Pacer v2
• Sponsored: Yes

#2 Kat Matthews

Matthews ran the first lap alongside Philipp, but could not match the pace as they began lap two. Despite cramping heavily towards the end, Matthews still delivered the second fastest run of the day as she took second place on the day.

• Run Split: 2:53:06
• Running Shoes: ASICS MetaSpeed Edge+
• Sponsored: Yes

#3 Chelsea Sodaro

Sodaro was considered by many to be a threat for the win if she came off the bike within ten minutes of the win. She was barely within that window starting the run. And although she matched pace with the leading duo to start the run, she soon settled into a pace that put her third for both run time and for the race.

• Run Split: 2:54:25
• Running Shoes: On Cloudboom Strike
• Sponsored: Yes

#4 Kylie Simpson

Simpson was well down the order coming out of the water, 34th in the field, and didn’t make much inroads on the bike, moving to 32nd place. But the fourth fastest run of the day moved her up to 24th — and the only top 10 run split outside of the paying positions.

• Run Split: 2:56:26
• Running Shoes: Nike AlphaFly 3
• Sponsored: No

#5 Nikki Bartlett

Fifth on the day, and a fifth fastest run for Bartlett. Her run pushed her past Marta Sanchez to claim that fifth place spot.

• Run Split: 2:57:24
• Running Shoes: HOKA Rocket X2
• Sponsored: Yes

#6 Jackie Hering

The IRONMAN Pro Series leader found herself in 13th place coming off the bike, with work to do to make in-roads into the top 10. That she did, using the sixth fastest run of the day to make it up to 9th place.

• Run Split: 2:57:40
• Running Shoes: Nike AlphaFly 3
• Sponsored: No

#7 Danielle Lewis

Lewis is known for her run prowess, so it is unsurprising to find her on this list. What may surprise some is that her 3:00:24 run split is her slowest marathon split since her 9th place finish at IRONMAN Texas earlier this year.

• Run Split: 3:00:24
• Running Shoes: Nike AlphaFly 3
• Sponsored: No

#8 Penny Slater

Slater started the run in eight place. The eighth fastest run of the day allowed her to move up a place, taking seventh and her first top 10 finish at the IRONMAN World Championships.

• Run Split: 3:01:22
• Running Shoes: Nike AlphaFly 3
• Sponsored: No

#9 Marjolaine Pierré

Pierré started the run in the podium places, but soon was passed by the hard-charging Sodaro. Pierré found herself somewhat solitary for the remainder of the race; not in touch with the leading trio, but well in front of fifth place Nikki Bartlett.

• Run Split: 3:02:30
• Running Shoes: ASICS MetaSpeed Sky Paris
• Sponsored: Yes

#10 Gurutze Frades Larralde

The final woman to earn a paycheck, Larralde had eight women she needed to pass on the run in order to make money. She moved up three places on lap one, two places on lap two, and two more on lap three. She made her final pass with four miles left to run to make the paying places.

• Run Split: 3:02:53
• Running Shoes: Nike AlphaFly 3
• Sponsored: No

The post 2024 IRONMAN World Championships Top 10 Run Splits first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

As a self-admitted gear nerd, particularly for running shoes, this article’s been germinating in my head ever since I decided to enter IRONMAN Lake Placid. The mission: take four pairs of shoes that I was contemplating wearing for the race, put them through a series of tests, and come away with a winner. Sounds simple, right?

The hard part was coming up with the comparison set. Some of that is wallet-related — two of the four shoes in this test were paid for out of my own pocket. But it was also trying to figure out a fair set of shoes to compare against. I respond extremely well to carbon-plated shoes, but seeing as I’m not exactly expecting a blazing run time in LP, would that be the right play?

Ultimately I settled on four options, all of them with carbon-plates, with an added criteria for slow-speed comfort. Because, well, let’s face it — the wheels are likely to come off at some point, and I’d like to be prepared for that moment.

Let’s meet the contenders. We have two entrants from HOKA — the still available Rocket X2 that put HOKA’s racing line-up on the map, and the new this year Cielo X1. Both shoes tower over the competition in physical height, although all meet the World Athletics criteria for measured stack. I purchased a pair of Asics MetaSpeed Sky Paris, as I was first shocked that Fleet Feet West Hartford even had a pair of fun shoes in my size in stock (nobody carries a 13 in anything fun) and then wowed by the try-on feel. And, lastly, I had to put old reliable in the mix: a pair of Saucony’s Endorphin Pro, but two generations old. Why not the newer ones? Because I tend to prefer lower drop shoes, and because the mid foot carve out has gotten so narrow as to be untenable for my foot shape and gait.

Before we dive in, a quick discarding of why some shoes aren’t here. Nike’s carbon shoes are so narrow under the mid foot that it aggravates some posterior tibial tendonitis symptoms. I found On to be far too harsh of a ride with a poor fit. I could not find a local shop that carried Brooks Hyperion Elite without forcing me to pay up front for it as a special order. And New Balance was out of stock of the FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4.

Let’s start comparing.

Uppers and Initial Feel

When I was working shoe floors, we used to say that the first feeling once you put on a shoe would make or break the experience. If you don’t like a shoe the second you put it on, it is highly unlikely that shoe feel is going to get much better when you start running in it. There are some exceptions to that rule — one of them in this comparison — but it’s a good rule of thumb.

Despite both being from HOKA, the Cielo and the Rocket could not be more dissimilar in initial feel. The upper on the Rocket is thinner, with a nearly non-existent heel counter that can make putting the shoe on a chore. That said, once inside the shoe, you have a typical HOKA experience: a plush, premium underfoot feel, a snug midfoot wrap, and freedom in the toe box. The Cielo, meanwhile, is a much boxier fit despite the tongue attaching to the midsole in an intended wrap. It also feels far less stable than the Rocket, with an initial giveaway — your foot sits *in* the Rocket, like most HOKAs, whereas your foot rides *on top* of the Cielo’s midsole.

The MetaSpeed came across as somewhere between the HOKA’s. The upper reminds me more of the Rocket X2, but you’re definitely riding on top of the midsole like the Cielo. Despite a nearly flat insole, the MetaSpeed also has the most pronounced feeling arch of the bunch, and it announces the most loudly walking around that it is, indeed, a carbon-plated racer. It’s the raciest feeling of the bunch — and definitely not something that screamed that it would be particularly comfortable when running in.

The Endorphin Pro reminded me why I’ve run in Saucony’s ever since the original Kinvara came to market. It follows the typical Saucony low-offset playbook: wide midfoot platform, medium arch, narrow heel, wide toe box. It’s familiar. It’s a cozy blanket on a cold winter morning; a comfort. (So, Saucony, BRING THIS BACK. Love, Me.)

Speed Testing

To test my response to the carbon plate in each shoe, I ran multiple times in each pair across what my wife and I dub “the Loop” here at the house. It’s a rolling 2.5 mile trip that includes roughly one mile on our well-packed gravel road; a mile that trends downhill on a broad highway shoulder; and a half mile stretch that includes a third of a mile hill that tops out at a 21% grade to come back to the house.

I targeted the very top-end of my “Z1” heart rate (I operate on a ZR-Z1-Z2-Z3 system) in order to drive consistency across them. Temperatures and conditions were mixed for each shoe, with each getting a run in similar weather and my personal fatigue levels based on the rest of my training.

The clear winner of the speed test was the MetaSpeed Sky. Over the rolling terrain of this course, the combination of the longer stride made available by the foam and carbon plate and flexibility of the forefoot when running uphill combined for a shoe that was, on average, 13 seconds per mile faster than any other shoe in the test. It particularly excelled on the flats and downhills, with a peak pace at my target HR of 6:44/mile.

The next two shoes surprised me, with the Endorphin Pro and the Rocket X2 tying for second place. I think that surprise came from the running experience in both; the Saucony feels a little snappier underfoot, whereas the Rocket X2 came across as a smoother run experience. That said, the Rocket X2 was a touch more difficult to push uphill with the combination of higher midsole height and carbon plate. Overall the Endorphin Pro gave me the most consistent run pace across the course, whereas the Rocket X2 would, like the MetaSpeed, give me more bang for my buck on flats and downhills but give that time back going up.

I don’t quite know what it was with the Cielo, whether it was the feeling of additional height or stability, or if I was running scared in the shoe, but for whatever reason, HR was almost always a tick higher, and pace a tick slower, than any other shoe in the test, regardless of conditions or training load. It was also my least favorite shoe to come up that hill with. It’s still faster than my baseline training shoes, to be certain — but it didn’t feel great while getting there.

Slower Speed Comfort

Carbon plate efficiency is one thing. How the shoe tolerates running at what will most likely be my IM pace on the flats and uphills is another. Because, as I said before — the wheels are bound to come off at some point (probably, oh, the corner of River Road and Sentinel Road on run lap 2). For this part of the test, I aimed for a ceiling heart rate of 140, which would typically translate out into a run pace in the mid 8s to low 9s per mile. Runs varied in distance between 7.5 and 12.5 miles in total, and may have included walking breaks on the large climbs near my house in order to keep HR in check.

This is where the Saucony shined. The shoe was comfortable at any pace that was run in it. It was also the only shoe that I did not blister in once. It didn’t matter if it was 95 degrees or 45 degrees. It also did the best job dampening the times where the town decided the best approach to managing our gravel road was by dumping as much loose rock on it as it could.

The Rocket X2 came closest to that experience, with a nearly perfect experience while running in a wide variety of temperatures and pace matching that of the Saucony’s. It, too, was also quite stable. The biggest flaw of the shoe is the gap in the heel; the number of times I got a rock stuck in that section of the shoe entered double digits on a single run. And it drove me bananas.

The MetaSpeed and Cielo were tied on this count, for different reasons. The MetaSpeed is simply a shoe that wants to run fast; the platform stability of the shoe improves at quicker paces. But it’s not something I’d call a particularly comfortable shoe. The midfoot felt harsh. There’s a *lot* of sound. And the upper is so thin, without a toe bumper, that clipping a rock when my form was less than perfect hurt so much I initially thought I’d broken the toe.

On the Cielo, the same stability issues that plagued the faster runs came up during slower ones, too. Quite simply, sitting on top of the midsole, with a narrower cut in the midfoot, just does not work for me. It also had the same issue as the Rocket X2 of jamming rocks into the heel. I think I was most shocked by this shoe overall — and mostly for the wrong reasons.

Final Placing

Fourth place was easy: HOKA’s Cielo X1 is, unfortunately, a shoe that just does not work for me at any speed. To be clear, that doesn’t make it a bad shoe; it makes it a bad shoe for me. I think if you’re someone who has traditionally liked, say, some of the Nike carbon shoes but don’t want to give Nike any money, this might be a strong solution.

Now comes the hard part. Ultimately I wound up weighting long run comfort slightly more than carbon plate efficiency. Whether that’s your choice, well, that’s up to you and your run time. With that in mind, I award silver medals to the Rocket X2 and the MetaSpeed Sky. And somehow, despite being a few models old, the Saucony Endorphin Pro wins out this round.

The post Gear Battle: Run Shoes for IM Lake Placid first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Why two shoes in one review you ask? Well, they are kind of the same shoe but built for different people so I thought it made sense to review both at the same time. I’ll explain in a moment.

adidas, a brand with a long history in running, yet a complicated one in the recent world of run specialty retail so not familiar to many. adidas gets credit for changing the industry with the launch of Boost foam back in 2013 as it was the first trainer with a bouncy, high response foam, a foam created by BASF that had a higher rebound then regular EVA. When Boost launched every other brand realized they had to play catchup and fast.

At that time, adidas dedicated a lot of resources on being in run stores and getting on the feet of everyday runners and it worked, as Boost was very successful. Yes, it was kind of heavy, but man what a ride and so different from everything else at the time.

Then they did a corporate shift away from brick-and-mortar stores and changed to a direct-to-consumer focus and promptly lost the everyday runner as they also shifted away from Boost to newer foams and an elite level focus. They were still making some great shoes, but more in the niche/specialized category of high performance (adizero) and lost ground to every other brand that was outfitting the masses, and also launching their own new high rebound foams.

Enter 2024 and a complete re-focus for the product line, with dedicated models for the masses, while still making great high-end products. Think of Supernova as a collection of models for the everyman/women. The workhorse shoe that logs all the miles and doesn’t cost you your first born. Now why the two-shoe review? As I stated, they are very similar, Rise is the neutral daily trainer and Solution is the guidance version. Both feature Dreamstrike+ midsoles and very similar support rods between the Dreamstrike+ foam and the rubber outsole.

Those EVA rods on the Solution are aligned a bit more to the medial side by combining two rods together, offering more guidance/control, while on the Rise they remain more neutral providing transition assistance from heal to forefoot. Looking at the midsole, they are very similar with the Solution offering a higher stack height. Its in the midsole where you can easily see the difference between the two shoes Support Rods (the grey foam near the outsole), with the rods on the Solution being thicker and more sculpted, again to provide additional support/guidance.

So, how do they feel? Really nice. My foot pattern from midstance to toe off does best in a guidance shoe as my foot travels from lateral to medial going too far past neutral, losing me propulsion forces and causing my Achilles to be a mess. So, for me the Solution is a “better” option and between the upper, higher stack and extra guidance I got a really nice riding shoe for daily mileage. My heart, on the other hand ,preferred the Rise — a little lower to the ground, a slightly snappier, more alive ride and some extra flexibility. I do know long term for me that adds up to issues but if I had both I’d use Rise on shorter, quicker days and Solution on longer, slower days.

Overall, both shoes are really nice options. Great mesh on the upper that has a very good accommodating fit. Both are well cushioned without being overly soft and mushy and have some pop to them (Ride has more pop, Solution more cushion). It comes down to whether you need a little extra guidance in your stride but I’d say these are the 2 best daily trainers adidas has made in years. Add them to a rotation of faster models such as Boston 12 and adios Pro 3 and adidas has you covered.

Specifications

Supernova Rise
Cost: $140.00
Mens: 9.7oz (275g)
Womens: 8.6oz (243g)
Stack: 28.5mm/18.5mm
Drop: 10mm
*My 10.5 US weighed 10.7 oz (304g)

Supernova Solution
Cost: $140.00
Mens: 10.3oz (293g)
Womens: 8.6oz (245g)
Stack: 35mm/25mm
Drop: 10mm
*My 10.5 US weighed 10.7 oz (304g)

You can purchase either shoe here.

**I have no idea how my two pairs weigh exactly the same but they do, they shouldn’t but they do

The post Reviewed: adidas Supernova Rise & Solution first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Let's get it out of the way first: so far, most people hate the laces on HOKA's latest race offering, the Cielo X1. Triathletes are going to really hate them. They are stiff and not easy to tighten quickly. Once in place, they do provide serious, lock in place support if you can find your perfect fit. But for triathlon, just pull the laces out and replace with your favorite elastic lace.

OK, now for the rest of the shoe. First spotted on sponsored athletes in summer/fall 2023 (though with a Rocket X2 upper and often wrongly reported to be a Rocket X3), the Cielo X1 is the newest and highest energy return shoe HOKA have made. The 2-layer PEBA midsole with carbon fiber plate sandwiched in the middle features dynamic cutouts through the midsole to reduce weight, though the Cielo X1 is not the lightest racer on the market coming in at a listed weight of 9.3 oz.

Different from most Hoka over the years the Cielo X1 is a 7mm drop shoe, higher than what the brand has previously offered. Part of this is Hoka has changed how they measure drop, now including the Strobel and insole and part is yeah, it’s a slightly higher drop. If you’re the type that can notice 2mm it may feel higher, most won’t notice a thing. (Editor’s Note: to borrow the old phrase from Mizuno – focus on miles, not millimeters.)

When I first put these on, I wasn’t sure what to think. I have a fairly high arch and yet I could feel the midfoot filling up under my foot, almost like a bump. Then I walked around, still not really sure it is even going to be “like” let along “love” as they felt pretty unstable walking around. Next up was to run and there it is, a really nice pop of rebound with every foot strike. I land pretty midfoot and that is the sweet spot for the Cielo X1. The shoe has a very pronounced rocker shape and I don’t think landing rearfoot will work very well but that midfoot “fullness” I felt when I first put these on acted like a bounce house under full run force as it compressed and rebounded and I liked it.

I did have to stay focused on form as when I got a little lazy, I could feel the shoe being a little unstable as my foot landed a little further back and with more lateral sway. It seemed to be at least less stable compared to the New Balance SuperComp Elite v4 that I tested just before these. While running hard I really liked the feel, responsiveness, and the shoes’ ability to absorb a ton of impact.

The upper is very supportive with a unique ribbed knit upper that reminds me of Nike Aeroswift half tights. There is also a knit gusseted tongue that wraps the foot nicely and is forgiving enough for the high instep crowd. HOKA says the upper is very breathable but being in Western NY, aka, almost Canada, in February, I can’t easily test that out as my feet are not going to get warm here (though they also didn’t get cold, which honestly, they never do, years of running sockless all year round will do that) The material is a little on the thick/stiff/supportive side so those with wide feet may not fit too well here as I don’t think there will be much give.

A large pull tab is on the tongue to grab so the guested tongue doesn’t push down. A fairly firm yet low heel counter helps to really lock the rearfoot in place and should keep any slippage issues to a minimum as I’ve seen none so far. Between the upper material, the laces and the heel counter my foot was locked in over the midsole.

At the recent Orlando Marathon Trials, Hoka athletes were all in Cielo X1 from what I saw. Non-sponsored athletes wearing Hoka were in Rocket X2, most likely due to Cielo X1 releasing 2 days before the race. I expect to see people moving to Cielo X1 from Rocket X2 for its higher energy return and I won’t be surprised if a v2 somewhere in the future ends up being lighter weight as they find places to trim some grams.

Overall, I’ve enjoyed the ride and fit of the shoe. Weight weenies will find it heavy but it sure does soak up the miles and provides a lot of bounce. And remember, for triathlon, swap out the laces ASAP.

HOKA Cielo X1 Stats
Price: $275.00
Released February 1, 2024
Unisex: 9.3 oz (264g)
Stack: 40mm/33mm
Drop: 7mm
*My 10.5 US weighed 9.5oz (270g)

The post Reviewed: HOKA Cielo X1 first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

At over 125 years old Saucony has a long history in footwear. They also have a long history in triathlon through sponsorship of numerous legends of the sport and at one time even owned bike brand Quintana Roo. Needless to say, they know how to make some good running shoes and they remain a strong player in multisport.

Ride 17 is version 17 of the good old daily trainer from Saucony. Really it could be considered even older as it has DNA from the Trigon Series from the 90’s and you could go so far as say a bit of Jazz 3000 bloodline as a nicely cushioned, do a bit of everything for a moderately priced shoe.

Ride 17 updates

The biggest update is to the midsole as it now features PWRRUN+ foam, same as the current Triumph 21 (though with 2mm lower stack in the rearfoot). PWRRUN+ is a low-density PU based foam that allows for lower weight, softer feel and a bit more responsiveness than previously used foams. It doesn’t have the pop and rebound of say the Endorphin Speed but as an every day log some mileage shoe it has a very nice, lively ride to it.

Saucony is also gradually moving back to their traditional fit of a narrower heel and a slightly roomier toebox. For decades this is what made the brand so popular, especially with women, as the heel and midfoot was nice and secure and the forefoot gave the toes just a little extra space to wiggle. It's good to see this move from what has been a bit of a sloppy rearfoot fit.

The engineered mesh upper is soft and accommodating and as mentioned above the toes have some breathing room. Those with really narrow feet or those that like a snug fit would do better to look elsewhere as the front may feel too roomy.

Another highlight for me is that there is a nice amount of rubber on the outsole. A lot of shoes try to reduce weight by leaving the midsole foam exposed, resulting in a lighter shoe that will wear out faster. The Ride 17 has a nice nearly full outsole, which provides plenty of grip and will help the shoe last for many miles.

With my high instep I do feel a slight amount of pressure over the very top of my foot where the laces are tied. Some of that is the attached tongue but mostly is just my foot; the majority of people won’t have an issue and I can easily log miles with no issues. It’s just something I slightly felt if I had them on for a long time.

To me one thing that makes a really good shoe is when you don’t think about it at all during a run, it just works and does its job, that’s the Ride 17. It isn’t flashy, it doesn’t make you super excited. I could log miles and never really think about what was on my feet. I didn’t have to figure out lacing, or deal with any issues, you can just run.

Specs and Availability

$140.00
Men: 9.9 oz (282g)
Women: 8.4 oz (238g)
Stack: 35/27mm
Drop: 8mm
Standard and wide width options available
*My 10.5 US weighed 10.6 oz (300g)

The post Reviewed: Saucony Ride 17 first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Editor's Note: We're happy to welcome Boots, AKA FF Boots on the forum, to our writing team. Boots co-owns, with his wife Ellen, Fleet Feet Rochester's three stores in upstate New York and the event company YellowJacket Racing.

First, before diving into the specifics of this shoe, I wanted to go through a bit of my history and philosophy when it comes to testing.

As the shoe buyer for my stores, I’ve been evaluating and testing shoes for decades now and also consult with brands on future product development. I’m known for being bluntly honest with brands, which is seen as a pro and a con depending on what the brand was hoping to hear.

In terms of fitting experience, I’ve personally fit everyone from young kids and senior citizens to professional athletes across numerous sports as well as Olympic Gold Medalists.

I also have a long history with launching new brands and products. My stores were one of the earliest HOKA dealers in the US, and the same with On Running. I’ve worked closely with Karhu and Diadora on their revitalization in to the marketplace. Essentially, I like new stuff and evolving the industry.

When it comes down to it, my “philosophy” when it comes to testing and evaluating product is as follows:

1. I test through the eyes of the intended customer, and NOT my personal preferences.
2. I take in to account the direction I may know a brand is headed with their product and where the current product falls within that journey.
3. I don’t adhere to going longer to make a shoe fit a wider foot, just get a shoe that fits correctly, both length and width.
4. The boring stuff is just as important as the cool flashy new toys. The majority of runners are wearing good, solid daily trainers, and not carbon plated, super foam shoes.
5. Shoe weight is not at the top of the list for me. How a shoe works with a person’s biomechanics is most important. An extra ounce for a shoe that might improve biomechanics, efficiency and power is worth it.

Now, with that. The shoe in question. Whether you call them super shoes, cheater shoes, KISS army platform racers, whatever you want; they are here to stay and only getting better (and faster).

What makes super shoes "super" — is it the Foam or is it the carbon plate? The answer is yes. The trend for high stack height racers was made possible by the use of super lightweight yet highly responsive foams for the midsole. This allowed for an increase in shock absorption that helps the legs and also for the shoe to “give back” more of the energy that is put into it with each foot strike. Add in a carbon plate that 1, helps stabilize all that tall squishy foam and 2, propels the foot through its gait cycle faster and presto, you have a really fast shoe.

With the introduction of version 4, New Balance has taken a big step up in performance with the SuperComp (hereafter, shortened to “SC”) Elite. The 100% PEBA midsole increases energy return and makes for a really nice, soft ride. The re-designed carbon plate with energy arc (where the plate and the void in the midsole are designed to work together to increase energy return) makes for an even faster transition to toe off.

I don’t have a ton of miles on mine yet but one thing I’ve always liked about the SC Elite is while being very fast it is also fairly stable, which is good for those not running 2:10 marathon pace. The wide platform underfoot gives a decent amount of support for more mortal paces, including those of us that utilize occasional walk breaks.

The upper on v4 is one of the more “trainer” like uppers of all super shoes. By that I mean it’s not overly tight or narrow and should be rather accommodating for a wide range of foot shapes. One downside that is triathlon specific is that the tongue of the shoe does not come up very high, so there’s nothing to easily grab in transition and get your foot into the shoe. If this is an issue for you, any local shoe repair store should be able to add pull tabs to the tongue (and heel if you prefer) or you could just cut the entire tongue off.

I often like to wear a low-profile aftermarket insert such as a Superfeet Dynamic or Currex RunPro and the stock insole on the v4 is easily removable making this possible. Note, for triathlon I suggest adding extra glue under the insole so it doesn’t move during transition.

For the wide foot fam, SC Elite v4 comes in a wide option for both men and women. That’s a big deal — there are very few other shoes in this category that come in widths — and sticks to the NB legacy of width options in abundance.

Overall, I find the ride soft but not overly squishy with nice rebound/energy return and I have had no issues with the fit of the upper. For those that some super shoes feel unstable underfoot the New Balance SC Elite v4 could be a very good option with its wider platform underfoot offering a nice base of support.

New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4
Price: $250.00

Published Specifications:
Mens: 8.4 oz (237g)**
Womens: 6.6 oz (188g)
Stack: 40mm/36mm
Drop: 4mm
Standard and wide width options available

**My 10.5 US sized pair weighed 9.2 oz (262g)

The post Reviewed: New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

This year, though, almost a third of the top run performances in Kona came from athletes outside of earning a paycheck. Still, the two fastest runs on the day saw those athletes springboard up the rankings — and in one case, establish a new run course record. Here's the shoes that powered those record runs, with numerous brands represented.

All Images: Slowtwitch

Fastest Run: Anne Haug
Run Split: 2:48:23 (course record)
Finish Position: 2
Run Shoe: Nike Zoom AlphaFly NEXT%

Haug has traditionally worn Nike's original carbon-plated shoe, the VaporFly, and used it to great success (including the year she won the IRONMAN World Championships). She moved into the AlphaFly this year, which features more stack height. Clearly no problem for Haug, as she now owns the record for fastest run split.

#2 Run: Chelsea Sodaro
Run Split: 2:53:02
Finish Position: 6
Run Shoe: On Prototype

Sodaro was well down the order coming off the bike, more than 20 minutes from Lucy Charles-Barclay's lead. Undeterred, Sodaro began mowing through the field on the run, coming up less than two minutes short of catching Daniela Ryf for fifth.

Sodaro's On shoes look to be a lower stack version of the prototype Gustav Iden wore prior to IRONMAN's alignment with World Triathlon on shoe rules. You can hear more about Sodaro's 2023 season on our podcast.

#3 Run: Laura Philipp
Run Split: 2:55:24
Finish Position: 3
Run Shoe: New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite

Philipp's used a third fastest bike and run to overcome a sizable swim deficit, making a decisive move early in the bike to bridge and then continue to hold position on the run. Philipp's worn New Balance the last few years. The FuelCell SuperComp Elite uses a familiar pattern — 4mm drop, highly cushioned foam, carbon plate — but with a slightly wider platform underfoot. It flies under the radar. It shouldn't. It's a damn good shoe.

#4 Run: Lucy Charles-Barclay
Run Split: 2:57:38 (course record)
Finish Position: 1
Run Shoe: Asics MetaSpeed Sky+

The 2023 IRONMAN World Champion has worn Asics for the bulk of her long-course career, and moved into the MetaSpeed Sky series shoes when first-released in 2021. Charles-Barclay mentioned the shoe as being a helpful part of her recovery from a metatarsal fracture earlier in the year, in part due to the stiff carbon plate in the forefoot. Whatever it is, the combination of Charles-Barclay and this shoe works — she's been running faster than ever, including a by-far best run split in Kona for her this year.

#5 Run: Svenja Thoes
Run Split: 3:01:07
Finish Position: 14
Run Shoe: Blacked Out

Thoes had to scramble to take home prize money, finding herself further down the order than Sodaro coming off of the bike. She did so brilliantly, nearly breaking three hours for the marathon — it would have been her second sub-three hour IM marathon ever.

Thoes raced in a completely blacked out shoe that looks suspiciously like either a Saucony Endorphin Elite or a Nike AlphaFly. Thoes typically wears Altra running shoes. We could not confirm the model.

#6 Run: Sarah True
Run Split: 3:02:09
Finish Position: 8
Run Shoe: Nike AlphaFly 2

Fellow Tundra Division athlete True had a well-rounded day to finish in the top 10 in Kona for the first time since 2018. True had a lot of new equipment this year for both the bike and run. It was the current generation AlphaFly on her feet this year in Kona.

#7 Run: Daniela Ryf
Run Split: 3:02:11
Finish Position: 5
Run Shoe: HOKA Rocket X Prototype

Ryf, a long-time Asics athlete, finally moved into a carbon-plated run shoe this year after holding out for years. Ryf received a prototype of the next generation Carbon Rocket X, which featured a new iteration of HOKA's super soft foam and carbon plate, mated to a current generation Rocket X 2 upper. The combination seemed to work — like clockwork when healthy, Ryf runs somewhere between 2:57 and 3:03 in Kona.

#8 Run: Skye Moench
Run Split: 3:02:40
Finish Position: 7
Run Shoe: Saucony Endorphin Elite

Moench backed up her 9th place 2022 performance with an improvement this year, some of which can be attributed to her run — to date, her marathon time in Kona was her second-fastest IM run ever. (That's since been shattered by Moench's record-breaking performance at IRONMAN Florida.)

The Endorphin Elite is a curious shoe in Saucony's line-up. It is narrower under the mid foot versus the rest of the Endorphin line, while also abandoning some of the hallmark Saucony fit characteristics. That said, the combination clearly works for Moench.

#9 Run: Leonie Konczalla
Run Split: 3:03:31
Finish Position: 24
Run Shoe: On CloudBoom Echo

The first of our non-top 15 athletes, Konczalla (who also happens to be a surgeon) didn't have the day she wanted on the swim and bike, but rallied for an extremely fast marathon at the end of the day. Unfortunately, we didn't get a photo of her on the day.

#10 Run: Taylor Knibb
Run Split: 3:05:13
Finish Position: 4
Run Shoe: Nike Zoom AlphaFly 2

Knibb continued to break the mold of what's possible in a first trip to Kona, holding onto second until the exit of the Natural Energy Lab and nearly holding on for a debut podium. Knibb was another athlete in Nike's ever popular AlphaFly.

#11 Run: Laura Jansen
Run Split: 3:06:14
Finish Position: 19
Run Shoe: Saucony Endorphin Pro

The second of our non-money winners, Jansen was another athlete caught out coming out of the water and left a significant deficit to fight out of for the remainder of the day. Jansen's Endorphin Pro is my preferred race shoe out of the Saucony line-up, with a slightly broader mid foot region giving more stability to the platform, despite the soft foam and carbon plate.

#12 Run: Penny Slater
Run Split: 3:08:08
Finish Position: 13
Run Shoe: On Cloudboom Echo

Slater earned her paycheck with the 12th fastest run of the day. She, too, utilized On's carbon-plated shoe. If you prefer a firmer ride out of your race day footwear and a slender fit around the foot, this is one of your better options.

#13 Run: Hannah Berry
Run Split: 3:08:39
Finish Position: 11
Run Shoe: Asics MetaSpeed Sky

Berry's balanced performance — top 15 worthy splits across all three disciplines — saw her take home a paycheck in her first IRONMAN World Championship. Like Charles-Barclay, Berry runs in the MetaSpeed Sky — according to Asics, it's better for athlete's who increase speed by increasing stride length (versus the Edge, which is for athletes who increase speed through a mix of stride length and cadence).

#14 Run: Laura Zimmerman
Run Split: 3:08:49
Finish Position: 22
Run Shoe: HOKA Rocket X 2

Zimmerman's swim was her undoing at a chance at a paycheck. Still, she fought back for the next eight hours of her day. Her run in Kona this year is her fastest IRONMAN World Championships marathon. The Rocket X 2 she used here was one of the most popular shoes in 2022, despite it then being labelled a prototype, and for good reason: if you respond well to carbon shoes but need more midsole width, this is a great option.

#15 Run: Jen Annett
Run Split: 3:10:16
Finish Position: 23
Run Shoe: Nike Zoom AlphaFly

Annett's fastest Kona run of her career came this year. She's another AlphaFly wearer. Like Moench, she also backed up her run in Hawaii with a strong race in Florida, running faster there than she did in Kona.

The post The Fastest Pro Run Shoes in Kona first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Hoka has been missing a speed shoe from its lineup. While, sure, you can do all of your workouts in the Carbon Rocket X2, these can get expensive to replace and Hoka racing shoes aren't known for their durability. Although it’s all relative considering the cost of almost anything for the bike.

Nowadays, the "speed workout shoe" has become one of the most popular trainers. People want a plated shoe without paying the carbon-plated shoe price. However, the Hoka's Pebax-plated shoe, the Mach X, is almost as expensive. Is it worth the cost? Hoka already has several plated models, including the Carbon X2, Carbon X3, Tecton X2, and now the Mach X with a Pebax plate. There is a rumor that the Carbon X3 is going away, though.

Finally, while the Mach X and Mach 5 share the Mach name, they aren't similar. The Mach X is more similar to the Carbon X2 than the Mach 5. It's actually weird that Hoka named it the Mach, but it fulfills a plated training shoe Hoka that has been missing in their lineup, similar to the Brooks Hyperion Tempo or Max, Saucony Endorphin Speed, Nike Tempo Next, or ASICS Magic Speed 3.

First Impression

My first run in the Hoka Mach X was on a training day. I wanted a faster run but not necessarily a speed workout; just something above an easy run pace. When I put it on, I immediately noticed it ran a half-size small, but other than that it felt comfortable. It was much softer than I imagined but not as soft as the Hoka Clifton. It was easy to pick up the pace, and I ran about 30 seconds faster than my easy run pace with minimal effort.

Hoka is known to run wider for the most part, and the Mach X runs wide but short. I would try it on if you can. The mesh upper is soft to the touch and breathable. Breathability is essential in the Mojave Desert summer. The tongue is relatively flat, and the heel collar is padded. For the most part, the Mach X has a comfortable upper, but finding the right fit will probably discourage many runners.

In running shoes, I wear between a women's size 10-11 wide, and I've found the size 11 to fit the best.

Performance

The "X" in Hoka shoes typically means plated. For most other Hoka shoes, it means carbon plated, but the Mach X is Pebax plated. Perhaps the Hoka Rocket P (for Pebax) would have made sense or something of that nature. But I digress.

The Mach X is soft, and the Pebax plate provides structure but doesn't firm up the shoe as much as a carbon-plated one. The Mach X midsole is made up of two layers. There's Profly X — As the top layer, it is softer. There is more Profly X in the forefoot than the heel. This makes the front of the Mach X feel more peaceful and have a more natural transition from heel to toe. And then there's CMEVA: The firmer foam on the bottom is designed for durability and stability.

In my experience, many of Hoka's carbon-plated shoes don't have durable outsoles. The Carbon X3 has no blown rubber, so you run on raw EVA foam, and you're lucky if you get 200 miles out of it. Luckily, that isn't the case with the Mach X, and the rubber wraps to the edge of the midsole. The "durabrasion" rubber outsole is much better than any other racing shoe Hoka has. For those who heel strike, you'll have a bit more durability.

Regarding traction, I used it on a few bad weather days, including rain and on sandy trails, and it handled decently well. It's not the best shoe for traction, but it's the best plated shoe from Hoka.

The Mach X is designed as a speed work shoe, and that's precisely how it falls into my rotation. It's a great trainer for faster runs and long runs. It's not something I would use for track work, but it's an excellent option for longer intervals and faster long runs.

Conclusion

The Hoka Mach X is the missing trainer Hoka has needed. It's an excellent option if you are looking for a soft, responsive, and durable workout shoe. While it is about $20 more expensive than similar nylon plated shoes, I believe it's worth it, especially if you can save your Carbon X2, or whatever carbon-plated shoe you use, for race day.

Who should buy the Hoka Mach X?
If you like Hoka and are looking for a workout and hard-effort shoe, or if you have wider feet and are looking for a plated shoe.

Hoka Mach X Stats

:
Speed/workout shoe
Weight: 9.4 oz
Heel Toe Drop: 5 mm
Cost: $180

Pros of the Hoka Mach X:
–More durable than most speed shoes
–Durable

Cons of the Hoka Mach X:
–It runs a half-size short
–More expensive than competitors

The post In Depth with HOKA’s Mach X first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

The On Cloudboom Echo 3 is a firm carbon-plated racing shoe designed for shorter distances up to the half marathon. Before even trying it, I wondered if the price was worth it? At $290, it's almost more costly than any other carbon-plated running shoe out there.

Cloudboom Echo 3 Stats

Type of shoe: racing/carbon plated
Weight: 7.6 oz
Heel to Toe Drop: 9.5 mm
Cost: $290

Get on any airplane, and you'll see at least 20% of travelers wearing On. Run in any city, and it's the same thing. Race any triathlon, and you'll see more and more of them on people's feet. On has significantly grown in the last few years, and it's quickly become one of the top-selling running brands.  On running shoes have a distinct look to them. Their "Cloudtec" soles are intriguing. But it's also considered fashionable, so you see them on a lot of travelers’ feet. 

The On Cloudboom Echo 3 is designed as a marathon racing shoe. The big update this year is the fully recyclable HF superfoam midsole made from Pebax. The midsole is 46% bio-based and is made from castor beans. The midsole and the full-length Speedboard Carbon Fiber Plate, and Cloudtec elements together create a modern-day racing shoe.

It's extremely firm and doesn't have that plush cushioning that a lot of carbon-plated marathon shoes have now. On claims that it is their fastest race-day shoe ever. While, yes, it's their fastest carbon-plated shoe ever, I can't quite agree that it's a great marathon shoe, especially since most people reading this are running their marathon after hours on the bike.

Upper Design

The brand On is known for its lightweight and comfortable upper. The Cloudboom Echo 3 features an upper that doesn't absorb liquid. This is great if you're running another Boston Marathon 2018 because your feet will stay drier. However, this doesn't make the upper breathable, and breathable uppers are essential for summer living in the Mojave Desert. The engineered polyester upper is thin and strong but it doesn't stretch well—you don't need to worry about it ripping. 

The tongue is thin and semi-gusseted on one side. I was concerned about it not being fully gusseted, but it doesn't slide around. It has additional eyelets under the regular ones, so you can tie it however you want. The shoelaces are interesting in that they feel like they are made from synthetic mesh but are still tacky enough to stay tied. 

On runs narrower than other brands, and the Cloudboom Echo 3 is no different. Typically, I wear a woman's size 10-11 in running shoes, and with On size 11 fits the best. If you have a wider foot, I recommend going up a half size.

Midsole Design

The Cloudboom Echo 3 doesn't feel like a marathon racing shoe. You feel the ground more, and there isn't a lot of energy return. If you miss the era of minimal racing flats and touching the ground, you'll likely enjoy running in the On Cloudboom Echo 3.

I've run almost every kind of run in the Cloudboom Echo 3, from easy runs to tempo and track work. I even tried a long run to see how it responded. It's designed for racing, and that's all I would use it for. But it didn't feel great in the long run, making me worry it wouldn't be a great marathon racing shoe. If you prefer a firm ride, you may love how it feels during long runs. My feet felt tired and slightly sore.

You can see the carbon plate in the On Cloudboom Echo 3, unlike many other brands. It's stiff and doesn't flex. One of the more unique pieces to the shoe is the thin silicone straps under the plate in the forefoot. On claims they are designed to hold your feet into place. It feels weird at first, but you get used to it. And they do keep my feet from sliding around.

Traction and Durability

When I saw the price tag, I thought that perhaps the Cloudboom Echo 3 was highly durable. It's not. It's likely one of the least durable carbon-plated shoes out there. On says the life of the Cloudboom Echo 3 is four marathons. (That could also be three long runs and one marathon.) It might not even make it past one month.

The outsole isn't flat, so the raised pieces often catch the ground. Mine have already worn significantly after only 25 miles.

The traction for the Cloudboom Echo 3 is good. I've taken it out on an inclement weather day and on the sandy desert trails and haven't had any issues. Together with the upper, I think it would be a good choice for a rainy race.

Concluding Thoughts

I want to like the Cloudboom Echo 3, but it's firm. Too firm for most people to run a marathon, and it doesn't feel like it should cost $290. Maybe it looks like a $290 shoe though? It does excel in the ability to race decently in pouring rain or inclement weather due to the traction and upper.

I would love to see On make the Cloudboom Echo 4 softer by increasing the stack height, adding more cushion, and making it more durable.

Who should buy the On Cloudboom Echo 3??
If you love the brand On and you like firm racing shoes, this is for you. It is great for half marathons and below.

The post Tested: On Cloudboom Echo 3 first appeared on Slowtwitch News.