 |
| adidas energy boost. |
Then came the incredible Adios Boost racer.
 |
| adidas adios boost |
I reviewed them last year and finally got them on an indoor track for a 2 x 5K tempo last night. Even an old slow poke like me can run fast and feel great in what I told my friends at the track are the "world's fastest shoes",worn by multiple major marathon winners this year. Smiles ear to ear for me and a bit of envy from the friends in their Mizuno and Pegasus... slower boats. Pete Larson over at Runblogger called them his #2 shoe of the year, despite the greater than usual for him 10mm heel to toe drop.
Next up and just out the Supernova Glide Boost.
 |
| Supernova Glide Boost Source: adidas.com |
 |
| Supernova Glide Boost Source: adidas.com |
I tried a pair on at a local running store side by side with the Energy and noticed immediate differences
- wider toe box with a soft mesh and welded overlays instead of the stretch tech fit fabric that bothered some.
- the rest of the upper seems at bit old tech with stitching and heavy looking overlays.
- less "spring" and stiffness to the forefoot flex than Energy, a good thing for a trainer. A smoother, more continuous flex due to removal of front plastic Torsion strips and use of EVA near the toe. Under the instep the Torsion plastic seems to be more substantial for a bit more stability.
- a wider more continuous coverage of Continental rubber outsole especially in the forefoot. My sense is a bit less forefoot Boost midsole thickness when compared to the Energy for a firm yet cushioned ride upfront, sitting between the Energy and Adios. Not quite as rigidly directed as the Energy, a good thing in my view.
- a bit of an EVA bumper, the white above the blue in the picture for a I think a bit more seating of the foot, but also some additional weight.
- an obvious issue and sad is that the overall weight is higher than the Boost at 10.3 oz vs 9.3 oz Men's size 9. Quite frankly a shoe like this should weigh less than 10 oz. The weight is likely due the heavy mid foot overlays, the bumper, and the additional rubber outsole material.
- Price for Glide Boost $130 vs. Energy Boost $150
I hope to run some serious long miles in a pair of the Glide soon. Thinking they might be an ideal Boston shoe. That is is if adidas doesn't come out with a Boost version of their Boston shoe soon.
2 comments:
I'm coming late to comment, but maybe you can help:
I use the Adios Boost for my interval sessions and shorter tempo runs, usually less than an hour or a little more, and absolutely love that shoe. On the other hand, I'm having trouble on my very long runs, since above 15 miles or so, my forefoot really gets too sore, I've replaced a Mizuno Waverider with a New Balance 1080 (supposedly for "heavy runners") to no avail. So i'm looking for a shoe with ample forefoot cushioning for the long and slow ones. Would I find this more with the Glide or the Energy Boost? The Sauconys (Ride and Triumph) also seem to have that, but since I love the Adios, would I find a similar but more softer and substantial feel with the Energy or the Boost?
Hi Belsha, I have run a lot in Energy Boost and it is more cushioned all around than the adios boost but IMO not mushy due to the use of the Torsion plastic. I have tried on the Glide but not run in it. It has a big wider toe box and more EVA in the midsole, Heavier. If the Energy fits you and it should if you have no problems with the adios Boost forefoot fit I would pick Energy over Glide Boost. Another very solid new option the Hoka Huaka coming out in US end of July. I have an early pair and they are absolutely superb in terms of forefoot cushion 25mm, responsive midsole ,flexibility, and lightness 8.9 oz vs 10 for Energy. Won't last as long as Energy in terms of upper, and outsole unless you use ShoeGoo. Another option the upcoming adidas Boston Boost. Softer forefoot than Energy but due to less Torsion stuff in the heel a bit of a mushy heel. All reviewed elsewhere on my blog. Let us know what you end up with!
Post a Comment