Article by Matt Kolat
Hoka Rincon 4 (€132, £109.99, $125 USD)
Pros
Low price for a versatile trainer
Stiff/firm foam (may also be a disadvantage for some)
Styling (subjective)
Low weight
Cons
Stats
Sample Weight: 263g/ 9.2oz US12 EU46.2/3
Stack Height 37 mm heel / 32 mm forefoot (+3mm over version 2) Drop: 5 mm
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Let me start with the fit. When it comes to Hoka sizing, I always order my footwear a half size larger. The Rincon model is even smaller than the average Hoka, so I would recommend that you try on shoes a full size larger than usual.
In addition, I must mention that the upper is relatively narrow in the midfoot and front, and in general the shoe itself is very small. People with wide feet or who need more space in the upper (for orthopedic insoles, for example) may have trouble fitting the Rincons to their feet. Another unusual solution is the system of laces that do not reach the ankle, ending too early, but about this, and the impact of this solution on running, more in the following sections of the review.
Once on the foot, the shoe gives the impression of being very light in its category. This is indeed the case - 263g in my 'kayak' size 46 and ⅔ of the weight is excellent.
The upper is very heavily perforated and you can feel it. I tested the shoe in temperatures of 25-35 degrees Celsius and they didn't feel as hot as I would have expected. Normally I try not to run when the temperature reaches 35 or more, but if you are more adventurous than I am then for such, 'hot' occasions I definitely recommend the Rincon 4. In the ankle area the upper is adequately softened, as befits a training shoe.
What came as a slight surprise to me, the heel counter is very heavily padded, which certainly improves the stability of the Rincon 4 despite their narrow silhouette. I wouldn't be myself if I didn't mention the reflectors. The Rincon 4 has two large reflective inserts in the tongue area and one narrow insert in the toe area. Speaking of the tongue, it is definitely too short, which is most noticeable when putting on the shoe. Fortunately, this does not translate into any discomfort while running.
Midsole and Outsole
Let's start, unusually, with the outsole. The Rincon 4 does not use traditional rubber on its tread. Undoubtedly, this is one of the reasons giving them such a very lightweight character. Due to the high temperatures, I did not manage to test the grip on very wet surfaces even once. Instead of traditional rubber, the manufacturer decided to use a layer of EVA foam blend with rubber.
After running about 50km, the outsole wears down at an average rate - and this is a positive surprise to me. Why? Because first of all, shoes without traditional rubber, with my height and weight (182 cm/83 kg/heel striker), tend to wear out much faster. Secondly, the price of the shoe at - it is definitely below the market average which gives us a good price/longevity ratio.
The midsole foam is CMEVA (Compression Molded EVA), which is very stiff and firm in the Rincon 4 although we do have 3mm more stack height than the Rincon 3 to come at a quite substantial 37mm heel / 32 mm forefoot.
For many of you firmer CMEVA foam will perhaps be a 'dealbreaker', for me it is just the opposite. Right now on the market, 90% of shoes are trying to be as soft as possible, comfort is key. But what about the rest of the runners, like me, who prefer firmer foam. The choice is very narrow or in some brands - such as Nike there is none (all Nike models I know are soft or very soft). An additional advantage of firmer foam is longevity, a problem faced by runners of the previous version of Rincon in which after running X kilometers the cushioning completely flattens out and loses its soft character.
Ride and Conclusions
As I mentioned earlier, the Rincon 4 has a very firm foam. This translates into a running experience similar to the last time I felt in the Adidas Boston 10. These were shoes that most did not like - the opposite for me.
When running, the shoes do not cushion in a springy way, but in a more traditional way. This translates into very high stability of the shoe and allows the use the Rincons not only for running, but also for faster workouts (which is also helped by the low weight of the shoe).
During the run the shoe rolls very traditionally, the 'finish rocker', which is a trademark of Hoki is not very noticeable. In terms of terrain, I would stick to asphalt and hard-packed forest trails. In terms of distances, I think its sweet spot would be 10 km to a half marathon. For a full marathon you would need a bit more and forgiving foam and for 5 km or less you will find lighter models.
What would I improve about the Rincon 4? Not much, really - it's a very good shoe especially in the 'entry level' category, i.e. basic running shoes aimed mainly at beginners. But two things do come to mind.
Firstly, the shoe could be more roomy in width and height, I was most comfortable running in it without socks and in thicker socks it was simply too tight for my moderately broad foot
Secondly, I would like the tongue to be longer and the holes for the laces to be moved a little further towards the ankle. This would certainly increase the comfort of the run.
All in all, the Rincon 4 is a very good entry-level Hoka training shoe. In particular, I would recommend it to beginner runners who want to buy a decent training shoe without having to 'break the piggy bank'.
Matt’s Score: 9.5/10
🙂🙂🙂
Maciej 'Matt' Kolat- 37 years old, hailing from Poland but pounding Scottish pavements and trails since 2007. Mainly runs shorter distances on pavement 5-10 km and reserves longer runs for beautiful Scottish Glens. Matt’s opinion sometimes may differ from other RTR testers as he is the slowest of the bunch (5k at 25:38). Matt also uses running as a way to stay healthy having shedded 100 lbs so far (and counting).
Translated from Matt's original Polish review with Deepl.com
2 comments:
Appreciate the review and insightful comments; totally agree w/ your comments on CMEVA. Given the durometer of most peba-based midsoles, their longevity is definitely questionable; and, given the rate that most runners go through or replace shoes does it really matter? Infused EVA definitely adds stability to higher stacked shoes. I’ve had several Rincons and have appreciated the stable ride, but, given the narrow nature described here - especially in the forefoot - I’ll pass on this iteration. Again, insightful review.
Can I ask what is the point of a high stack firm shoe in the first place? Why add mm of foam that do not seem to have any use?
Post a Comment