Article by Matt Kolat ,Peter Stuart, and Ben David
Hoka Rincon 4 (€132, £109.99, $125 USD)
Pros
Low price for a versatile trainer Matt/Peter/Ben
Stiff/firm foam (may also be a disadvantage for some) Matt/Peter
Styling (subjective)
Low weight
Can be a nice workhorse Peter/Ben
Cons
Very short tongue
Very different shoe compared to previous editions (this may also be an advantage)
Sizing and fit are a major issue: Peter/Ben
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
Matt: Let me start with the fit. When it comes to Hoka sizing, I always order my footwear a half size larger. The Rincon 4 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.
Peter: I got the all black, black on black, none blacker version of the Rincon. Very light out of the box. It appeared to be a nice, inexpensive daily trainer that might fit somewhere between a Mach 6 and a Clifton.
Unfortunately, it seems like Hoka got the sizing all wrong on this shoe. The shoe is small in every way. The sizing is off by at least, but probably a whole size. If being too short wasn’t enough, the toebox also feels restrictive and overly tight. I got a big toe blister on run #1 and lost a pinkie toenail on run #2. I don’t know how this happens in this day and age, especially from a company that turns out a lot of shoes. I checked the box, the shoe, compared them to other Hoka’s. Sure enough, they say size 11, but they feel small and claustrophobic. It’s a shame, because it’s pretty clear that the Rincon would ride very nicely were it not a portable torture device.
Ben: I also got the black-on-black colorway, probably not the best for summertime miles, but I made it work. (Did I have a choice??)
As others have noted, the fit here is the outstanding issue. My size 9 felt very short, even if the toe box was not all that constricting. I found this surprising as I am dead-on true-to-size in all of the latest iterations of Hoka shoes: Mach 6, Mach X, Cielo, etc. Clearly people should size UP on this shoe, something I rarely recommend.
If you can work around the sizing (easier said than done), the underfoot feeling is more plush and forgiving than I remember in previous iterations of the Rincon. I would almost venture that it’s catching up to the Clifton in terms of overall plushness and wearability.
This is no speed racer in terms of streamlined responsiveness nor is it an overly bulky Bondi-type recovery shoe (and at this price point you wouldn’t really expect it to be either of those things). I found it to be a kind of ‘tweener’ and thus most adept at short, easy, no-pressure runs.
Midsole and Outsole
Matt: 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, Hoka decided to use a layer of EVA foam blended 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.
Peter: The midsole is firm, but forgiving. There is a nice rocker effect, so the RIncon rolls through the gait cycle quite easily. While there is a firmness here, there’s also a pretty noticeable bounce. Once again, if the shoe fit better it would be easier to get more of a sense of the ride. The outsole seems fine. No slipping, but it’s pretty dry out here this summer.
Ben: I found the slightly firmer midsole to be refreshing (and certainly on a Hoka shoe). It gives the shoe a touch of pop and denies it s ome of the mushiness we’ve seen with more Hoka shoes to count (like early versions of the Mach and some of the Cliftons over the years). It also means that it doesn’t confine the shoe to the easiest of paces, but can accommodate those slightly speedier daily runs. To me, the foam is what makes this the most exciting and most welcomed Rincon yet. Bottom line, if you like the Rincon ride, you’ll love the Rincon 4.
Ride and Conclusions
Matt: 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
Peter: Just an unforgivable miss on the sizing here. If you want to get them, go a full size bigger and you may have a gem of a shoe. It’s hard to recommend just because I can’t really put long miles in mine. Ride is good, firm and forgiving. It feels like they didn’t put a ton of thought into the shoe, which is a shame. Better luck next time!
Peter’s Score 5/10
Ben: The sizing is awful, as noted various times above. That said, the shoe has potential if you can find a way to hone in the proper sizing and fit for you. It’s still far from the best daily run model that Hoka offers but it’s a step in the right direction, at a fair price for a shoe that many have found wanting for years. If you’re looking for a second or third option for easy days, this could work for those who have an aversion to the Clifton line. It can’t compete with the Mach 6 or Mach X but it isn’t trying to do that. It also works if you want to dip your toe into the Hoka world but aren’t up for spending big money or some of their flashier shoes. All of that said, when there is such an abundance of great shoes out there, I’m not sure if there’s ultimately a lot of space for this one.
Ben’s Score 6.5/10
🙂🙂🙂
3 Comparisons
ASICS Noosa Tri 16 (RTR Review)
Ben: The Noosa Tri is snappier, livelier and has a way more dialed-in fit. As an everyday trainer, I found it to be one of the pleasant surprises of this year so far. Noosa Tri is the obvious choice for me.
Hoka Mach 6: (RTR Review)
Peter: The Mach 6 is a lovely, snappy ride that doesn’t eat my toenails. I think the Rincon 4 is slightly firmer feeling and more of a daily trainer than a tempo shoe. I’d go Mach 6.
Ben: Mach 6 has a better fit and is much livelier underfoot. I’d go Mach 6.
361 Eleos (RTR Review)
Peter: The Eleos is softer, more fun and more versatile. One of the best daily trainers of the year for sure. The Rincon 4 is better at building blisters and keeping toenails shorter!
Tester Profiles
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).
Ben is the Senior Rabbi of Reform Congregation Keneseth Israel of Elkins Park, PA. A cancer survivor, he has run 21 marathons. He holds PRs of 3:15 for the marathon and 1:30 for the half. At 46, he still enjoys pushing himself and combining his running with supporting a variety of causes. Follow him on Instagram: @RabbiBPD or Twitter: @BDinPA
Peter lives in California and has been a sub 3 hour marathoner as well as a 1:21 half marathoner in recent years.
Translated from Matt's original Polish review with Deepl.com
Samples were provided at no charge for review purposes. RoadTrail Run has affiliate partnerships and may earn commission on products purchased via shopping links in this article. These partnerships do not influence our editorial content. The opinions herein are entirely the authors'.
Comments and Questions Welcome Below! Please let us know mileage, paces, race distances, and current preferred shoes
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
Europe only: use RTR code RTR5ALL for 5% off all products, even sale products
No comments:
Post a Comment