Article by Jen Schmidt, Courtney Kelly, Renee Krusemark, Sally Reiley, Ben David, Peter Stuart and Ryan Eiler
Nike Vaporfly 4 ($260)
Introduction
Courtney:“The Original Super Shoe”, as stamped on the medial forefoot of the new Vaporfly 4 says it all.
Although it has become well-loved by racing shoe enthusiasts everywhere, the evolution of the Vaporfly has ebbed and flowed for me. I actually skipped version 3 heeding the advice of a friend and stock piled an extra pair of V2s. When I heard about the release of V4 with its lighter weight and lower stack height, I was anxious to see changes that could really recreate that excitement!
Pros:
Extremely light - Jen/Sally/Courtney/Renee/Reed/Peter/Ben
Excellent energy return - Jen/Sally/Renee/Courtney/Reed/Ryan/Peter/Ryan
Faster transition from landing to toe off. Encourages a high cadence-Courtney
More “ground feel” than predecessors - Sally/Jen/Courtney/Ryan/Peter/Ben
Excellent and secure hold of my narrower foot - Sally/Jen/Renee/Reed/Ryan
Smooth transitions at slower paces as well as uptempo - Sally/Renee/Ryan
More of a “natural” feel to the stride - Sally/Jen/Renee/Peter
Vs V3, upper is less baggy with better containment - Ryan/Ben
Cons:
- Can feel a little more wobbly underfoot than the previous version, especially in the rear and midfoot - Jen/Sally
Less of a full marathon option for mid pack runners - Renee/Peter/Ben
- Could use more heel lockdown - Ryan/Peter/Ben
- Upper of toe box takes a few miles to break in - Jen
I am personally missing the aggressive rocker of previous versions for marathon racing - Sally/Jen/Renee
Question on durability for some due to thinner rubber padding in heel (but this is somewhat expected in this kind of race shoe)-Courtney
5mm less foam in heel means less cushioned ride, limits volume of running in the shoe, plus plate rides closer to heel -Courtney
More narrow midfoot as Nike cut into this area by 5mm -Courtney
Less versatility than prior Vaporflies - Reed
Jen is a 2:41 marathoner, Courtney has PR’s of 3:04:27 marathon 1:25, 5 mile 30:17, and a 5k 18:20, Sally has a 3:24 PR as a 60+AG, Renee has PR’s 1:30:59 for the half and 3:26:45 for the marathon, Ben has PR's of 3:15 marathon and 1:30 for the half . Peter has a recent 3:10 marathon. Ryan has a 2024 2:13 marathon PR
Stats
Approx. Weight: men's 5.98 oz / 170g US9 5.2 oz /147 g US W8
Sample Weights:
men’s 5.78oz / 164g US8.5 (previous version 6.3 oz / 179g US8.5), 191g / 6.7oz US M11,6.31oz/179g US M9.5
women’s 5.2 oz /147 g US W8 (2024 Vaporfly 3: 5.8 oz / 165 g US W8), ; 5.3 oz / 151g US W8.5
Stack Heights:
VF4: men’s 35mm heel / 29mm forefoot (6mm drop)
VF3 men’s 39-40 mm heel (measured) / 31-32 forefoot ( measured) (8mm drop)
Platform Widths:
VF4: 75mm heel / 45mm midfoot / 105mm forefoot US8.5, women’s 71mm heel / 45 mm midfoot / 101 mm forefoot US 8.5
VF3: 75mm heel / 50mm midfoot / 105mm forefoot US8.5
Available Late April 2025. $260
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Jen: This latest incarnation of the Vaporfly is a definite departure from previous versions. Incredibly, it’s almost 10% lighter than the previous version, weighing in at only 5.3 oz/151 g in my US W8.5.
While the weight savings come from material changes throughout the shoe, the main reason is that VF4 is also lower stack height than the VF3, dropping almost 5 mm in stack height (from 40 to 35 mm) and 5 mm in width at the midfoot (from 50 to 45 mm).
This version also sculpts back the mass of the extended heel crash pad, making it much closer to the Zoom Fly 6 in visual design.
The upper is very lightweight engineered mesh, reinforced just around the laces and edge of the toe box with a laminated band.
On the VF4, the laminated reinforcement has a triangular extension over the big toe, similar to the Alphafly but in contrast to the VF2, the last version I ran in (see below).
Note the triangular extension of the laminated reinforcement on the VF4, not present in earlier versions.
I’ve lost toenails from the Alphafly but not the VF2 due to pressure from the upper over the big toe, and I hope this upper design doesn’t cause similar issues in the VF4.
At first, the toe box seemed like it might be a little too tight, but it relaxed after 20-25 miles into a clean true-to-size fit. My fairly low-volume foot was held quite securely without heel slippage or extra room through the midfoot or toe box.
Courtney:The fit of the Vaporfly 4 has come a long way from the V2 I stocked up on. Although it was one of my short distance favorites, it practically took pliers to get on and off. Stepping into this shoe is a much different story. The upper’s engineered mesh is flexible and the lacing’s added stretch and ridges allow a good lockdown. I found the fit to be a perfect race fit, but with a bit of extra material on the lateral ankle. For extra stability I did utilize the racing eyelets with a runners knot to ensure a solid lockdown.
The heel collar is quite rigid for support but is generously padded.
I did not experience any slippage or irritation and found it quite comfortable. Nike has used a TPU engineered mesh for a super breathable ride.
I see this shoe working well into the summer months and it’s inspired me to get some speed back into my training.
The Vaporfly 4’s perforated suede-like material on the heel collar and non gusseted tongue of the shoe give it 360 degree breathability.
The tongue is made of the same engineered mesh as the rest of the upper, and is reinforced over the lace tie area with a soft, perforated material that prevents lace bite while maintaining breathability.
Ryan: Spoiler alert — yes, you can still use the Vaporfly for marathoning despite the shaving of rear stack height. There’s always been a bit of a stepping-on-toes phenomenon brewing between Nike’s Vaporfly and Alphafly. The adjustments made to this Vaporfly 4 finally put a hint of daylight between their use cases, although they both of course remain world-class choices for distance racing. From here on out, I think the Alphafly will be distinctly viewed as more of the long-haul, all of the bells and whistles option, whereas the Vaporfly is clearly simpler and more versatile, if just as capable as handling 26.2.
My initial feeling was one of relief that, ostensibly, not much had changed aside from the overly-perforated toe box of V3. The fit is glove-like and characteristically narrow for Nike, and I think it works perfectly for this shoe. The upper is now a stronger, more uniform,
directionally-woven engineered mesh which worked beautifully over my first 4 runs that ranged from nose-breathing pace down to intervals at sub-5’/mi. While V3’s upper worked well and was highly breathable, its heavily perforated toe box ended up being a bit too stretchy for my taste, especially after 100 miles or so. This version’s tighter weave creates a noticeably more secure feeling around the foot, making it more capable at tackling shorter, faster distances as noted below. There’s also a new toe bumper which keeps the toe box nicely sculpted and from sitting down on top of your forefoot as tended to happen in V3.
The rear of the shoe is built in a fairly similar fashion as the previous generation. There’s a solidly built heel counter and a soft, shiny bumper around the achilles to help keep the heel seated.
The switch from asymmetric to more standard lacing wasn’t noticeable to me. The fit is true to size lengthwise, but again – this one’s fairly narrow throughout.
Peter: The Vaporfly has grown up from the bouncy and somewhat unstable wild child of the OG. The original Vaporfly was such a revelation–If you remember way back to the original Vaporfly, it was really the first of its kind. There are race shoes BVF and AVF. Before the Vaporfly I ran races in minimally cushioned, light ‘race day’ shoes. The Vaporfly appeared and it was this bouncy, plated craziness. It was really fun to run in and I raced a couple of marathons in them.
For me, the big stack and bouncy foam wore out its welcome at about 22 miles of the marathon. When my form started to go, the shoe was unforgiving. The Vaporfly 4 seems to be the (young) adult version of the Vaporfly. It’s gotten lighter, the stack is a little lower and, while the energy return is still excellent, it all feels a little less wild and a little more refined.
The upper fits well for me. Step-in is easy, lacing is simple and overall the fit is good. First few miles I felt like the rigidity of the shoe was allowing my heel to slip a bit, but as I ran the shoe felt like it relaxed and fit better.
While the Vaporfly 4 didn’t produce the laugh out loud “what the hell is this thing” of the original, it felt much more stable on the later miles of a long run with lots of pacework.
Renee: Another magic Vaporfly. As an average runner, the Vaporfly remains the one shoe that instantly makes me feel faster. I enjoy several other plated road racers (and a few trail plated shoes), but none of them have that magic feeling like the Vaporfly. The magic has limits for me now, which I’ll explain in the midsole and ride sections.
The upper fit is comfortable and secure. I have a low volume, average width foot. I have a preference for v4’s upper over the v3 and find it equally as race-ready as the v1 fit. I am between a size 7.5 and a size 8 in some of Nike’s other shoes, namely their trail shoes. I have a size 8 in v4 and v3. I could not wear a 7.5 in this shoe.
Sally: I ran my first marathon (Boston) in 2014 in a very unremarkable daily trainer and didn’t know any different. One and done was the plan, but fast forward to this week as I am about to run my 12th consecutive Boston (not to mention numerous New York, Chicago, and London finishes as well). I eagerly bought my first pair of Vaporflys in April 2018 - they were an obsidian blue Vaporfly 4% Flyknit. That pair got very wet in the 2018 Boston Marathon. Did they make a difference? Rain boots would have been a better choice!
I have since run in every version of the Vaporfly and run marathon PR’s in several.
My all-time favorite was the VF2 which I raced in so much that I purchased three different pairs. I always said that even if the supershoe didn't actually make me run faster, if I believed it was making me run faster, then it was worth it. Placebo effect?
As an everyday runner (marathon finish times from 3:24 to 3:44 in the 60+AG), I have always preferred the Vaporfly over the aggressive Alphafly.. until I tried the Alphafly 3. I was planning on wearing the AF3 next week, but now I have a tough choice!
Nike’s new lineup has not disappointed this year, and the new VF4 is impressive. An incredibly lightweight, lower stack, streamlined version of its predecessor, I was worried it might lack the magic that makes a Vaporfly a Vaporfly. It has been a joy to put through the paces!
The VF4 fits my narrow foot like a glove and is instantly comfortable. It fits very TTS (I used to have to size up half a size in the first few versions to give my big toes enough room at the front) and locks my foot down perfectly, as I would expect from a race day shoe. I have over 50 miles in the shoe this week, and have had no hot spots whatsoever.
The lacing is no longer off-set, which suits me well. The engineered mesh upper is quite breathable (to a fault in these cold winter-like temperatures) and more secure than the stretchier, more open mesh of the VF3.
The tongue is just a bit longer, providing better coverage under the top laces. I have been a big fan of Nike’s race shoe serrated laces that really lock themselves in place; here they changed to a non-saw tooth edged lace but the hold is just as good (phew).
Ben: I don’t want to bury the lede, but this is my favorite VaporFly yet.
I found the first two versions to be exceedingly harsh. I’d finish runs with my feet and Achilles angry and sore. V3 was wobbly, too soft in the heel, with poor lockdown (at least for me).
V4 feels very snappy and fast, more cushioned through the arch, with an exceptional upper.
It feels like Nike is now separating the AlphaFly and VaporFly lovers into two distinct groups. They are very different shoes at this point. We could also say that the Alpha is more clearly focused on the marathon distance, while the VaporFly 4 feels perfectly designed for the half marathon and below, especially with its reduced stack height and reduced weight.
Midsole & Platform
Jen: The 5 mm decrease in stack height, 5 mm decrease in midsole width, and 2 mm lower drop all make a noticeable difference here.
At slower paces, I felt that the VF4 was somewhat less stable through the heel and midsole than the VF2. This created a slightly wobblier, flatter landing and pushoff, in contrast to the smooth rocker of the VF2.
Once I picked up the pace and was striking only through the midfoot and forefoot, however, the VF4 really began to shine. The updated ZoomX foam provides excellent energy return and the full-length carbon fiber Flyplate aids in propulsion.
To me, the VF4 doesn’t feel quite as marshmallow-soft or springy as the Alphafly 2 (the last Alphafly I bought), but is lighter, lower, and clearly made for speed: my guess is that this update will be the shoe of choice for many 5k to half marathon racers, while some will lean towards the Alphafly for marathon distances and beyond. Still, there is more than enough cushion and energy return here to make the VF4 a great marathon shoe.
Courtney: The nimbleness and snappiness of the Vaporfly 4 has become addictive! This ultra light racing shoe is meant for top speed, and I have to say I am loving it.
After several speed sessions at the track, I noticed there is a definite push forward to the forefoot that is favorable for a faster ride. I am usually a pretty heavy heel striker, but in the Vaporfly 4 I find my landings are more at the midfoot and I am quickly rolled forward to a fast toe off. No bottoming out here.
There are several reasons why I think this is occurring. First, the newly designed curvature of the Flyplate in V4 is more sharply angled downward with less ZoomX foam under the heel and more foam under the forefoot, creating a slope and efficient roll forward. Secondly, I find the Vaporfly’s lowered stack height in the heel encourages a higher cadence using energy to go forward rather than bounding/bouncing upward.
In data nerd terms, my vertical oscillation is lower in the Vaporfly. I also found the less rockered ride to be surprisingly efficient and controlled. A big toe spring would take this shoe into the overdone category and be missing the refreshing ground feel that Nike has executed so well here. A shoe like the Alphafly with a higher stack of ZoomX and a plate that rides closer to the forefoot creates a rolling sensation rather than the snappy ride of the Vaporfly.
I find the Vaporfly to be much more comfortable at faster paces than slower ones. This is not always the case with super shoes as some suit the longer distance better. Shoes like the Nike Alphafly 3 have a lot more cushioning with a slightly heavier weight that make it an ideal shoe for distances like the marathon where the Vaporfly really shines at a 10k-5k pace or faster.
Once I slowed down I started to feel the instability of a narrow heel and midfoot (though improved stability from previous models).
Though Nike decided to take out width in the midfoot, I did still find it to be more stable than the Next % model that I previously ran in. I didn’t run Vaporfly 3.
V4 sports a winged top half of the midsole that provides some sidewall support which I noticed most in the medial arch. This being said, for me the Vaporfly remains in a special short distance race category that I really can’t take for long distances as it lacks the cushion that other race shoes today offer.
Renee: Ah, the stack height. Yes, it’s less. Remember when people ran marathons in low stack shoes? I ran a 30 mile easy trail/horse trail in the New Balance Elite v1 years ago, and while unstable for trail, the stack (32mm/22mm) was fine.
Now here I am thinking I can’t run a full marathon in a 34/29mm shoe. But I’m slower now and need more under my forefoot, especially since I’m used to it, and especially when I’m running pavement instead of trail or dirt/gravel. Faster runners might disagree. I will say the v4 feels better for 5k and 10k distances than the previous version, but at my paces, I’m not going to run faster in this version as compared to v3. I have a slight inclination to choose a previous version for a half marathon too, but I think for faster paces/runners v4 will be better because of the lower weight.
The difference in the plate location within the midsole gives v4 less of a rockered ride as compared to v1 and v3 (I did not run with v2). I’d need to be in great shape to choose this shoe for a full marathon over some of the more cushioned options. The shoe feels faster at shorter distances and it’s more controllable because of the lower weight and lower stack. The shoe is dainty and requires a fast takeoff. I can’t imagine the shoe being comfortable at mile 22 if I was running a 8:30 min/mile pace or slower. It’s fine for warm up and cool down miles, but I wouldn’t want to run slow with it for a marathon distance.
Sally: Nike has done a great job of dropping weight and yet retaining that full-length slab of our beloved ZoomX foam, split down the middle by a partially visible full-length carbon fiber FlyPlate.
The midsole narrows a bit on both the medial and lateral sides of the midfoot, making it slightly less stable than the VF3, but I found the lower stack to balance that out.
I sense a smoother, less bouncy transition and defintely more ground feel. This midsole is decent at the slower paces, but it really starts to shine as your turnover and your paces increase. I am more of a midfoot striker that gets forward in my shoes, and the VF4 encourages that quick turnover. The propulsion and toe-off is not as aggressive as in the VF2 in particular.
Ben: As others note, the midsole is certainly narrow, which could be a problem for some. To me, it adds to the racer-like feel of the shoe.
Everything about this shoe wants you to run fast, from the laces to the upper, to the adjusted plate and relative lack of cushioning. The rocker moves you very much onto your forefoot, a different sensation than in previous models. At fast speeds, this is a wonderful feeling, less so when muddling along. I originally thought the narrow heel would be a problem but the shoe finds a way to take you off of your heels (for the most part) and this becomes less noticeable.
Peter: Everyone beat me to the punch on all of the juicy midsole details, so I’ll just add a brief note here. The Midsole feels a little less wild and and a little more stable than previous versions (certainly the original) of the VF. Turnover is very quick and I agree that they feel better at faster paces.
Ryan: I find the magic of ZoomX in the way that it delivers a balance of explosive power without sacrificing control. This definitely isn’t the case for many other midsoles on the market, which tend to trade off one for the other. This same dynamic continues in this midsole.
I’ll be honest and say that as a midfoot striker, I don’t really notice a huge difference in the stack reduction at the rear of the shoe. And the forefoot stack remains unchanged, so you still get the same level of explosive protection there. As a result, I think that this iteration has gained some versatility and can now be smartly put to use from anywhere from 5k-marathon.
The most notable sensation with this VF4 is just how darn nimble and low-inertia it feels on foot. It begs you to giddy up and keep your cadence high, mashing into the soft but powerful mid/forefoot.
I’d describe the midsole’s underfoot geometry as fairly ordinary, and as such, it doesn’t have any prescriptive tendencies. There isn’t what I’d describe as a noticeable ‘rocker’ effect, and the transition is lightning quick as long as you’re moving at an effortful pace and putting some leverage into the plate. As others noted though, its stiffness doesn’t lend it to being as friendly at slower paces (or if your form breaks late in a race).
Outsole
Jen: The outsole is mostly smooth, exposed foam up to the midfoot, with a narrow gap down the center that exposes the Flyplate. That gap might be a problem on gravel, but helps save weight and won’t be an issue on the shoe’s intended surface of smooth asphalt.
Courtney: The midfoot and forefoot have rubber coverage that provided enough traction for a moderate paces run on wet roads, but I haven't yet tested it on tight corners at pace. I wore the VF2 for the majority of my XC season last year and hope the VF4’s outsole has enough grip to perform equally well on trails.
The outsole of the Vaporfly 4 is minimal on the rear with two crash pads on either side of the split. The forefoot has a more robust rubber outsole which makes sense as this shoe is really pushing you to this area. Most of the wear and tear I am seeing is at the lateral toe with little impact on those rear pads.
Though the outsole is thinner in this version( Nike claims cutting weight), I am not so worried about durability. I see the Vaporfly as a strictly 200 mile life shoe and wouldn’t expect to ride this out much longer.
Renee: Sally mentions that the shoe is better for transitioning speeds, and I agree. While I didn’t notice this dramatically while running, it’s apparent in the outsole wear. I have lateral wear on the heel of my v1 and v3 specifically from treadmill workouts of intervals when I drag my heel when slowing down. Also, I run on the same flat/smooth gravel section at home and make sharp turns running back and forth. I do not have the same wear on the v4, which seems to be mostly because of the lower stack and control underfoot. I’m not dragging my heel when I quickly slow down or make a shape turn.
The rubber compound itself under the heel seems to be more durable too, although I liked the waffle pattern of v3.
The cutout at the ground in v4 is much larger than v3’s. I did not have any gravel wedge here because I was landing on the forefoot, but it’s possible.
The outsole rubber does not cover the entire heel/midfoot area, leaving exposed midsole. Unlike v3’s waffle forefoot coverage, the forefoot of v4 is entirely covered.
Sally: I immediately note that this outsole is quieter than previous VF versions, a big plus in my book. As the others have pointed out, the plentiful rubber under the forefoot is thinner than in the past versions (to save weight), but seems plenty grippy and shows no signs of wear at 50 miles.
Sadly I have been able to test these shoes in plenty of rain and even on ice (come on, New England, let it be spring!) and can vouch for the solid traction underfoot. I have collected a few nice rocks in the FlyPlate cutout, but let’s blame that on my road conditions.
Ben: I had the chance to do one of my test runs, a very wet 5K and found that the shoe performed well around muddy, damp corners. There is decent traction here, all things considered.
Its durability and longevity are stil a bit questionable. We’ve become spoiled of late, taking race shoes well into the triple digits. It’s hard to even remember when we were all advised that these wouldn't take you to 100 miles. This might be such a case, though that remains to be seen.
Ryan: I love the simplicity here of the fully covered forefoot waffle design. It makes for a confident toe-off and a smooth transition. The longer, deeper groove which splits the heel up slightly didn’t seem to affect the ride in a noticeable way.
While the midfoot foam will quickly show signs of abrasion, it shouldn't affect the shoe’s ride or performance. If V3 is any guide, durability will be acceptable here, but I wouldn’t go out wearing these on training runs unless your shoe budget is unrestricted.
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Jen: I loved the VF2, skipped the VF3, and am ready to fall in love all over again with the VF4 as a race day shoe.
That said, the updates are significant, and the VF4 isn’t immediately recognizable as part of the Vaporfly line of recent years and harkens back to the 2017-2018 lower stack pre Next % versions.
Highlights in my opinion are the extremely lightweight and well-designed upper which is much more comfortable than the VF2. Runners who want a closer-to-the-ground ride will welcome the lower stack, while I’m a little more ambivalent (and liked the smooth rocker from midfoot to toe-off of the VF2). I’d happily reach for the VF4 for road 5k to half marathon distances and also look forward to testing it on XC courses this fall.
Jen’s score: 9.85/10, 😊😊😊😊😊
Ride (50%): 10/10 Fit (30%): 10/10 Value (15%): 9/10 Style (5%): 10/10
Courtney: The Vaporfly 4 is an extremely light and fast race shoe that really owns the short distance category for me. Similar to my feelings about the older Next%, I categorize this shoe into my short distances, but top speed shoes. It really lacks the support I need in the heel and midfoot for slower paces and longer endeavors, but it may work well for those with different biomechanics.
At a pretty affordable price (only $10 more than the 2017 v1), it is a sound investment for superb performance. It remains one of those shoes I pick up and my heart flutters because I know something special can happen!
Courtney’s score: 9.98/10😊😊😊😊😊
Ride(50%): 10/10 Fit (30%): 10/10 Value (15%):10/10 Style (5%): 9.5/10
Renee: The Vaporfly 4 is a magical shoe even for average runners like me. For utility and cost, I still prefer the previous versions. At my paces, the v4 won’t be significantly faster for a 5k or 10k, and I wouldn’t choose it for a full marathon because I need more underfoot for comfort.
Thus, I think the previous versions are more cost efficient because of their greater race type range for me. That said, v4 feels much better for speed workouts than v1 or v3, and the upper is more secure than v3’s. The shoe is smooth at 7:30-8 min/mile paces but seems more “alive” at paces closer to 6:00 to 6:45 min/mile, way faster than my marathon pace.
For a 3:30 or so marathon finish time, the v4 might work for those who are dainty with quick cadence. The shoe is not uncomfortable for slower paces, I just wouldn’t want to run slow with it for 26.2+ miles. Even for a half marathon, I’d need to be in good shape, keeping a solid 7 min/mile or less (not easy for me). On gravel and light trails, it seems more controllable because of the lower stack, but it’s still a wild ride on anything debris covered. For anyone wanting a half marathon or less racing shoe, the v4 is one of the best options. For a full marathon, I’d look elsewhere.
Renee’s Score: 9.8/10
Ride 10/10, Value 9.5 (comparable to other plated racers, but less diverse in terms of distance), Fit 10/10
😊😊😊😊😊
Sally: I have a history of love affairs with the Vaporfly, and am pleased to report that the flutters are still there. The VF4 is a lighter, trimmer, lower to the ground, more streamlined and well-fitting race day shoe that will be my top choice for races up to the half marathon. As a marathoner running 7:45 - 8:15/mi paces, I worry that the VF4 would be a struggle after 15-20 miles; for me this shoe excels at the faster tempo paces. As I get older, I realize I like a bit more cushion and support under my feet for the long distances. I also like more of an aggressive rocker for race day efforts, which previous versions (especially VF2) had more of.
It seems to be that Nike is making more of a distinction here between its two leading race day shoes, with the Alphafly 3 being geared for the marathoner and the Vaporfly 4 for the shorter distances. The smile factor is high, especially when you pick up your pace!
Sally’s score: 9.87 / 10.0
Ride (50%): 9.9/10 Fit (30%):10/10 Value (15%):9.5/10 Style (5%):10/10
😊😊😊😊😊
Ben: As someone who has struggled with past versions of the VaporFly I was very pleasantly surprised by version 4. It’s fast and nimble, super light and fun. While it’s likely not the best choice for the marathon, it absolutely sings at shorter distances, perhaps up to the half marathon.
The upper is fantastic and the lockdown is great. The ride is somehow both cushioned and quick.
It’s a great option for those looking to run fast and/or train fast at shorter distances. Does the somewhat limited usage justify the price or do you just go with the (AlphaFly 3, Asics MetaSpeed Sky/Edge Paris, Puma Deviate Nitro Elite 3) all of which can basically do it all.
Ben’s Score: 9.6/10
😊😊😊😊😊
Peter: I was right in the last weeks of Marathon training as I tested the Vaporfly 04. I put them on and ran 16 with a bunch of MGP segments and they were flawless. They felt great at Marathon pace and I really enjoyed them even on the easy sections. My feet felt great at the end of the run and I had to seriously consider them for my race day shoe. I’ve since done a few different workouts in them and they feel great at MGP, HMGP and faster. They feel more stable than the original Vaporfly and I’d highly recommend them as a tempo trainer and race day shoe for anyone.
Peter’s Score 9.8/10
😊😊😊😊😊
Ryan: There are some minor adjustments made here which I think do result in a slightly superior shoe to V3. V4 has certainly become more versatile and has a higher performing upper. It also feels even snappier and quicker to turn over than any previous version. The ride hasn’t changed a tremendous amount, but has become slightly more straightforward and controlled.
Overall, I like the idea of separating the Vaporfly from the Alphafly, and I think the design changes here make it obvious that the Alphafly is marathon-specific, whereas the Vaporfly is completely appropriate for ripping anything from 5k on up. The price tag stings, the heel could use a bit more lockdown, and durability isn’t likely to be stellar, but those aside, I’m having a hard time finding flaws with this one.
Ryan’s Score 9.8/10
😊😊😊😊1/2
10 Comparisons
Vaporfly Next% v3 (RTR Review)
Renee: I have comparisons throughout. For average or mid/back pack runners, the v3 has more underfoot for comfort for the full marathon distance. The higher drop and plate placement give a more rockered ride to cover the distance. The new version is better for shorter distances and speed, given the lower stack and lighter weight. If looking only for a 5-10k option, v4. If needing a shoe for 5k to half and full marathons, v3 is better. Sizing is comparable.
Sally: I have run marathons in the VF3 comfortably thanks to its more generous underfoot midsole, but think I will limit VF4 to shorter efforts. Both fit well but VF4 is even more streamlined on my narrow foot. VF3 for a marathon, VF4 for fast tempo work and races from 5K to 10K to Half Marathon.
Vaporfly Next % (RTR Review)
Jen: I loved this version of the Vaporfly, and the VF4 is quite different. The Next% has more of a rockered feel, wider midfoot and heel, higher stack, and rougher upper with short laces. The VF4 is lighter, lower, and sleeker, with an equally responsive ride but perhaps a little less propulsion.
I agree with Jen here. Next% was truly a great shoe, but I really value the added comfort of V4. For me the Vaporfly 4 is slightly more stable and offers efficiency and a more natural roll forward.
Renee: The Vaporfly Next% v1 works better for half to full distances for me at my paces. I need more stack under the forefoot. The higher drop and plate give the propulsion I need for distance. The new version feels faster and better for anything shorter, so it’s a better option for racing specifically shorter distances. The upper fit is similar for me in both v1 and v4. I have both a size 7.5 and 8 in v1. I could not wear a 7.5 in v4. If between half sizes, I suggest the half size up.
Adios Pro 4 (RTR Review)
Courtney: The aggressive forefoot rocker of the Adidas Pro 4 looks very different from the geometry of our smaller Vaporfly. The Pro 4 is designed with a softer thicker foam with a wider more propulsive feel at midfoot from its signature energy rods. There is little of the ground feel of the Vaporfly 4. The more generous fit through the forefoot in the Adios Pro 4 is perhaps better suited for longer distances to accommodate swelling. Though I like the Pro 4 for shorter distances too, I think the Vaporfly is just a touch faster for me.
Ryan: The Pro 4 feels like the more marathon-specific choice here, with a more wily midsole and ultra energetic stack. It doesn’t turnover as quickly as the Vaporfly but it does feel like it has a more cushioned platform, especially as the Pro 4’s heel has been significantly softened from v3. The upper of the Vaporfly fits more snugly and in keeping consistent with its midsole, is more capable over shorter, faster distances. The Vaporfly feels smoother and is the more approachable of the two, but both are fantastic options. Choose the Pro 4 for marathon-type efforts where energy return and impact reduction are paramount, but consider the Vaporfly for any distance shorter than that.
New Balance SC Pacer 2 (RTR Review)
Renee: Both shoes are marketed towards a half marathon or less rather than full marathon. They both seem to be a possible the full marathon shoe for those not needing the stack of their counterparts, i.e. AlphaFly for Nike and the Elite v4 for New Balance. The Pacer 2 misses the mark, however. It’s a heavier shoe than it should be, especially compared to the Vaporfly. I enjoyed the shoe, but it’s not comfortable enough for a full and it’s not as fast as the Vaporfly. While an 8mm drop shoe, the Pacer 2 feels less. Sizing is comparable.
Sally: Both geared for the half marathon, but the Pacer 2 is heavier and much firmer. I recall wondering how the heck some female pros can race a marathon in the Pacer as it wouldn't work for me. The VF4 is lighter with a more comfortable, sleeker fitting upper and smoother transition, and a midsole that comes to life with faster turnover.
Ben: It’s a good comparison. Both are sleek, stripped down and fast. I found the Pacer to be more versatile and more forgiving, which are both a plus in my book. If you’re looking for more of a do-it-all shoe, I’d take the New Balance. The VaporFly is a better race shoe.
ASICS Metaspeed Edge Paris (RTR Review)
Ryan: The Edge is the only shoe I’ve run which I’d say rivals the turnover of the Vaporfly v4. The ASICS doesn’t feel quite as controlled and well-behaved as the Nike does though. Again, in a recurring theme for this review, the Vaporfly feels more at home over a wider range of distances, whereas the Metaspeed Edge is particularly adept at half-full marathon type efforts. Both shoes provide an ultra light, comfortable but capable upper, but the Nike’s has a more aggressive lockdown and is noticeably narrower in the forefoot. This one’s going to come down to preference, but I’d lean toward the Nike for most use cases.
ASICS Metaspeed Sky Paris (RTR Review)
Ben: The Metaspeed Sky Paris is possibly my favorite carbon-plated race shoe ever. It’s light, fast and streamlined without being overly harsh oe prescriptive. It is certainly ready to go the distance in the marathon for me, which likely cannot be said for the VF4.
Tracksmith Eliot Racer (RTR Review)
Sally: These two shoes have put a smile on my face recently and have both made training for Boston a joy (running is joyful, remember?) Both are good looking and super comfortable race day/training options that are lower to the ground and smoother in transition than the current competitors offerings, those high stack wild geometry sometimes unsttble and aggressively rockered offerings we are seeing this year.
The Eliot Racer is luxurious and elegant and smooth and my choice for comfortably cushioned long runs; the Vaporfly 4 is likewise smooth and responsive but really shines at the faster tempos, making it my choice for races up to the half marathon. Both will appeal to the runner who wants a high end performance shoe that fits well but isn’t overly aggressive in its geometry.
Ryan: The Eliot Racer seems to focus more on aesthetics and experience, which it delivers, whereas the Vaporfly orients itself around performance. I’d choose the Nike over the Tracksmith every time – no question.
Nike Alphafly 3 (RTR Review)
Courtney: The Nike Alphafly 3 propels you forward, but does not provide the snappy quick ride of the Vaporfly. This is not surprising given the difference in weight and geometry. AF3 was designed with different functions in mind. With ample cushioning, The Alphafly is a perfect shoe to go all the miles and feels more comfortable at marathon pace. I definitely land further back in the Alphafly but its wider 85 mm heel / 65 mm midfoot / 115 mm forefoot platform, stacked ZoomX foam and Zoom Air pods allow me to land protected and get enough energy off the forefoot.
Peter: I know I’m an outlier here, but I don’t really like the Alphafly 3. I land in a way that I feel I’m fighting the shoe. Everyone I know loves the Alphafly, but for me I’d choose the Vaporfly 04 any time.
Ryan: The Alphafly feels like an overbuilt, mechanical beast as compared to this latest Vaporfly. The Vaporfly is much easier to get accustomed to, whereas the Alphafly has a bit of a learning curve, thanks to its ‘pods’ and extremely cushioned ride. Both are still fantastic choices, but I’d put the Alphafly down as an acquired taste, as compared to the Vaporfly which I think most folks will love right out of the box. This latest Vaporfly has a much quicker turnover because of its simpler stack geometry and cleaner transition. Think of the Alphafly as a marathon specific tool, and the Vaporfly as a world-class, jack-of-all 5k+ trades.
Saucony Endorphin Pro 4 (RTR Review)
Renee: The Pro 4 is higher stack and better for a full marathon in terms of comfort/cushion under the forefoot. The slight rocker and plate help with turnover although it still requires a good takeoff from the runner. It’s not a slow shoe and can be uncomfortable at the midfoot if not maintaining fast paces. The Vaporfly is much lighter and much faster. For shorter distances, the Vaporfly. If needing cushion underfoot for a half or full, the Pro 4. Sizing is comparable. The Pro 4 is not as tight, so better for distance but not as race-ready for those short distances.
Brooks Hyperion Elite PB (RTR Review)
Courtney: The Hyperion Elite 4 PB has a similar snug fit as the Vaporfly, but with a 5mm higher stack and higher drop at 8mm. The Hyperion Elite has a more supportive midfoot and medial arch which could really benefit runners as they begin to fatigue in those areas later miles of the race or if you need more pronation support.
Overall, the more cushioned and controlled DNA Flash V2 foam and stack of the Brooks may lend itself better to longer distances. I still found the Hyperion to have a very responsive yet natural roll forward, but couldn’t quite hit the speeds the Vaporfly 4 could.
Ben: I agree with Courtney. This is a good comparison. Both shoes are spry, light, snug and snappy. I think the Brooks is better suited for the marathon given its added stack and more ample foam. I also think the Brooks is a touch less harsh for these reasons.
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
The Vaporfly 4 will release late April 2025
Tester Profiles
Jennifer Schmidt found trail running in her mid-20's and began dabbling on the roads a few years later. Trail 50k's are nearest and dearest to her heart, and she recently took the win at the 2025 Way Too Cool 50k and placed sixth at the 2025 Black Canyon Ultras 50k. These days, you can find her primarily on the sweet California singletrack around Auburn, chasing competitive and personal goals over a variety of surfaces and distances. Depending on the season, she also competes in the USATF road and XC circuits for Sacramento Running Association's racing team, with a marathon PR of 2:41.
Courtney Kelly, age 37 is a college lacrosse player turned avid runner. She lives in Manchester, MA with her husband and two daughters ages 4 and 8. Courtney signed up for her first 1/2 marathon the morning of the race in 2022, winning second place in a time of 1:26. She decided to take running a bit more seriously, joining Wicked Running Club and trying some training plans. She ran her first marathon this fall in 3:04:27. In addition, she holds a half marathon PR of 1:25, a 5 mile PR 30:17, and a 5k PR of 18:20. She looks forward to getting some more strength and speed under her belt this next season, before taking a crack at the marathon again. She is 5’4”, 110 lbs.
Renee is a former U.S. Marine journalist, which is when her enjoyment of running and writing started. She isn’t that awesome of a runner, but she tries really hard. Most of her weekly 50-60 miles take place on rural country roads in Nebraska, meaning mud, gravel, dirt, hills, and the occasional field. She has PR’s of 1:30:59 for the half marathon and 3:26:45 for the marathon.
Sally is a lifelong runner and mother of five who agreed against her better judgment to run her first marathon at age 54; she has since run the past eleven Boston Marathons, three NYC Marathons, two Chicagos, and one London with the WMM Six Star Medal now in her sights (Berlin in 2025). With a Boston PR of 3:25:55 in 2022 (9th place in AG) and three consecutive 2nd place in Age Group awards in NYC, she has competed in several Abbott WMM Age Group World Championships and placed 6th in the world in W 60-64 when she ran an all-time PR of 3:24:02 at age 63 at the 2022 London Marathon. She also competes in USATF races of all distances with the Greater Lowell Road Runners team. To add meaning to her Boston Marathon races she runs with Team Eye and Ear and has raised over $320,000 for Massachusetts Eye and Ear Hospital. Sally stands tall at 5’2’’ and 105 pounds, and lives in Marblehead, MA where she trains outdoors year round. She blames her love of skiing out West for any and all Boston Marathon training challenges.
Ben is the Senior Rabbi of Reform Congregation Keneseth Israel of Elkins Park, PA. A cancer survivor, he has run 23 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.
Ryan Eller A hopeless soccer career led Ryan to take up running, and after taking a decade-long break from competing, he is back racking up mileage whenever he can. He calls the 2018 Boston Marathon the hardest race of his life, where he finished in 2:40, barely remembering his name at the finish line. Ryan more recently has a PR of 2:13:36 at the 2024 NYC Marathon and ran 2:14:23 at the 2024 Boston Marathon, finishing 3d American and 15th overall.
Europe only: use RTR code RTR5ALL for 5% off all products, even sale products
1 comment:
A lot of cons to be an almost 10 score review. lol
Post a Comment