Article by Courtney Kelly and Michael Ellenberger
Nike Structure 26 ($145)
Introduction
Michael: The Structure is Nike’s flagship stability trainer, and version 26 marks a noticeable shift in the model’s identity. Gone is the Cushlon/Air Zoom combo, replaced by a full ReactX midsole. The goal seems clear: modernize the Structure while keeping the support that’s made it a mainstay in the stability category.
And for the most part, Nike succeeds - this is a meaningful update that dials back the plastic-y feel of the 25 and delivers a much smoother ride. It’s still not quite a standout in the broader daily trainer category, but it’s only a very small step behind the Pegasus now, in my opinion (rather than a whole tier). If you need support, the choice between the two is closer to personal preference than performance gaps.
Pros:
- Guidance focused and not overly “structured”, for a more natural ride feel: Courtney/Michael
- Fun bright colorway: Courtney
- Plush and very comfortable: : Courtney/Michael
- Fair price at $145, competitors come in at $150+: Courtney/Michael
Cons:
- Best for recovery paces : Courtney/Michael
- Could be lighter: Courtney
- Ugly, IMO: Michael
Stats
Approx. Weight: men’s 10.35 oz / 293g US9 // women’s 9 oz / 255g US8
Sample Weights:
women’s 9.52 oz / 270g US9
men’s 10.1 oz / 286g US8.5 (Structure 25: 9.9 oz / 281g US8.5)
Stack Height: 38 mm heel / 28 mm forefoot
Platform Width: 110 mm forefoot / 80 mm midfoot / 90 mm heel
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Courtney: The Structure is an affordable, reliable, mild to moderate stability shoe helping runners achieve their running goals with cushion and support. Although I did not run in previous versions of the Nike Structure, I have run in a variety of stability shoes including the Puma Forever Run, Guide 17, GT 2000, with many of my running years were spent in the ASICS Kayano.
The Hyper Pink colorway I received provides visibility and creates some excitement about running in a often not so exciting stability shoe. Many times supportive shoes lack “fun” and Nike has made sure to include some in their visual design. There are also 5 women’s colorways to choose from if pink is not your vibe.
The fit of the Structure is well executed. It is snug enough to feel supportive, and after a few miles of breaking in, comfort increases.
The Structure features an improved mesh upper with plenty of padding on the heel collar and tongue.
While part of the upper, the key support element here is the Internal Midfoot Fit Band which I will describe as part of the platform below.
Flat-style laces make it easy to adjust the tightness of the upper and find that just right fit.
The Structure has a plethora of reflective areas along the sides creating visibility for low light runs, in addition to the visibility of the Hyper Pink color way here!.
Michael: Straight out of the box, the Structure 26 feels more dialed-in than its predecessor. The upper is better executed all around - improved mesh, more comfortable padding around the collar and tongue, and an overall more secure midfoot hold, thanks to the new Internal Midfoot Fit Band. Flat laces and a solid lockdown make the shoe feel stable without being overbearing.
Fit is true to size, and I had no issues with volume or width. The heel hold is excellent, and the forefoot has just enough room to avoid any compression over longer efforts.
The pair I tested came in a red and white colorway that, to be honest, looks a little juvenile. Something about the blocking and finish gives off a straight-to-outlet vibe. A different colorway might change that impression (and in fact, I think Courtney’s look a lot nicer in photos than mine!), but this version in my men’s color didn’t do it for me.
Midsole & Platform
Courtney:The Structure now has a single density full React X midsole and no longer has the previous Cushlon and Zoom Air (at the forefoot) combination,
Like many recent stability shoes, Nike has done away with the medial post or other stiffeners at the arch which previously felt stiff, pointy, and uncomfortable.
Instead Structure introduces the “Internal Midfoot Fit Band”, a perforated non-stretchy band that is stitched into both sides of the sole, stretching up to connect with the lace sheaths
At first glance, I thought the band was part of the tongue gusset, but it is completely separate and there is no gusset. I found the technology provided gentle support throughout the foot rather than at a specific area for over-pronation support.
It is clear that Nike has avoided that “over supported” under the foot sensation that can be irritating to some runners. Shoes with too aggressive of a push from the medial support to the lateral side can be irritate the knee if introduced too quickly, but this is not the case here. Instead of rigid or bulky pronation support, the guidance is subtle, comfortable and natural.
Big high crash rails on both the medial and lateral sides at the arch help guide the foot forward on both sides and are a key stability element along with the internal midfoot band..
Triangular shaped overlays on both sides of the forefoot provide extra reinforcement.
Nike has removed the Air Zoom unit upfront found in previous versions for a more consistent feeling ride from heel to toe. In its place, full length React X EVA blend foam provides a more natural, responsive and more durable midsole.
Michael: This is where the biggest change happens; the Structure 26 now uses a single-density ReactX midsole - no more Cushlon, no more Air Zoom unit. And that’s mostly a good thing, especially as someone who found the Air Zoom units often more annoying than not (though they’ve improved in the recent past).
ReactX gives the shoe a consistent feel from heel to toe and avoids the disjointed sensation I felt in the last Structure, where the Air unit in the forefoot always felt like it was trying to do its own thing. Definitely not a “crazy fun” ride, but a solid upgrade (that goes much appreciated).
The internal band system offers gentle guidance without feeling intrusive. There’s no aggressive medial post here, and the stability is more platform geometry based and less mechanical. That means the ride is smooth and centered - never overly corrective. I technically do “need” a stability shoe (or at least have mild over pronation when walking) and while I didn’t feel like a new runner or anything like that in these, you can notice the effect when running, even at faster paces.
For those who need some support but have been turned off by traditional stability shoes, the Structure 26 strikes a nice balance. The guidance is subtle enough that neutral runners might not mind it, but it’s still effective for those prone to mild to moderate overpronation.
Outsole
Courtney: The outsole is made up of thick large blown rubber segments at the forefoot aiding in stability, with the largest located along the medial forefoot and under the first metatarsal for a stiff and propulsive toe off. The grooves at the forefoot allow forward flex but keep side to side flex at a minimum adding to the overall stability. The blown rubber upfront is lightweight and adds to cushion while offering good traction at the forefoot.
At the rear, we see larger grooves and patches of high abrasion rubber on the medial and lateral heel and towards the midfoot. There is decent width flare on the medial heel side allowing for stable and predictable landings. Durability seems to be holding up quite well at 30 miles with a bit more wear at the forefoot where the softer rubber is.
Michael: Nike went with large patches of blown rubber up front, especially along the medial forefoot, which reinforces toe-off in a way that adds both stability and a touch of propulsion. Flex grooves allow enough forward movement without making the platform feel wobbly side to side.
At the heel, there’s a good amount of high-abrasion rubber, and the flare on the medial side makes landings feel secure. Traction is fine in typical summer conditions - no complaints (also no crazy weather to test in).
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Courtney: The Structure may not be a speedster, but it’s certainly a reliable and safe choice as a stability trainer. Its comfort and gentle guidance have me continually reaching for it on my recovery run days. It resets my body, making sure things are aligned when my muscles are fatigued after those harder days.
The Structure comes in at a lower price than its competitors and is a good value.
I think runners of all levels can use this shoe and those with mild to moderate stability needs will find it a useful tool in their rotation.
The Structure is also an excellent walking shoe and I enjoyed some trails with the dog as well, with plenty of support. I expect solid durability from this shoe and I look forward to continuing to run and walk in it.
Overall: 9.08/10
Ride (50%): 8.5 I think Nike could make this shoe a little lighter to improve its versatility
Fit (30%): 9.5 Fit is great
Value (15%):10 great value for a shoe I will use regularly
Style (5%): 9.5 A good looking stability shoe.
😊😊😊😊
Michael: The Structure 26 is a clear improvement over the Structure 25. The plasticky feel is gone, the ride is smoother, and the shoe finally feels like it belongs in the modern stability conversation (as limited as that may be, with fewer and fewer options).
That said, it’s not a phenomenal, particularly standout trainer. It’s a dependable, well-built shoe that works best as a recovery day or easy mileage option for runners who want (or need) some extra support. For me, it’s a rotation piece - not a do-it-all shoe, but one I’ll reach for when I want a stable, no-fuss run. That works just fine for me here, and especially at the price, I’m happy.
If you’re deciding between the Structure and the Pegasus, it’s now more of an A/B choice than it used to be. If you don’t need stability, you might still prefer the Peg. But if you do, there’s no reason not to go for the Structure 26. Nike’s done a nice job modernizing it without alienating longtime fans of the line
Michael’s Score: 9.0 / 10
2 Comparisons
Puma ForeverRUN Nitro 2 (RTR Review)
Courtney: At a 40mm/30mm stack the Puma sits higher and you feel this as you are running. The Forever Run2 is a bit more performance oriented while still providing a solid amount of structure. I found the Structure to be more comfortable and natural. The shoes are nearly the same weight with the Puma at 267 grams and the structure at 270 grams. I found the upper of the Puma to be overly structured with overlays causing a cramped feeling that affected my natural gait pattern.
Saucony Guide 17 (RTR Review)
Courtney: With “Center Path” guidance technology and very wide platform, the Guide 17 has a similarly soft PWRRUN midsole that has comfort at the forefront of its design. The platform, although wider than the Structure's, is more flexible due to the deep grooves. It is similar to the Structure in its mild to moderate guidance, but I prefer to have the somewhat firm feelt of the Structure even when I am recovering from harder workouts. The Guide is a lighter shoe overall but its durability was not what I would expect from a trainer. The Structure’s outsole is well covered in high abrasion areas and I believe it will continue to run well over more miles.
Nike Pegasus 41 (RTR Review)
Michael: The Pegasus has long been a go-to daily trainer, and between it and the Structure, the Peg 41 remains the more versatile of the two for my rotation - but as I noted above, the gap is really closing. The Pegasus is slightly more responsive, lighter on foot, and smoother when picking up the pace. The Structure 26 is a considerable leap towards parity, though - especially for runners who want a bit more support without jumping all the way to something rigid. If you don’t need stability, stick with the Peg. But if you’ve got even mild pronation or just want something more planted, the Structure is finally worth considering in the same conversation.
Brooks Ghost 17 (RTR Review)
Michael: The Ghost 17 is technically a neutral trainer, but it’s one of the most stable-feeling shoes in that category thanks to its wide platform and linear ride. Compared to the Structure 26, the Ghost has fairly comparable specs, and both represent appreciated improvements over their predecessors. Not a lot of bad things to say about either; both are an evolution over its parent shoe, rather than a revolution - but with meaningful change. I think the Structure has slightly better lockdown and a softer ride, but the Brooks gives a bit more energy return and (if it matters) looks a lot better to my eyes. If you’re a lon-time Ghost wearer who wants just a touch more support and a little more energy, the Structure’s worth a look.
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
Latest Reviews-chronological order HERE
The Nike Structure 26 will be available July 24, 2025
Tester Profiles
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.Off the roads, Courtney is a painter and loving mother to her girls.
Michael is a patent attorney and graduate of Northwestern University Law School. Prior to law school, he competed collegiately at Washington University in St. Louis (10,000m PR of 30:21). Michael’s PRs include a 67:43 half-marathon (Chicago Half-Marathon) and a 2:20:41 marathon PR at the 2025 Houston Marathon. Michael continues to race on the roads, and is chasing a sub-2:20 marathon and potential OTQ in the future.
Europe only: use RTR code RTR5ALL for 5% off all products, even sale products
No comments:
Post a Comment