Review: New Balance Vazee Pace Sprints into the Field of Go-Fast, Light Trainers with the Right Stuff

Guest Review by Peter Stuart 

Is the New Balance Vazee Pace a Fresh Foam Zante killer? How does the latest in low weight go-fast running shoes stack up? There are so many really good lightweight cushioned shoes right now—it feels like between the minimal craze (whatever happened to…) and the new lean to maximal we are in a golden age of light, moderately cushioned shoes that are just plain FUN to run in.

New Balance Vazee Pace

The New Balance Vazee Pace has a light, snappy, comfortable and responsive ride—firm but not too punishing. The Vazee pace is built on the same last as the New Balance Fresh Foam Zante, has a 6mm drop  (22mm heel/16mm forefoot) and weighs 8.0 oz . This shoe joins a pretty crowded field of lightweight cushioned trainers in general (Nike Lunar Tempo, Saucony Kinvara and Fastwitch, Newton Aha and Fate) and from New Balance specifically—the 1400, 1500, Zante and 890 (which I believe it is replacing). So how does it fit in?

• Minimal, light breathable upper fits great. While it’s on the same last as the Zante, the Vazee fits a little bit more loosely around the arch and midfoot. I have found the Zante to be a bit constricting in the arch and the Vazee has none of that. It’s a nice, light mesh upper and has great laces with a little bit of elastic in them. Just a great fit for me. True to size.
• Firm! Hoka Cliftons these are not! That said, I didn’t find them to be punishing, just responsive and firm. They are less jarring by far than the NB 1500’s and the Saucony Fastwitch. The toe spring and the firm Revlite cushioning make for a quick turnover. It’s firm like the Saucony Fastwitch is firm—-firm heel, firm forefoot. The Zante with its Fresh Foam cushioning and hexagons side wall geometries is much less firm in the forefoot, but feels somewhat similar in the heel. The Lunar Tempo is definitely softer all around.

First Run Review: New Balance Fresh Foam 980 Trail-Versatile Trail Runner, Neither Cush nor Mush nor Brick

I just received a review pair of the New Balance Fresh Foam 980 Trail, the 2nd shoe featuring New Balance's Fresh Foam technologies of computer designed midsole and outsole geometries. This 10.25 oz men's 9, 8.1 oz women's 8, 4mm drop "trail" shoe retails for $109.95 and will be available by July 2014. 
I say "trail" as I am finding the Fresh Foam Trail is also a fine road shoe. 

New Balance  Fresh Foam 980 Trail

I have run a few miles on road and trail in the 980 Trail so far and am concluding they are a big improvement over the initial 980 Road I reviewed here. (Note 4/10/14: New Balance just sent me another pair of Roads as early pairs such as the one I received may have firmer midsoles than spec. I ran 5 miles in this new Road 980 and the cushioning was very similar to the Trail)  Smooth running even on the road with a foot lay down feel somewhat like Pearl Izumi's E:Motion line, they part ways with the PI shoes and the original 980 Road in that they are well cushioned and not somewhat harsh and overly firm as both the PI and 980 Road felt to me, nor rigid and a bit constricting in the forefoot as the pair of 980 Roads were for me at my true to size 8.5, the Trails here being 9's. The Trails are also not mushy or pillowy as the older model Hoka One One's are. 
Fresh Foam is the marketing slogan and with this shoe it starts to ring true, although I would not characterize the ride as "super soft and bouncy" as New Balance does. More a tuning of cushion and support to provide a smooth, well cushioned, stable and comfortable ride on trail and road. 

After 2 runs they are already more flexible than my still somewhat stiff 980 Road that have 30 plus miles on them. My first trail run in them was on muddy, steep, rooty NH trails and they were equally adept on the trail as on the road, I guess no surprise for this trail shoe!  Good grip, good stability on moderately uneven steep terrain with smooth striding on the flats.

Outsole: New Balance Fresh Foam 980 Trail

First, what is special about the midsole outsole design?
The New Balance 980 Fresh Foam is not made up of innovative materials (a la adidas Boost) or for that matter has a radical design ( a la Hoka).  The 980 is innovative as for the first time New Balance is leveraging parametric modeling software often used by architects to micro design and shape the data characteristics of loading and biomechanics into what is essentially a very simple single material EVA midsole and single material rubber outsole. The outer sidewalls have hexagonal "relief" based on the data modeling, which depending on location, either provide additional support via convex bulging shapes or deform, absorb shock and cushion through concave shapes.

So what did New Balance do to make this such a fine shoe, and an improvement in my view over the initial 980 Road? Well they tuned the midsole and outsole using their software, common sense, and I am sure some feedback from runners.

Midsole

The view below is of the lateral (outside) of the forefoot with Trail top and Road bottom.

Forefoot Lateral Side: New Balance Fresh Foam 980 Trail top, 980 Road bottom

New Balance swapped convex hexagons for concave ones upfront. Result for me a somewhat softer forefoot than the Road as concave shapes deflect a bit more than concave ones. Finger push test shows as much. I believe the midsole material is, or should be, despite my early experience with the Road of the same firmness in both shoes and the differences in feel are due to tuning of the hexagons and outsole.

Heel Lateral Side: New Balance Fresh Foam 980 Trail top, 980 Road bottom

In the heel area on the lateral side(outside) they made the hexagons on the Trail (top) larger and deeper which softens the heel landing without in any way making the shoe mushy.

Heel Medial Side: New Balance Fresh Foam 980 Trail top, 980 Road bottom

On the medial (inside) the Trail keeps convex hexagons from mid foot to heel and they are larger than on the Road. And this is my only quibble to date with the Trail and Road. I think these "support" geometries are intended to slow pronation as they firm that area, and while some may need a bit of help here, I usually run in a neutral shoe. The latest from the American College of Sports Medicine here recommends neutral non support shoes for the vast majority of runners. This said, especially for long trail runs and as the shoe gets some miles, the foot and eventually shoe tend to collapse inward in lighter shoes. I might have kept the smaller convex shaping of the road here as I feel a bit too much inside support in the Trail.

There is no rock plate I can see and don't believe it is needed, plenty of rock push through protection.

Outsole

Outsoles: New Balance Fresh Foam 980 Trail left, 980 Road right

Here clearly there are differences as the red sole on the Road is clearly for road use and green Trail for trail use. I found that the long deep lugs of the Trail provided superb grip on the steeps, a bit of icy snow, and the mud that I encountered. No mud accumulated but truth be said New England mud is not usually the sticky glop found out West. The lugs reverse towards the heel, sharp face foward, to provide braking. The long lugs also seem to contribute to a smooth ride on road, if a bit noisy. But there is more... The sheet, if you will, that holds the decently spaced lugs is thinner than the more continuous outsole with no flex grooves  of the Road. I believe this contributes to not only better road feel but more flex in the forefoot of the Trail . 

Upper

All overlays except around the lacing and for some strapping at the heel are seamfree. The upper is a very densely woven mesh, not exactly as light as many sub 10 oz trail runners who have but appears durable. I felt very well supported on some relatively rough trails without a need to overly cinch down the laces. It drains well, I did run through ankle deep water on my last run. It should not let dust in but may clog a bit with mud due to the very fine mesh.

The Trail upper is built on the same last (foot shape, volume,etc..) as the Road. The toe box while not as roomy as say the Skechers Ultra  is roomy enough with no sloppy play upfront, always an issue on trails for me. They are far more comfortable up front than my first pair of Road by sizing up half a size. With mid weight trail sock they should work for all my trail runs. If I ran long ultras and had wide feet, and I don't, I might potentially size up another half a size. The tongue is soft, padded and relatively thin when compared to the somewhat overly puffy tongue of the Road. The tongue is held in place by 2 webbing loops. The heel counter padding is a little thinner than the very puffy Road's. 

Update 7/13/14: I finally got to run some Utah single track in Park City. And for my first run out here, 11.5 miles and 2200 vertical feet the day after a half marathon, I picked the 980 Trail. Superb in all respects. Climb well with plenty of grip. Very stable on downhills from heel to toe.  As I expected the "firmness" of Fresh Foam shines on trails. Upper is supportive without being overly restrictive or too loose. A bit pointy in the toe but not a big issue for me. Lack of a rock plate not noticeable at all.

Overall Impressions
The 980 Fresh Foam Trail is a low drop (4mm), very solid,  supportive mid weight trainer runner suitable for both smooth and rough trails as well as roads. It is on the heavier side (10.25 oz)  of modern trail runners which often come in under 10 oz but given the cushion, deep and effective lugs, and rugged upper I think worth the weight for old legs, longer runs and tougher terrain. The tuning of the hexagon geometries and outsole has also made this a fine smooth running road shoe with few if any of the drawbacks associated with trail shoes on the road: harsh firm ride, overly slappy due to the outsole, or weight. I plan to make this one of my goto shoes for Summer 2014.

Competitor.com agrees with my review "...the Fresh Foam Trail—a modified replica of the award-winning Fresh Foam 980 road shoe—is a dynamic and versatile shoe that excels on many different types of terrain." See their review here.

Disclosure: The 980 Trail was provided to me free of charge by New Balance. The opinions herein are entirely my own. 

Review- New Balance 980 Fresh Foam: Supportive Cushioned Lightweight Product of Computer Aided Design

The New Balance 980 Fresh Foam, a 8.8 oz men's size 9, 7.3 oz women's size 7, 4mm heel/toe drop lightweight trainer is now on sale ($110 MSRP).

Note 4/11/14: New Balance sent me another pair of 980 in size 9, up half a size from my normal 8.5. It turns out the firmness in the midsole I felt in the first pair reviewed here was not to spec, too stiff. The new pair is more cushioned especially in the forefoot, roomy, and has better flex.

The New Balance 980 Fresh Foam is not made up of innovative materials (a la adidas Boost) or for that matter has a radical design ( a la Hoka).  The 980 is innovative as for the first time New Balance is leveraging parametric modeling software often used by architects to micro design and shape the data characteristics of loading and biomechanics into what is essentially a very simple single material EVA midsole and single material rubber outsole. New Balance has used this approach before  to custom design 3D spike plates for elite athletes based on their form and foot shape. I saw the Fresh Foam introduced at OR last summer and wrote about them then.

How does this innovative approach translate to the shoe's design? 
The outer sidewalls have hexagonal "relief" based on the data modeling, which depending on location, either provide additional support via convex bulging shapes or deform, absorb shock and cushion through concave shapes.

New Balance 980 Fresh Foam Medial Side

The medial (inside of foot)  heel area is firmer and more supportive due to convex hexagons on the  sidewall. The forefoot is more cushioned and deforms more due to concave hexagons.

New Balance 980 Fresh Foam Lateral

The lateral (outside of foot)  heel is concave and deforms and absorbs on landing on the decoupled heel, while the lateral forefoot is more supportive allowing the foot to roll inwards for toe off









Does it work? Yes. Not only does my informal finger "durometer" test indicate that convex areas are firmer and concave areas deform more but running in the shoes one gets a sensation of consistent smooth support from heel to toe.

Marketing materials from New Balance say that the 980 has "ultra-plush" cushioning. Well it all depends on what one means by ultra plush. They feel quite a bit firmer than Hokas or Skechers Ultra but less firm than the sometimes harshly firm Pearl Izumi EM line.  They are fairly close in cushion for me to the adidas Energy Boost although quite a bit firmer but more stable with less of the Energy's rebound effect. Running Warehouse has the stack heights at 25mm heel, 21mm forefoot.  They have a thick insole which I believe RW includes. The forefoot certainly feels nicely cushioned similar to an Altra Torin. The overall sensation is by no means unpleasant. One feels very well cushioned, well supported with good road feel. They feel particularly stable, yet cushioned, on downhills.  The bumps in the road have been smoothed out but it still there. Think of the difference between a big Audi and an old school luxury sedan. 980 is the Audi.

Upper and Fit
They fit true to my size 8.5, just, due to a somewhat narrow front of the toe box. I would size up half a size if I was running a marathon in the Fresh Foam and since this review New Balance sent me a half size up which fits far better.  Not really as roomy as the very roomy, almost too roomy, Skechers show below. There a 5 eyelets plus 2 further back to dial in the upper. Tongue is big and thick I think to help cushion use of far back 2 lace holes.  Laced and stayed comfortable without adjustment on the first try. A very modern seamless upper. The only stitching is at the very bottom of the lacing system. Rest is all modern overlays over a soft open mesh.

Skechers Go Run Ride 3 compared to New Balance 980 Fresh Foam 

Outsole
Outsole is completely covered in rubber with a bit of a decoupled heel. The computer aided design informed the size and placement of the outsole's hexagons and it is here New Balance may have gone a bit too far.  The shoe flexes far back near the middle of the area of small hexagons under the instep. Fairly stiff in the forefoot especially in the cold and I am pretty sure it is mostly the outsole and not midsole that causes the stiffness but it is gradually "breaking in" ( with 22 miles on the shoe). Unusual flex and not sure it matches my form as I have a roll forward and toe off near the front. I might have opened the forefoot outsole up to the midsole with grooves to get a more gradual flex. As the shoe does not have a "rocker" as a Hoka does or an air gap far back as the Pearl Izumi does, and they are stiff, it is fairly hard for me to roll forward and off at jogging pace. With more miles they may flex more.  I have not yet tried them at speed but soon will. Often shoes feel and function far differently at speed, particularly stiff ones.

Road Feel and Ride
Apart from the stiff forefoot and flex point far back they run very smoothly with great firm cushion and support. No leg soreness at all the next day. While a 4mm drop shoe, I did not have the sensation I sometimes to that the "heel isn't there". If I was making the decisions I might have gone with a bit softer foam. I say "road feel" as the midsole outsole (lack of lugs aside) could also make this a fine trail shoe in my opinion. I tried them off the side of the road and found them very stable. Unusual, as I often look for trail shoes that can run the road but this one feels starting from a road focus it could easily handle many trails. And New Balance knows this, as a trail version I saw at Outdoor Retailer is coming later this year. It essentially looked like a beefier deep tread on pretty much the same shoe.
Who might like the New Balance 980 Fresh Foam?
The 980 is a well cushioned and light trainer for those seeking a smooth, supportive ride. I might hazard a guess that heavier runners looking for a light sub 9oz shoe will find the Fresh Foam a good option due to its supportive nature. There are support/stability features designed into the hexagons so this could also be a good shoe for mild over-pronators without causing issue for neutral runners.  As long as not muddy or too steep (the stiff forefoot a bit of a concern on steep climbs without a rocker)  the Fresh Foam should also give a stable ride on easier trails. If they feel comfortable at speed I will consider them for my Boston shoe.

See my review of the New Balance Fresh Foam 980 Trail here. A very fine trail shoe for rugged terrain as well as a smooth runner on the road, a versatile hybrid for varied terrain.

For another review of the New Balance 980 Fresh Foam see Holip Soekawan's super review here.

Disclosure: The New Balance 980 Fresh Foam were provided to me free of charge for this review. The opinions herein are entirely my own.

Analysis of my Boston Marathon Shoe Options-Review New Balance 890 & Initial Impressions.

As the Boston Marathon approaches I have been mulling my shoe choices.  I run in neutral shoes and have a short slide without much knee lift. My half marathon times at age 52-53 have been between 1;35 and 1:39. I qualified for Boston at the St. George Marathon with a 3:29 at the St. George Marathon in 2009.

In 2010 I ran St. George in Saucony Kinvaras and found them to have adequate cushioning for the mostly downhill final 13 miles. Most of my shorter 2010 races were run in Nike Zooms, Kinvaras, adizero Rockets, and Newtons. In recent months I have been running in Hoka One One Bondi B and Mafates,  Adidas adizero Rockets, and Saucony Kinvaras,

For the hills of Boston and a planned pace of 8:00-8:10 I need a responsive shoe with adequate heel cushioning. While I have been improving my mid foot stride I will not be able to hold form all the way to the end. I also want a light shoe, less than 10 oz. Below an analysis of my current shoe quiver.

What I am finding is that a low forefoot height is key to a responsive feel but I also need good heel cushion for the later miles when form starts to fall apart. Both the adizero Rockets and my brand new New Balance 890 have about 10 mm of forefoot height. The Kinvaras at 14mm feel high are somewhat unstable, feel high, at speed. They also flex gradually ie not  pronounced at the flex point in the forefoot and are somewhat stiff. The Hokas with a low heel to forefoot  drop at 4mm with incredible cushion and light weight 8.8 oz are so far ( and they do require break in given the high stiff midsole) are somewhat harder to maintain paces below 8:30 per mile. The Kinvaras while adequately cushioned in forefoot and heel but are narrow in upper toe box and forefoot midsole strike platform.

Yesterday at my local running store Runner's Alley in Portsmouth NH I tried a pair of the brand new New Balance 890.

New Balance 890  Source: New Balance

Very light at 9.5 oz the 890's feature  REVlite midsole foam, the white foam in the picture below is 30% lighter than conventional midsole foams according to NB.

The white REVLite extends  to the front of the shoe all the way to the toe box with all REVLite on the inner part of the foot and partial REVLite on the outside of the foot. No motion control features on the inner side. The yellow foam is firmer and extends on the outside of the foot up to just before the flex point in the forefoot. The softer REVLite forward across the whole shoe forward allows a good flex. The thin layer of yellow foam is the outer sole material up front.

Likely REVLite is more or less the same material as the Kinvaras and Hokas but to me it felt more responsive on the run: firmer yet also cushioned. Part of the responsiveness is of course the low forefoot height and it seems a wide forefoot strike platform, and a well designed easy flex at the forefoot flex point. The upper is not over reinforced. The toe box is wide without excess material or stiff overlays. I sized up half a size to 9 for a little extra room as feet swell in the marathon.

My first run in the 890's, a 6.39 mile jaunt around New Castle in blustery weather was excellent. 8:00 pace. I liked the 23mm of heel cushion on the rolling downhills. The forefoot is responsive and flexible. They climb well. My only concern so far is the greater than usual, for me, heel toe ramp of 12 mm. Most of my current shoes are 4-6mm and I do feel something today I have not felt in months, some calf tightness something I never feel in the Hokas.   I will continue to focus on the 890's and Hoka One One Bondi B as potential Boston shoes in the coming weeks.

Hoka One One Bondi B