Difference between revisions of "Nike LunarSpider"
From Fellrnr.com, Running tips
User:Fellrnr (User talk:Fellrnr | contribs) (Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:Nike LunarSpider (R5) Review}} The Nike LunarSpider (R5) is a good, but not great lightweight shoe. It's reasonably comfortable and offers good cushioning...") |
User:Fellrnr (User talk:Fellrnr | contribs) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
=Characteristics= | =Characteristics= | ||
[[File:NikeSpiderForefootSmaller.jpg|right|thumb|300px|A slice through the forefoot, showing the black plastic shank. The foam cushioning is slightly thinner under the shank, and I could feel the difference when running.]] | [[File:NikeSpiderForefootSmaller.jpg|right|thumb|300px|A slice through the forefoot, showing the black plastic shank. The foam cushioning is slightly thinner under the shank, and I could feel the difference when running.]] | ||
| − | * {{H:WhyBuy}}. The LunarSpider is a | + | * {{H:WhyBuy}}. The LunarSpider is a great shoe, but remember it's more expensive and less effective than its competition. |
* {{H:cushioning}}. The LunarSpider is not quite as soft or well cushioned in the forefoot as the better shoes like the [[Asics Gel Hyper Speed]]. I think this is partly due to the hard plastic plate that runs under the forefoot. This plate also makes the forefoot cushioning a little uneven as the foam under the plate is not quite as thick as the foam on its own. The rear cushioning is as good as the Nike Streak, but not the Hyper Speed, and it's heavier than either. That makes the LunarSpider good, but not great. | * {{H:cushioning}}. The LunarSpider is not quite as soft or well cushioned in the forefoot as the better shoes like the [[Asics Gel Hyper Speed]]. I think this is partly due to the hard plastic plate that runs under the forefoot. This plate also makes the forefoot cushioning a little uneven as the foam under the plate is not quite as thick as the foam on its own. The rear cushioning is as good as the Nike Streak, but not the Hyper Speed, and it's heavier than either. That makes the LunarSpider good, but not great. | ||
* {{H:drop}}. The LunarSpider only has 3mm of drop when loaded, which is pretty good for a mainstream shoe. | * {{H:drop}}. The LunarSpider only has 3mm of drop when loaded, which is pretty good for a mainstream shoe. | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
* {{H:flexibility}}. The LunarSpider has a springy plastic shank that extends from the rear of the shoe to very close to the tip. The shank can be seen in the underside pictures as black "Y" shaped plastic, but the actual shank is much wider under the surface. Under the forefoot it's about 2 inches/50mm wide. This shank reduces flexibility, something I normally dislike. However, unlike foam that simply resists bending, the plastic shank acts as a bit of a spring, helping toe off. I only noticed the difference at slightly faster paces, as my stride lengthens and there's more toe off emphasis, but I came to rather like it. One downside to the shank noted above is that the cushioning is uneven under the forefoot. | * {{H:flexibility}}. The LunarSpider has a springy plastic shank that extends from the rear of the shoe to very close to the tip. The shank can be seen in the underside pictures as black "Y" shaped plastic, but the actual shank is much wider under the surface. Under the forefoot it's about 2 inches/50mm wide. This shank reduces flexibility, something I normally dislike. However, unlike foam that simply resists bending, the plastic shank acts as a bit of a spring, helping toe off. I only noticed the difference at slightly faster paces, as my stride lengthens and there's more toe off emphasis, but I came to rather like it. One downside to the shank noted above is that the cushioning is uneven under the forefoot. | ||
* {{H:outsole}}. The LunarSpider has firmer outsole under the heel, but it has an aggressive plastic outsole in the forefoot that provides great grip on road surfaces. I appreciated the extra grip when running faster on wet asphalt, and it gives extra confidence on sharp turns. | * {{H:outsole}}. The LunarSpider has firmer outsole under the heel, but it has an aggressive plastic outsole in the forefoot that provides great grip on road surfaces. I appreciated the extra grip when running faster on wet asphalt, and it gives extra confidence on sharp turns. | ||
| − | * {{H:shape}}. The LunarSpider is not designed to fit a human foot, so I [[Shoe Modifications| cut open the toe box]] so my toes would not get squashed in. | + | * {{H:shape}}. The LunarSpider is not designed to fit a human foot, so I [[Shoe Modifications| cut open the toe box]] so my toes would not get squashed in. {{H:TryCuttingShoes}} |
* {{H:upper}}. The upper is inflexible and only has a seam where the green and blue upper meets in the pictures. The upper is fairly standard and quite breathable, but for some reason Nike has added strings from the midsole to the eye holes for reinforcement. (You can see these as black lines on the pictures.) While these did not cause any problems, they do seem a little pointless. There is a tiny bit of padding around the rear of the foot, plus a bit more padding around the ankle opening. It's not the most comfortable upper, but it's not bad either. | * {{H:upper}}. The upper is inflexible and only has a seam where the green and blue upper meets in the pictures. The upper is fairly standard and quite breathable, but for some reason Nike has added strings from the midsole to the eye holes for reinforcement. (You can see these as black lines on the pictures.) While these did not cause any problems, they do seem a little pointless. There is a tiny bit of padding around the rear of the foot, plus a bit more padding around the ankle opening. It's not the most comfortable upper, but it's not bad either. | ||
* {{H:tongue}}. The LunarSpider has a traditional tongue that is has a tab to attach it to the laces. The tongue has only a tiny bit of padding. | * {{H:tongue}}. The LunarSpider has a traditional tongue that is has a tab to attach it to the laces. The tongue has only a tiny bit of padding. | ||
* {{H:lacing}}. The LunarSpider has flat laces that worked well and I never had them come undone. | * {{H:lacing}}. The LunarSpider has flat laces that worked well and I never had them come undone. | ||
* {{H:heelcounter}}. The LunarSpider has rigid heal counter which reduces the rear comfort a little bit. | * {{H:heelcounter}}. The LunarSpider has rigid heal counter which reduces the rear comfort a little bit. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
=Comparisons= | =Comparisons= | ||
Here are some direct comparisons with its potential competition. | Here are some direct comparisons with its potential competition. | ||
| Line 40: | Line 38: | ||
|[[File:Asics-Gel-Hyper-Speed-6-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|Asics Gel Hyper Speed 6 outside]] | |[[File:Asics-Gel-Hyper-Speed-6-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|Asics Gel Hyper Speed 6 outside]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
| + | {{FastBlr|asics/gel-hyperspeed-6-192|192|Asics Gel Hyper Speed 6}} | ||
==Nike LunarSpider and New Balance RC5000== | ==Nike LunarSpider and New Balance RC5000== | ||
The LunarSpider is more than twice as heavy as the ultralight [[New Balance RC5000]] while providing only slightly more cushioning. | The LunarSpider is more than twice as heavy as the ultralight [[New Balance RC5000]] while providing only slightly more cushioning. | ||
| Line 54: | Line 53: | ||
|[[File:New-Balance-MRC-5000-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|New Balance MRC 5000 outside]] | |[[File:New-Balance-MRC-5000-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|New Balance MRC 5000 outside]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
| + | {{FastBlr|new-balance/rc5000-v1-852|852|New Balance RC5000}} | ||
==Nike LunarSpider and Asics GT 2000== | ==Nike LunarSpider and Asics GT 2000== | ||
I tend to compare shoes against my benchmark "normal running shoe", the [[Asics GT 2000]]. The GT 2000 is nearly twice the weight of the LunarSpider but provides slightly less cushioning in the heel and not much more in the forefoot. There's a lot more padding in the GT 2000's upper, but I've not found there's a huge difference in comfort. Given the weight and inflexibility of the GT 2000, it feels like a clog compared with the LunarSpider. | I tend to compare shoes against my benchmark "normal running shoe", the [[Asics GT 2000]]. The GT 2000 is nearly twice the weight of the LunarSpider but provides slightly less cushioning in the heel and not much more in the forefoot. There's a lot more padding in the GT 2000's upper, but I've not found there's a huge difference in comfort. Given the weight and inflexibility of the GT 2000, it feels like a clog compared with the LunarSpider. | ||
| Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
|[[File:Asics-GT2000-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|Asics GT2000 outside]] | |[[File:Asics-GT2000-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|Asics GT2000 outside]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
| + | {{ShoeGraphs}} | ||
=A Comparison with other Recommended Shoes= | =A Comparison with other Recommended Shoes= | ||
{{:Shoes-include}} | {{:Shoes-include}} | ||
Revision as of 17:21, 14 September 2015
The Nike LunarSpider (R5) is a good, but not great lightweight shoe. It's reasonably comfortable and offers good cushioning for its weight, but it's pricy and the forefoot plastic shank makes the cushioning a little uneven. The LunarSpider is marketed as a 'racing flat' but I use it as an everyday training shoe, as it provides everything I need with none of the typical excesses of a modern running shoe. The LunarSpider is also not a minimalist shoe, as it has enough cushioning for long distances and the plastic plate further reduces ground feel. These reviews are not being maintained. If you want trustworthy and detailed reviews, check out Run Repeat Shoe Reviews. If I'd continued doing running shoe reviews, I'd want to produce a site like run repeat. I used The Science of Running Shoes as the basis of how I tested running shoes and what you should look for in a running shoe.
Contents
1 Characteristics
- Why you’d buy it. The LunarSpider is a great shoe, but remember it's more expensive and less effective than its competition.
- Cushioning . The LunarSpider is not quite as soft or well cushioned in the forefoot as the better shoes like the Asics Gel Hyper Speed. I think this is partly due to the hard plastic plate that runs under the forefoot. This plate also makes the forefoot cushioning a little uneven as the foam under the plate is not quite as thick as the foam on its own. The rear cushioning is as good as the Nike Streak, but not the Hyper Speed, and it's heavier than either. That makes the LunarSpider good, but not great.
- Drop. The LunarSpider only has 3mm of drop when loaded, which is pretty good for a mainstream shoe.
- Structure. The LunarSpider uses Nike's "Lunarlon", which is two types of foam; a soft foam under the rear and midfoot and the other acting as a cradle for the rear, and extending under the forefoot. This is an interesting idea, but as far as I can tell, the two types of foam are pretty much identical except for their color. This is not a problem, but it does add cost to the production of the shoe without producing much benefit.
- Flexibility. The LunarSpider has a springy plastic shank that extends from the rear of the shoe to very close to the tip. The shank can be seen in the underside pictures as black "Y" shaped plastic, but the actual shank is much wider under the surface. Under the forefoot it's about 2 inches/50mm wide. This shank reduces flexibility, something I normally dislike. However, unlike foam that simply resists bending, the plastic shank acts as a bit of a spring, helping toe off. I only noticed the difference at slightly faster paces, as my stride lengthens and there's more toe off emphasis, but I came to rather like it. One downside to the shank noted above is that the cushioning is uneven under the forefoot.
- Outsole. The LunarSpider has firmer outsole under the heel, but it has an aggressive plastic outsole in the forefoot that provides great grip on road surfaces. I appreciated the extra grip when running faster on wet asphalt, and it gives extra confidence on sharp turns.
- Shape. The LunarSpider is not designed to fit a human foot, so I cut open the toe box so my toes would not get squashed in. (I recommend cutting open the toe box of virtually all running shoes, with the exception of a few shoes like some Altra shoes. When you have some worn out shoes, you should try cutting open the toe box. I've found that it's a big improvement, allowing my toes to move naturally and engage for toe off, as well as reducing the possibility of blisters.)
- Upper. The upper is inflexible and only has a seam where the green and blue upper meets in the pictures. The upper is fairly standard and quite breathable, but for some reason Nike has added strings from the midsole to the eye holes for reinforcement. (You can see these as black lines on the pictures.) While these did not cause any problems, they do seem a little pointless. There is a tiny bit of padding around the rear of the foot, plus a bit more padding around the ankle opening. It's not the most comfortable upper, but it's not bad either.
- Tongue. The LunarSpider has a traditional tongue that is has a tab to attach it to the laces. The tongue has only a tiny bit of padding.
- Lacing. The LunarSpider has flat laces that worked well and I never had them come undone.
- Heel Counter. The LunarSpider has rigid heal counter which reduces the rear comfort a little bit.
2 Comparisons
Here are some direct comparisons with its potential competition.
2.1 Nike LunarSpider and Asics Gel Hyper Speed
The LunarSpider is a reasonable shoe, but it doesn't have any advantages over the Asics Gel Hyper Speed. The LunarSpider is heavier, but not as well cushioned as the Hyper Speed. It's also quite a bit more expensive.
| This review was made possible by readers like you buying products via my links. I buy all the products I review through normal retail channels, which allows me to create unbiased reviews free from the influence of reciprocity, or the need to keep vendors happy. It also ensures I don't get "reviewer specials" that are better than the retail versions.
|
2.2 Nike LunarSpider and New Balance RC5000
The LunarSpider is more than twice as heavy as the ultralight New Balance RC5000 while providing only slightly more cushioning.
|
| This review was made possible by readers like you buying products via my links. I buy all the products I review through normal retail channels, which allows me to create unbiased reviews free from the influence of reciprocity, or the need to keep vendors happy. It also ensures I don't get "reviewer specials" that are better than the retail versions.
|
2.3 Nike LunarSpider and Asics GT 2000
I tend to compare shoes against my benchmark "normal running shoe", the Asics GT 2000. The GT 2000 is nearly twice the weight of the LunarSpider but provides slightly less cushioning in the heel and not much more in the forefoot. There's a lot more padding in the GT 2000's upper, but I've not found there's a huge difference in comfort. Given the weight and inflexibility of the GT 2000, it feels like a clog compared with the LunarSpider.
3 Cushioning and Shoes
It's intuitively obvious that the cushioning in a shoe will reduce the impact on your body when running. However, The Science of Running Shoes indicates that the reality is rather more complex. While slight cushioning may reduce the effort needed to run by improving your Running Economy, most scientific research indicates that more cushioning does further improve Running Economy. In addition, cushioning does not generally reduce impact and may actually increase it. This is counterintuitive, but is likely to be due to the way a runners mind and body adapts to softer cushioning. Unfortunately, the scientific evidence is far from complete and it's hard to give clear recommendations. I believe that some runners will prefer more cushioning, while others prefer less, and typically those running further have a fondness for greater cushioning. I also believe that a shoe should be as light as possible, and a shoe should justify its weight with the cushioning it provides. My advice is to decide what level of cushioning you're looking for, and then find the lightest shoes that also fit well and are comfortable.
4 Visualizing the Attributes of the Nike LunarSpider
5 A Comparison with other Recommended Shoes
| If you're looking for "the best of the best" running shoe, here are my top picks. Of course, the answer will depend a little on what you're looking for, so I have recommendations for various categories.
|
For a more detailed on running shoes see the Recommendations for Best Running Shoes. This table lists the key attributes of What to Look for in Running Shoes. For more detailed information, on the shoes see detailed shoe comparison.
|
Full Review |
Brand | Name | Rating | Recommended price |
Benefit | Weight (oz) |
Penalty (sec/mile) |
Forefoot Thickness |
Heel Thickness |
Loaded Drop mm |
Cushioning | Flexibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saucony Type A Review | Saucony | A/A7 | Recommended | $100 | 6.4 | 6.7 | 12.1 | 19 | 22 | 1 | 4.3 | 7 |
| Saucony Type A6 Review | Saucony | A6 | Highly Recommended | $100 | 8.2 | 6.1 | 9.5 | 17 | 21 | 4 | 5.0 | 7 |
| Saucony Type A8 Review | Saucony | A8 | Highly Recommended | $90 | 7.5 | 6.2 | 9.7 | 19 | 20 | -1 | 4.7 | 7 |
| Adidas Adios Boost 2 Review | Adidas | Adios | Worth considering | $140 | 4.7 | 8.6 | 13.4 | 17 | 27 | 11 | 4.0 | 6 |
| Hoka Bondi 5 Review | Hoka | Bondi | Recommended | $150 | 6.1 | 11.6 | 18.1 | 38 | 42 | 5 | 7.1 | 2 |
| Hoka Clayton 2 Review | Hoka | Clayton2 | Highly Recommended | $150 | 9.1 | 8.3 | 12.9 | 23 | 28 | 1 | 7.5 | 5 |
| Hoka Clifton 4 Review | Hoka | Clifton4 | Worth considering | $130 | 7.7 | 9.3 | 14.5 | 30 | 35 | 10 | 7.2 | 3 |
| ON Cloudflash Review | On Cloud | Cloudflash | Worth considering | $180 | 4.4 | 8.3 | 14.6 | 19 | 26 | 7 | 3.7 | 6 |
| On Cloudracer Review | On Cloud | Cloudracer | Worth considering | $130 | 5.7 | 8.2 | 12.8 | 19 | 27 | 5 | 4.7 | 7 |
| ON Cloud X Review | On Cloud | CloudX | Not recommended | $140 | 4.5 | 8.3 | 16.3 | 21 | 27 | 7 | 3.8 | 7 |
| Mizuno Wave Cruise Review | Mizuno | Cruise | Worth considering | $120 | 6.6 | 5.9 | 12.5 | 17 | 20 | 7 | 3.9 | 6 |
| Newton Distance IV Review | Newton | Distance | Worth considering | $155 | 7.5 | 9.1 | 14.2 | 26 | 31 | 3 | 6.8 | 5 |
| Asics Gel DS Racer 10 Review | Asics | DS Racer | Worth considering | $110 | 8.2 | 7.0 | 10.9 | 21 | 26 | 6 | 5.8 | 5 |
| Altra Duo Review | Altra | Duo | Recommended | $130 | 6.0 | 8.4 | 13.1 | 29 | 29 | 1 | 5.0 | 5 |
| Mizuno Wave Ekiden 8 Review | Mizuno | Ekiden | Worth considering | $115 | 5.7 | 5.7 | 14.6 | 13 | 18 | 6 | 3.2 | 8 |
| Saucony Endorphin 2 Review | Saucony | Endorphin 2 | Worth considering | $115 | 8.0 | 5.1 | 9.6 | 15 | 13 | -1 | 4.1 | 8 |
| Adidas Energy Boost Review | Adidas | Energy | Worth considering | $160 | 7.2 | 10.0 | 15.6 | 20 | 30 | 7 | 7.2 | 5 |
| Altra Escalante Review | Altra | Escalante | Best of the Best | $130 | 9.1 | 8.7 | 13.5 | 28 | 25 | -1 | 7.9 | 6 |
| Altra Escalante 1.5 Review | Altra | Escalante 1.5 | Best of the Best | $130 | 8.2 | 9.0 | 14.0 | 26 | 27 | -1 | 7.4 | 7 |
| Saucony Fastwitch Review | Saucony | Fastwitch | Highly Recommended | $90 | 9.5 | 7.1 | 11.1 | 20 | 22 | 4 | 6.8 | 7 |
| Topo Fli-Lyte 2 Review | Topo | Fli-Lyte2 | Highly Recommended | $100 | 6.7 | 9.1 | 14.2 | 24 | 26 | 3 | 6.1 | 5 |
| Reebok Floatride Run Review | Reebok | Floatride | Worth considering | $150 | 7.7 | 9.6 | 14.9 | 28 | 34 | 10 | 7.4 | 5 |
| Saucony Freedom Review | Saucony | Freedom | Recommended | $160 | 5.4 | 10.7 | 16.6 | 25 | 29 | 3 | 5.8 | 6 |
| Skechers GORun 4 Review | Skechers | GORun | Not recommended | $100 | 6.1 | 7.5 | 11.7 | 15 | 23 | 3 | 4.5 | 7 |
| Skechers GOrun Ultra 2 Review | Skechers | GRU | Worth considering | $90 | 7.5 | 10.0 | 15.6 | 28 | 34 | 8 | 7.5 | 4 |
| Asics GT 2000 Review | Asics | GT 2000 | Not recommended | $120 | 4.8 | 11.2 | 17.4 | 28 | 35 | 5 | 5.4 | 2 |
| New Balance Hanzo S Review | New Balance | Hanzo | Worth considering | $110 | 7.6 | 6.9 | 10.7 | 21 | 19 | 2 | 5.2 | 5 |
| Hoka Hupana Review | Hoka | Hupana | Recommended | $115 | 6.1 | 8.9 | 13.9 | 31 | 36 | 7 | 5.4 | 4 |
| Asics Gel Hyper Speed 7 Review | Asics | Hyper Speed | Highly Recommended | $75 | 10.9 | 6.3 | 9.8 | 22 | 26 | 5 | 6.8 | 6 |
| Altra Instinct 4.0 Review | Altra | Instinct 4.0 | Worth considering | $120 | 6.0 | 9.8 | 15.3 | 29 | 25 | -1 | 5.9 | 5 |
| Asics Tarther Kainos 3 Review | Asics | Kainos | Worth considering | $130 | 10.0 | 6.9 | 10.7 | 17 | 27 | 9 | 6.8 | 6 |
| Altra King MT 1.5 Review | Altra | King MT | Recommended | $140 | 7.5 | 10.7 | 16.7 | 19 | 21 | 3 | 8.0 | 5 |
| Saucony Kinvara 8 Review | Saucony | Kinvara 8 | Best of the Best | $110 | 9.3 | 8.6 | 13.4 | 26 | 31 | 3 | 8.0 | 5 |
| Altra Lone Peak 3.5 Review | Altra | Lone Peak | Highly Recommended | $120 | 4.2 | 11.4 | 17.7 | 24 | 25 | 4 | 4.8 | 5 |
| Nike Zoom Streak LT 3 Review | Nike | LT3 | Best of the Best | $80 | 9.8 | 5.4 | 8.4 | 16 | 21 | 5 | 5.3 | 7 |
| Nike Zoom Streak LT 4 Review | Nike | LT4 | Recommended | $90 | 8.5 | 5.5 | 8.5 | 15 | 21 | 3 | 4.6 | 6 |
| Nike LunarSpider R5 Review | Nike | LunarSpider | Recommended | $125 | 6.9 | 6.7 | 10.4 | 17 | 21 | 3 | 4.6 | 6 |
| Hoka Mafate Speed Review | Hoka | Mafate | Best of the Best | $170 | 7.6 | 11.9 | 18.5 | 39 | 40 | 4 | 9.0 | 1 |
| Pearl Izumi EM Road N0 v2 Review | Pearl | N0 | Highly Recommended | $100 | 7.9 | 6.5 | 10.1 | 14 | 20 | 4 | 5.2 | 8 |
| Saucony Nomad Review | Saucony | Nomad | Worth considering | $110 | 4.3 | 10.5 | 17.2 | 25 | 27 | 2 | 4.5 | 4 |
| Hoka Odyssey Review | Hoka | Odyssey | Highly Recommended | $130 | 8.5 | 9.4 | 14.6 | 37 | 45 | 5 | 8.0 | 3 |
| Altra Olympus 2.5 Review | Altra | Olympus | Highly Recommended | $150 | 4.6 | 11.8 | 18.4 | 35 | 34 | 0 | 5.4 | 6 |
| Altra One 3.0 Review | Altra | One | Recommended | $100 | 6.1 | 8.8 | 13.7 | 23 | 23 | 0 | 5.4 | 6 |
| Altra Paradigm 4.0 Review | Altra | Paradigm | Highly Recommended | $150 | 5.3 | 11.0 | 17.1 | 28 | 30 | 5 | 5.8 | 8 |
| Asics Piranha SP 5 Review | Asics | Piranha | Recommended | $100 | 10.1 | 4.2 | 6.5 | 11 | 15 | 3 | 4.2 | 9 |
| Brooks PureFlow 5 Review | Brooks | PureFlow | Worth considering | $110 | 6.0 | 9.7 | 15.1 | 26 | 29 | 5 | 5.8 | 8 |
| Salming Race Review | Salming | Race | Worth considering | $130 | 6.9 | 6.5 | 10.1 | 16 | 19 | 4 | 4.5 | 6 |
| Altra Escalante Racer Review | Altra | Racer | Highly Recommended | $140 | 6.6 | 7.6 | 11.8 | 24 | 26 | 6 | 5.0 | 8 |
| New Balance RC1600 v2 Review | New Balance | RC1600 | Highly Recommended | $110 | 8.8 | 5.6 | 8.7 | 15 | 21 | 5 | 4.9 | 8 |
| New Balance RC5000v2 Review | New Balance | RC5000v2 | Best of the Best | $125 | 14.2 | 4.0 | 6.2 | 13 | 21 | 6 | 5.7 | 7 |
| Skechers GoRun Ride 3 Review | Skechers | Ride | Worth considering | $85 | 5.9 | 8.5 | 13.2 | 18 | 28 | 6 | 5.0 | 8 |
| Nike RN Distance 2 Review | Nike | RNDist2 | Worth considering | $120 | 8.0 | 9.2 | 14.3 | 25 | 28 | 4 | 7.4 | 7 |
| Inov-8 RoadXTreme 220 Review | Inov-8 | RXT-220 | Worth considering | $120 | 5.2 | 8.0 | 18.2 | 14 | 17 | 3 | 4.2 | 8 |
| Salomon Sense Ride Review | Salomon | Sense | Worth considering | $120 | 8.5 | 10.0 | 15.6 | 26 | 29 | 6 | 8.5 | 0 |
| Altra Solstice Review | Altra | Solstice | Highly Recommended | $90 | 7.1 | 8.1 | 12.5 | 23 | 25 | 0 | 5.7 | 5 |
| Topo ST-2 Review | Topo | ST-2 | Highly Recommended | $90 | 8.2 | 7.3 | 11.4 | 20 | 18 | 0 | 6.0 | 7 |
| Hoka Stinson Lite Review | Hoka | Stinson | Highly Recommended | $160 | 7.3 | 11.6 | 18.1 | 35 | 40 | 6 | 8.5 | 0 |
| Altra Superior | Altra | Superior | Highly Recommended | $110 | 5.6 | 9.9 | 15.5 | 21 | 25 | -1 | 5.5 | 4 |
| Adidas Takumi Sen 3 Review | Adidas | Takumi Sen 3 | Highly Recommended | $160 | 7.7 | 6.6 | 10.2 | 17 | 21 | 4 | 5.1 | 5 |
| Topo Terraventure | Topo | Terraventure | Review Pending | $110 | 2.6 | 10.8 | 27.5 | 24 | 24 | 0 | 2.8 | 10 |
| Altra Timp Review | Altra | Timp | Best of the Best | $130 | 3.7 | 11.6 | 18.1 | 30 | 31 | -1 | 4.3 | 6 |
| Altra Torin 2.0 Review | Altra | Torin | Worth considering | $125 | 3.4 | 9.6 | 20.7 | 30 | 25 | 1 | 3.3 | 9 |
| Altra Torin 3.5 Review | Altra | Torin 3.5 | Worth considering | $125 | 5.8 | 9.3 | 14.5 | 27 | 28 | 0 | 5.4 | 8 |
| Hoka Tracer Review | Hoka | Tracer | Recommended | $130 | 7.2 | 7.4 | 11.5 | 21 | 24 | 2 | 5.3 | 5 |
| Merrell Trail Glove 4 Review | Merrell | Trail Glove 4 | Best of the Best | $100 | 3.4 | 8.4 | 23.8 | 13 | 13 | 0 | 2.8 | 10 |
| Topo Tribute Review | Topo | Tribute | Recommended | $100 | 5.9 | 7.3 | 11.4 | 20 | 18 | -1 | 4.3 | 6 |
| Mizuno Wave Universe 5 Review | Mizuno | Universe | Highly Recommended | $125 | 10.7 | 3.1 | 10.6 | 9 | 12 | 1 | 3.3 | 9 |
| Altra Vanish-R Review | Altra | Vanish-R | Recommended | $100 | 16.1 | 5.3 | 8.2 | 19 | 21 | 4 | 8.5 | 6 |
| Merrell Vapor Glove 3 Review | Merrell | Vapor Glove 3 | Highly Recommended | $85 | 2.1 | 6.1 | 27.6 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 1.3 | 10 |
| Nike Vaporfly 4% Review | Nike | Vaporfly | Best of the Best | $250 | 10.4 | 7.2 | 11.2 | 25 | 37 | 8 | 7.5 | 2 |
| New Balance Vazee Pace Review | New Balance | Vazee Pace | Worth considering | $110 | 6.0 | 8.6 | 13.4 | 18 | 24 | 6 | 5.2 | 5 |
| Asics TartherZeal 3 Review | Asics | Zeal | Worth considering | $140 | 10.9 | 6.3 | 9.8 | 17 | 27 | 9 | 6.8 | 6 |
| Saucony Zealot 3 Review | Saucony | Zealot3 | Recommended | $130 | 8.9 | 9.5 | 14.8 | 29 | 32 | 4 | 8.5 | 6 |
| Nike Zoom Fly Review | Nike | Zoom Fly | Worth considering | $150 | 8.3 | 8.7 | 13.5 | 29 | 36 | 8 | 7.2 | 3 |
It's not a running shoe, but I love the Hoka Tor Ultra hiking boot and I've tested the Altra Lone Peak Boot, the Hoka Tor Speed 2, and the Inov-8 Roclite 325 hiking boots
Older shoe reviews: Saucony Hattori Review, Mizuno Cursoris Review, Skechers GO Bionic 2 Review, Hoka Clifton Review, Saucony Virrata 2 Review, Brooks PureCadence 3 Review, Brooks PureConnect 3 Review, Brooks PureFlow 3 Review, Skechers GO Bionic 2 Review, New Balance 980 Review, Brooks Transcend 2 Review, Hoka Huaka Review, Patagonia EVERlong Review, Asics 33-DFA Review, Hoka Conquest Review, Saucony Cortana Review, Puma Faas 100 R Review, Saucony Fastwitch Review, Nike Free Review, Asics Gel Lyte 33 Review, Skechers GOmeb Speed Review, Skechers GOrun Ultra Road Review, Nike LunaRacer Review, Altra Paradigm Review.
