Shoes-table

Full Review	Rating	Weight (oz)	Penalty sec/mile	Penalty sec/Km	Drop (mm)	Forefoot Thickness	Heel Thickness	Cushioning	Flexibility	Notes
Hoka Clifton Review	5	8.5	9.9	6.2	4	28	32	8	4	Top pick. A lighter weight version of the Hoka Bondi.
Altra Olympus Review	4	11.8	15.1	9.4	0	36	36	8	4.5	An evolution of the Hoka design: Thick & softly cushioned, but better shape.
Altra Paradigm Review	3	10.2	12.6	7.8	0	25	25	6	4	Similar to the olympus but not quite as good
Hoka Bondi Review	3	13	16.9	10.5	5	30	35	8	4	A great Hoka, but the Clifton is better.
Hoka Mafate Review	3	13.6	17.9	11.1	6	35	41	9	1	The heaviest, thickest and most cushioned of the Hokas.
Hoka Stinson Review	3	13.2	17.3	10.7	6	32	38	9	2	A little heavier and thicker than the Bondi/Clifton.
Altra One2	5	7.3	8.1	5.0	0	19	19	5	8.5	Soft cushioning and lightweight.
Mizuno Cursoris Review	5	6.8	7.3	4.5	0	18	18	5	8	Soft, light & comfortable. Still available, but discontinued
Saucony Virrata 2 Review	4	7.3	8.1	5.0	0	17	17	2	8	A light weight, zero drop shoe.
Skechers GO Bionic Review	4	6.2	6.4	3.9	0	10	10	2	8	Highly flexible, zero drop, but firm. Great value.
Adidas Takumi Sen 2 Review	3	6.9	7.4	4.6	5	17	22	1	6	An unusual Japanese racing shoe
Nike Free Review	3	7.1	7.8	4.8	4	17	21	2	8
Modified Nike Free	3	5	4.5	2.8	0	17	17	1	8
Saucony Kinvara 5 Review	2	7.9	9.0	5.6	6	18	24	5	7	An evolution towards a minimalist design. (More drop than advertised.)
Altra Torin Review	3	9	10.7	6.7	0	20	20	2	7
Brooks PureCadence 3 Review	3	9.4	11.3	7.0	5	18	23	4	7	A good level of cushioning, but firm & needs to be lighter.
Saucony Hattori	3	4.4	11.8	7.3	0	15	15	0.5	9	Very light, with minimal cushioning. No laces unless you get the LC version.
Adidas Energy Boost 2 Review	3	10	12.3	7.6	7	14	21	6	6	A new type of foam produces a better shoe than you'd expect. Figures are without insole.
Mizuno Wave Universe 5 Review	3	3.2	18.2	11.3	2	11	13	0	9	A radically light weight racing shoe.
Merrell Trail Glove	3	7	24.1	15.0	0	10	10	0	7	I prefer the trail glove, even on asphalt
Hoka Rapa Nui 2 Tarmac	0	10.7	13.4	8.3	4	26	30	2	4	Uses Hoka's RMAT foam which is overly firm.
Hoka Conquest Review	0	11.9	15.2	9.5	6	28	34	2	3	Uses Hoka's RMAT foam which is overly firm.
Hoka Huaka Review	0	9.9	12.1	7.5	5	21	26	4	6	Uses Hoka's RMAT foam which is overly firm.
New Balance Fresh Foam 980	0	9.1	10.9	6.8	4	21	25	2	6	Less of a drop than a traditional running shoe, but too firm.
Brooks Transcend	0	11.8	15.1	9.4	8	22	30	3	6	Brooks claim it is "the Ultimate Plush Ride", but it's not much thicker and it's overly firm.
Skechers GOrun Ultra Review	1	9.8	12.0	7.4	14	26	40	8	7	Tries to be a $80 Hoka, but fails. (Without insole the midsole is 24/34mm
Patagonia EVERlong Review	0	9.2	11.0	6.8	11	16	27	4	6	More drop than the claimed 4mm, but no other flaws. However, other shoes do it better.
Asics GT 2000	0	10.9	13.7	8.5	9	20	29	4	6	A shoe that almost defines 'traditional', included for comparison

• Weight. The weight of a shoe makes a big difference in the energy cost of running. Even small changes in weight can make a big difference in how fast we run. The weight in parenthesis is my measurement, which is size 9.5-11.0 depending on the shoe. This helps compensate for shoes that claim to be lighter by making their shoes small for any given size.
• Performance Penalty. Most studies show that for each 3.5oz/100g of shoe weight performance drops by 1%. However, there is also good evidence that cushioning can improve performance, so some allowance is made for the padding. The figures here are based on 4 hour marathon pace, which is 9:09 min/mile or 5:41 min/Km pace.
• 'Drop & Sole thickness'. The drop is difference in sole thickness between the forefoot and heel. Larger drops can interfere with natural running form, and may increase the probability of heel strike.