8,101
edits
Changes
From Fellrnr.com, Running tips
m
{{ShoeGraphs}}
comment: batch update
{{DISPLAYTITLE:Hoka Clifton 2 Review}} The Clifton 2 is a remarkable achievement for [[Hoka Shoe Review| Hoka]], giving an amazing level of cushioning for its light weight. The original Clifton was a justifiably popular shoe, and the best seller at Running Warehouse in 2014, no mean feat for what was a niche shoe not long ago. The Clifton is nearly as well cushioned as the [[Hoka Stinson]], and while it's not quite as cushioned as the [[Hoka Bondi]] or [[Hoka Mafate]], it's a lot lighter than either. The original Clifton has been replaced by the Clifton 2, and it's been joined by the similar [[Hoka Odyssey]] and Challenger ATR. (See below for comparisons with each. I'll use "Clifton" to mean the latest second version, and specify a version when comparing. You can read about the original in more detail at [[Hoka Clifton 1]] and the latest version at [[Hoka Clifton]].) I've rated it as "The Best of the Best." {{H:WhatToLookForInShoes}}
{| class="wikitable"
|- valign="top"
|}
=Characteristics=
* {{H:cushioning}}. The Clifton has a high level of cushioning, with the soft ride that Hoka of famous for. The cushioning that the Clifton provides for its weight is quite remarkable, and better than any other [[MinimaxMaximalist]] shoe. (The only shoe that has better weight-to-cushioning is at the other end of the spectrum; the ultralight [[New Balance RC5000]].)
* {{H:drop}}'''. '''The Clifton has about a 5mm drop unloaded, but when the shoe is worn this is reduced to 1mm, which is effectively zero-drop.
* {{H:structure}}. This shoe is made of a single type of foam, though it is colored to appear like there are two different foams in use. The Clifton has a less abrupt taper at the very front of the shoe than the Bondi, but not as gentle as the Altra Olympus. The very rear of the shoe is cut away slightly, creating a little bit of a rocker shape that's common to the Hoka range. The midsole wraps around the lower part of the foot to create additional stability. This helps overcome some of the problems you get with a thick sole creating a stilt like instability.
* {{H:tongue}}. The Clifton has a classic tongue rather than a tongue-less sock style of upper. The tongue has plenty of soft padding.
* {{H:lacing}}. The Clifton uses thin flat laces which stay tied. The laces have a slight bit of elasticity in them, improving the overall comfort of the shoe.
* {{H:heelcounter}}. The Clifton has only a modest heel counter [[Heel Counter]] that is both useless and harmless.
{{FastBlr|hoka-one-one/clifton-2-1062|1062|Hoka Clifton 2}}
=Comparisons=
Here are some direct comparisons with its potential competition.
|}
{{FastBlr|hoka-one-one/clifton-730|730|Hoka Clifton 1}}
==Clifton and Hoka Odyssey==
The [[Hoka Odyssey]] looks almost identical to both the original Clifton and the Clifton 2, and it would be easy to think it's the same shoe. The Odyssey is sold as a mass market version of the Clifton, with the Clifton only available through more specialist outlets. However, the Odyssey has a midsole that is closer to the [[Hoka Bondi]] than the Clifton in both thickness and firmness. So the Odyssey has similar cushioning to the Clifton, but through thicker, firmer foam. The Odyssey is also slightly heavier than either Clifton. The tongue on the Odyssey is unpadded, like the original Clifton, but unlike the original Clifton, I found the Odyssey tongue cut into my ankle slightly. Overall, I found I prefer the Clifton (1 or 2) over the Odyssey or the Bondi, and my subconscious preference seems stronger than I'd expect from the relatively small differences. I suspect that the small differences between the shoes add up, so get the Clifton or Clifton 2 over the Odyssey.
{| class="wikitable"
{{FastBlr|hoka-one-one/mafate-speed-1085|1085|Hoka Mafate}}
==Compared with the Hoka Conquest==
The Clifton looks virtually identical to the [[Hoka Conquest]] (see below for an image.) However, the shoes are radically different, as the Conquest is way too firm for a [[MinimaxMaximalist]] shoe. The diagonal slices through the midsole are actually cutaways in the Conquest, but simple coloring on the Clifton. The Conquest really needs those cut outs to mitigate the firmness of the foam, where the Clifton doesn't.
{| class="wikitable"
|- valign="top"
|}
{{FastBlr|hoka-one-one/conquest-2-1084|1084|Hoka Conquest}}
==Asics GT 2000 2000 and Hoka Clifton==
I like to compare shoes against the [[Asics GT 2000]] as it represents the traditional running shoe. The GT 2000 is over engineered and includes many things I dislike in traditional running shoes. These excessive features go against [[The Science of Running Shoes]] and are more likely to cause problems than solve them. The GT 2000 is nearly 50% heavier than the Clifton, but provides far less cushioning. I can think of no advantage the GT 2000 has over the Clifton, and I'd choose the Clifton every time.
{| class="wikitable"
|[[File:Asics-GT2000-outside.jpg|none|thumb|200px|Asics GT2000 outside]]
|}
{{ShoeGraphs}}
=A Comparison with other Recommended Shoes=
{{:Shoes-include}}
