Changes

* {{H:flexibility}}. The Cloudracer is nicely flexible, and I didn't find the CloudTec bumps to interfere or cause creases in the sole.

* {{H:outsole}}. Because of the CloudTec, the Cloudracer has outsole over the entire contact patch. This should give good wear characteristics.

* {{H:upper}}. The upper is quite thin, and what you'd expect from a lighter shoe. You can see where they've saved weight to try to offset the heavier CloudTec cushioning. The upper is mostly seamless, with a bit of padding at the rear of the foot.

* {{H:tongue}}. The Cloudracer has a traditional tongue that is has a tab to attach it to the laces. The tongue is unpadded and thin, and I found it tended to crease unless I was careful when I put it on.

* {{H:lacing}}. The Cloudracer has thin flat laces that stayed tied reasonably well.

* {{H:heelcounter}}. The Cloudracer has a surprisingly strong heel counter that I didn't like much.

=Comparisons=

Here are some direct comparisons with its potential competition.

|[[File:Asics-Gel-Hyper-Speed-6-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|Asics Gel Hyper Speed 6 outside]]

|}

==On Cloudracer and New Balance RC5000==

The Cloudracer is reasonably light weight, but the [[New Balance RC5000]] is quite stunningly light. The RC5000 is less than half the weight of the Cloudracer, but nearly as well cushioned. Of course, the bare bones RC5000 is not for everyone as it provides just enough cushioning to improve [[Running Economy]], but no more. The RC5000 is a fast shoe, but the minimal cushioning my not be sufficient for you. However, if the RC5000 lacks sufficient cushioning, then the Cloudracer may not be enough either. The Cloudracer has slightly more rear cushioning, but less in the forefoot.

|[[File:New-Balance-MRC-5000-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|New Balance MRC 5000 outside]]

|}

==On Cloudracer and Hoka Clifton==

The On Cloudracer and the [[Hoka Clifton]] are almost exactly the same weight, but the Clifton is vastly better cushioned. While this might be too much cushioning for some, it shows just how good conventional foam cushioning can be. The Clifton is less flexible than the Cloudracer, and neither of them have a shape that matches the human foot. In choosing between the two, I'd choose the Clifton pretty much every time. If I wanted less cushioning than the Clifton, then the Cloudracer would not be where I would look.

|[[File:Hoka-OneOne-Clifton-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|Hoka OneOne Clifton outside]]

|}

==On Cloudracer and Brooks PureConnect ==

The On Cloudracer and the [[Brooks PureConnect]] are similar shoes. The PureConnect is a little heavier, a little better cushioned in the forefoot but slightly less cushioned in the rear, closer to zero drop, and both are quite flexible. It would be tough to choose between the two, but I'd probably go for the PureConnect due to the lower drop.

|[[File:Brooks-PureConnect-3-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|Brooks PureConnect 3 outside]]

|}

==On Cloudracer and Asics GT 2000==

I tend to compare shoes against my benchmark "normal running shoe", the [[Asics GT 2000]]. The GT 2000 weights about a third again more than the Cloudracer, but you do get some extra forefoot cushioning for the weight. You also get a much softer, padded upper in the GT 2000. However, a lot of the excess weight is from over engineered features that are [[The Science of Running Shoes| more likely to cause problems than solve them]]. The Cloudracer won't attempt to interfere with your stride, or encourage you to heel strike like the GT 2000. The GT 2000 helps show how much worse the Cloudracer could have been. When compared with the GT 2000, the Cloudracer starts to look like a real winner.

|[[File:Asics-GT2000-outside.jpg|none|thumb|150px|Asics GT2000 outside]]

|}

=A Comparison with other Recommended Shoes=

{{:Shoes-include}}