Gear – jamiepang: Blog

Brooks Ghost Max (Limited Edition) After 50KM

March 16, 2024

The last pair of Brooks I’ve laced up was the Ghost 14 which I was personally not impressed with. The single density DNA Loft midsole was very firm and the ride was not engaging at all. When Paragon Vest, the authorized distributor for Brooks in Malaysia, offered to send me a pair of Ghost Max, my curiosity was sufficiently piqued. I’m game for any “Max” shoes. Will the updated version of DNA Loft still be as firm? I’ve logged 50km in the Ghost Max and I think I now know where they fit in one’s rotation.

First the specs and how they fit. The Ghost Max comes with a stack height of 39mm/33mm for a 6mm drop. It weighs in at a moderately heavy 10.6oz in my US10 . I classified it as moderately heavy because midsole tech have evolved to a level where even the weight of max-stacked shoes have dropped to mid to very low 9 ounces. They fit true to size, although you may want to consider sizing down by 1/2, on account of the extremely roomy toe-box. There are ample room for my big toe to dorsiflex and wide enough to accommodate all my digits. The upper is traditional mesh and the stock laces are non-stretchy and certainly long enough for runners’ knot. No issues double-knotting too, and they never came undone throughout my weeks running in them. Once you’re laced up, you’re totally locked in without a hint of heel slippage either.

The overall use of padding is spot on – not too much, not too minimalist. I’d like to add that despite being non-gusseted, the tongue was well secured at all times. In the event one needed to be reminded on the whys, “Commitment” and “Progress” are prominently printed on the tongue loops. The vents on the mesh upper especially on the vamp work great in our hot and humid weather.

The insole is removable, so coupled with the roomy upper, the shoes can certainly accommodate the use of custom insoles such as Sole Active and also orthotics wearers.

Per the specs sheet, the Ghost Max has a GlideRoll Rocker but compared to, say the Saucony Endorphin lineup, it’s very mild. More on this in a bit. The midsole is a thick slab (39mm at the heel) of single density DNA Loft v2 which I’d say an improvement over the first version. Low-rise sidewalls on the posterior lateral and medial sides, and a semi-rigid heel counter overlay provide good heel lock-in and stability. There are visual nods to the Hydroflow days of yore. If you’ve been a running shoe geek in the ’80s and early ’90s, you’ll know what I meant. The width of the midsole is wide and coupled with a midsole that’s on the firmer end, you’re getting is a very stable shoe. The outsole has plenty of rubber coverage but there are sufficient cut-outs to lend some flexibility. The colourful upper on this special edition release aside, other aspects of the shoes lean towards the functional aspect.

Truth be told, having many shoes in my active rotation, I wasn’t immediately sold on the Max’s proposition when I first stepped into the shoes. Sure they are heavy, but I was slightly disappointed at how firm and uninvolving they felt the first couple of runs. Seeing that they require some breaking in, I wore them at every opportunity including on casual Fridays and on weekends out. Sure enough, as with the Brooks I’ve experienced in the past, they started showing signs of loosening up, if just a little (emphasis on “little”), after 25K or so (distance included the walks and wearing casually).

As one who weighs between 59-60kg and in Week 2 of marathon training, the Max’s use case has been mainly that of a daily trainer. Its versatility isn’t amazing due to the weight, therefore I’ve been limiting their use to easy miles of up to 70 minutes. I’ve taken the Max up to 5:25/km paces and they felt fine. There are shoes for longer distances and/or quicker paces. After 50km, the DNA Loft v2 midsole have noticeably softened up. Resilient cushioning is what you’ll get from the Ghost Max and there’s none of the mushy and sink-in feeling at all.

Brooks Ghost Max_-7 — Nope, this photo wasn’t a duplicated upload to the prior one above. This shows how identical the lateral and medial sides of the shoe is. The casual looker won’t be able to tell the difference. Boring? Perhaps. Functional? Definitely.

If you’re a heel striker, you may even feel a wee bounce as you bomb downhill. Foot plant feels assured and I’ve yet to slip on any surface I’ve managed to test the shoes on – be they wet or dry, sandy patches or road. As expected, the rubber outsole shows no signs of wear at this point and one should be able to get a return of 500km at least. There are no creases on the midsole too.
They’re excellent shoes for those who spend most of their days on their feet. Think warehouse or health workers and those in retail. Just last week, I had them on my feet for 5.5 hours as the family and I trawled the exhibition halls at a local mall.

I disagree in calling the Max boring because they aren’t. There’s a hint of fun in how they roll through your strides once they’re broken in. Heavier runners may even get a bit of a bounce from the resilient midsole. More importantly, there’s more than enough protection for those seeking a solid cushioned platform that’s stable and offers all-day comfort if your work requires that you spend lots of time on your feet. That’s more than what I can say for shoes of long-running series from other brands. I hope Brooks continue to tweak and modernize DNA Loft v2 and DNA Flash v2 (which is implemented in company’s performance and racing lineup).

The Brooks Ghost Max (both the Limited Edition as well as the regular version) retails at RM659 and is available online and at all Brooks boutiques nationwide. The Brooks x Damon Brown Collection celebrate Black runners and the communities they’ve created for each other. Check out the designs by Seattle-based artist Damon Brown here.

Disclosure: The Brooks Ghost Max was provided to me for testing by Paragon Vest. I wasn’t paid to write this review and this is my honest review.

adidas Adizero Prime X – 100km Review

December 31, 2022

The Eve of the New Year saw Cheong, Calvin and I gathered in front of the Putra Mosque at 6 a.m., each at his own fitness level. Cheong has been training for some time, Calvin is presently prepping for a Marathon Major, and me still struggling to escape the current rut.

I didn’t have any plans for the morning other than to get some running done. I do have a Marathon coming up in just over 8 weeks’ time and while that event’s for me to remain acquainted with the distance (and therefore to be undertaken as a training run), I still need to get the miles in. What better way to take the Prime X past the 100km mark. I brought along the Xtep 160X 3.0 Pro for comparison. The morning’s plan was 3x5km over a variety of paces.

Since the Prime X isn’t new to the market, I won’t be spending paragraphs writing about the shoe specs but instead point you to the video below.

The morning was wet and a light drizzle prevailed, so we’ll be learning about how the shoes handle in such conditions. Before lacing up the Prime X, I thought it’s be good to kick things off in the Xtep. A 4km jog with Calvin averaging 6:15 felt really good and I continued in the same shoes the next 3km (4:48 average) pushing the pace a little and again, I love how the shoes responded. No issues with traction at the u-turns as well.

Next up was the Prime X. The softer ride and bounce was palpable compared to the Xtep. Of course, at 10.5oz at my US10, the shoe felt significantly chunkier, although it didn’t feel that weighty, than the Xtep (8.75oz, US10).

Again, traction on the wet surfaces were spot on. In fact, the Continental rubber outsoles were making squeaky noises throughout our run. Unless you tend to heel strike at the extreme lateral section (see below) where it’s smooth, you shouldn’t be overly concerned about the stability, or for that matter, road holding quality of the shoe.

I do have a couple of beef, minor though they are, about the upper. Firstly, the first row of the lace loops are positioned too close to the front. That creates an unnecessary pressure point when toeing off. The easy fix is to bypass the first row and lace up from the second one.

Secondly, the Celemesh upper puckers up easily. The Prime X has a generous toe box which means regular width feet folks like me may find it a tad roomy up front. Try sizing down by half before buying. Yes, I employ the runner’s knot for a more secure lockdown.

So, is the Prime X a shoe that I’d recommend? Here are my thoughts, in no order:

It’s a very comfy long haul shoe, traction is fantastic and I expect it to be durable as well.
It can take a variety of paces but holding it at MP for an extended period of time may ultimately tire you, due to its heft (again, 10.5oz in US10). While not super heavyweight (see NB Fuelcell Supercomp which borderlines 11oz in my size), you will feel the weight late into the 25-32km runs. No issues in long, moderate-paced runs, but certainly not for your A-races when there are other excellent options out there.
Don’t worry about the 50mm stack. Unless you’re chasing championship spots, the majority of us can live happy and just enjoy the shoe for what its worth.
I personally didn’t find it unstable.
At close to RM1200, the Prime X isn’t cheap by any means. However, adiClub members do enjoy decent discounts, so get that app downloaded and set up.

I’d give it a 👍🏽and a “Recommended Buy” if not for the launch of the outstanding Prime X Strung. Same stack, same price and much lighter. I went half a size down and my US9.5 weighs 9oz flat, a full 1.5oz difference. The Strung has an immediacy to the turnover and pace and definitely warrants an audition in a low key race, something I fully intend to do in March.

Disclosure: All shoes mentioned here were purchased using my own money and no obligations are owed to any parties.

New Balance RC Elite v2 – After 80km

September 17, 2022

I continue to seek alternatives to the Vaporfly Next% series (they’re fantastic racers, but I’ve had repeatedly poor experiences with their durability) for the longest time. The RC Elite v2 is one of those carbon-plated alternatives I’ve had the chance to get my hands, I meant feet, on.

Your eyes will naturally be drawn to its bright colours, rightly so. Too flashy and garish for some, beautiful for others. Personally, I find it gorgeous from every angle, all 36/28mm of it. It has an identical weight to the Endorphin Speed 1 (8.25oz for my US10) and fits true to size. The overall fit is on the snugger side befitting a performance model – RC denotes Racing/Competition – but not uncomfortable. Like the Rebel v2, the Elite’s lacing is skewed towards the medial side. What’s unique is its V-shaped and shorter design (visually about 1/3 shorter) which starts further up the vamp. I employ a runner’s knot on the right shoe (my shorter foot) while there’s no need for the same on the left side.

RCElite2_1 — An attempted photobomb by the Rebel v2

The mesh upper is very breathable and there was never a case of soggy socks for me. The tongue is not padded and ungusseted but it never slid around either. Never had I experienced any heel slippage due to a secure heel lock. The Elite v2 has a soft heel but firm (but not harsh) forefoot. Most reviewers commented about how soft the heel cushioning is, with some lamenting that it felt too soft. Since I hit the ground midfoot, I don’t particularly experience the full effect of the thick slab of FuelCell there. However, I do get an enjoyable squish and rebound whenever I force a heel strike. The midfoot cushioning is average and as mentioned, the forefoot toe-off is somewhat firm. I can understand how a firmer forefoot benefits racing on account of a more efficient and urgent push-off but over a marathon distance, that could potentially translate to greater feet fatigue and discomfort. Of course, comfort is highly subjective – one man’s meat and all that – and very much depends on one’s preference. I, for one, would’ve preferred the forefoot a smidge softer. Nike’s racers continue to offer a higher degree of “pop” and hence are a little more fun to race in.

That being said, the Elite v2 would be what I’ll reach out for for the 10K. There’s more competition when it comes to the Half Marathon though, with the Adios Pro 2 and Next% 2 entering the fray.

The Elite v2 feels better going fast than slow as I’ve discovered over a 25km long run. I’ve not had any stability issues with it, no blisters, no hotspots and I hope to put it through a wider variety of paces after KLSCM.

Durability is top-notch and my fears of a shredded blown rubber forefoot has been proven unfounded. After 80km, the upper is like new as are the exposed FuelCell midsole and outsole. I’ve yet to have any rock lodged in the midsole cut-out.

Other than my wish for a softer forefoot, the only other weakness is the traction over sandy patches and slicker conditions. I’ve had several moments at MP or faster recently, so consider that a caution if you will.

Comparable shoes include the Vaporfly Next% 2, Adizero Adios Pro 2, Endorphin Pro 2, and Metaspeed Edge+. The RC Elite v2 are still being sold on the New Balance Malaysia store but may soon be phased out with the arrival of the redesigned and renamed SC Elite v3 (RoadTrailRun video below).

Disclosures: I bought the NB RC Elite v2 with my own money, so no obligations due to any parties whatsoever!

New Balance 1080v11 – 100km Review

September 15, 2022

The v11 crossed the 100km mark this week. NB’s very popular daily trainer (now v12) complements the other shoes currently in my rotation:

Long Run: Prime X, Alphafly
MP, Long Tempos, Races: VF Next% v1 and 2, Adios Pro 2, RC Elite v2
Daily (soft, lightweight, quicker paced runs): Rebel v2
Daily (firm, quicker paced runs): Adios 6

The shoe looks beefy but I’ve learned that that visual impression does not reflect its ride. The v11’s ride is not one would say plush like, say, the Invisible or Nimbus 24, and that is mainly down to the Fresh Foam X midsole. Simply put, it’s not Fuelcell, which offers a “funner”, bouncier and lighter ride than the 1080. I’m getting ahead of myself so let’s start with the specs.

The v11 has a 34/26mm stack height for an 8mm drop. The US10 weighs in at 10.15oz and it fits true to size. Considering its build, it’s lighter than the Nimbus 24 (10.35oz for US9.5), Invincible Run 2, Solarglide 5, Ride 15, and Magnify Nitro. Most of the design elements are carried over from the v10 from the Ultra Heel, stretchy Hypoknit upper, and exposed foam and blown rubber outsole layout just to name a few areas. New Balance saw it adequate just making refinements here and there. As a result of the tweaks, the semi-rigid Ultra Heel now offers a more assured fit and lockdown than the previous version’s and the upper breathes even better.

The laces are minimally stretchy and are long enough for double knotting. I didn’t find it necessary for runner’s knot since lockdown is already secure enough. There’s enough padding on the tongue to take the lacing pressure off.

I purchased the shoe a few months ago actually, for the sole purpose of long runs. After all, the Fresh Foam X midsole feels very soft when depressed, offering what I thought would be perfect for those long easy miles. While the shoe is perfectly serviceable as a long run shoe, Fresh Foam X isn’t plush, nor offer as much compression and the bounce back to give you that pop. Sure, it’s stable, cushioned and protective but given how thick the slab is, I’ll admit that I was expecting more. The feel is more of a thicker Floatride than Boost, Nitro, Flyte Foam Blast+, ZoomX and NB’s own Fuelcell but I suppose that’s an unfair comparison since those are “super foams” and the Fresh Foam X isn’t.

The v11 is a pretty darn good as a smooth-riding daily trainer though, from very slow 7s up to the 5:30s/km. It’s nimble and solid enough to take on the hills, up and down and my legs never felt beaten up. The longest distance I’ve covered in them is 16km. I can also happily report the absence of blisters, heel slippages, soaked-through socks and wayward pebbles. Neither have I encountered any issues with traction.

Outsole durability at 100km is excellent considering the roads in my neighbourhood are rather gnarly with lots of stones and pebbles.

Now that v12 is already on sale here in Malaysia, the v11 is now a value buy – RM468 at the NB online store. A fantastic buy if you ask me.

The v11 isn’t flashy and does its job quietly, which is to help you get your week day easy miles in. It will definitely work for long runs too but personally for those runs, I’ll reach out for a plated option such as the versatile and heavier Prime X or the lighter and much softer Alphafly. Both are made to go long and for throwing in fast finishes.

Comparable shoes include the Velocity Nitro v2, Nimbus 24, Clifton 8, Floatride Energy 4, and Solarglide 5.

Disclosures: I bought the NB 1080 v11 with my own money, so no obligations due to any parties whatsoever!

ASICS Gel-Nimbus 24 – 150KM Review

April 19, 2022

The Nimbus 24 (N24) may have officially dropped in Malaysia in January but in reality they’ve been on the shelves since late December 2021. They’re, of course, ASICS’s premium daily neutral trainer, so the RM699 (a smidge cheaper than direct conversion of US$160 RRP) price tag reflects that position. As I’ve discovered after covering 130km in them, the 24th version turned out to be quite a surprise.

Since a person’s wear experience depends in part on the runner’s build and paces, here’s where I am right now:
Height: 176cm | Weight: 58-59kgs | Gait: Neutral | Mileage: Week 2 of 12 Weeks’ Marathon training, holding around the 90km/week volume.

The N24 entered my rotation midway through my base training and thus its diet of mostly easy-moderate days were pretty much up its alley. It wasn’t an intended purchase but the 30% discount card (with a short expiration date) was too good to pass up.

As with the recent ASICS models I’ve had the opportunity to try out, the sizing for the N24 is a little iffy. I mulled between my regular US10 (fits a little long but perfectly usable) and the 9.5 (snugger but still no scrunching of the toes) and opted for the smaller option. With a shoe as cushioned as this one, I really don’t need thick socks. A thin pair works great, allowing easy access to the FlyteFoam Blast+ midsole. The N24 is the first shoe to sport ASIC’s new midsole foam, touted to be lighter yet maintaining the same properties as FlyteFoam Blast. By late-2022, we can expect to see FlyteFoam Blast+ (FFB+) appearing more in ASICS’s lineup.

My US9.5 comes in at 10.35oz, nearly a full ounce lighter than Nimbus 23, from what I’ve read. I place comfort higher than weight when it comes to easy/recovery paced shoes, so the weight is really no big deal in this case.

I’ll let the official spec-sheet below break down the various components for you while I keep to my wear experience.

The N24 has a wonderful step-in feel, with a level of cushioning that’s just right, not the kind of marshmallow-softness you get in the original Nimbus Lite [review]. The knitted and perforated semi-gusseted tongue of the N24 is one of the best I’ve experienced in recent times. Some reviewers have quite rightly compared it to the Alphafly’s. It’s stretchy and has generous coverage, and it stays in place at all times. You’ll notice the placement of the extended lace loop which goes over and under the tongue.

As you can see from the photos, there isn’t a need to employ a runner’s knot since I went down half a size. Another reason for the secure hold can be attributed to the smart use of textured fabric lining around the heel internally (see photo below) which simply grips your heel. The padding around the heel collar isn’t overdone unlike Saucony Triumph’s and it’s clear that the designers certainly put a great deal of thoughts, and even restraint (since it’s ASICS we’re talking about here) to the upper design. Just compare the overall design cues of the Nimbus 23’s against the 24’s to appreciate how much has been pared down in this version.

There are 2 reflective strips run around the heel to the medial and lateral sides so you’ll be seen and that’s about it. The blue dots that run the length of the laces are not reflective.

The midsole of the N24 is where ASICS continue to load their tech. It’s got a massive slab of gel in the heel and a hidden coin-sized piece under the ball of the foot. The Trusstic insert shrunk and can only be observed poking out under the medial arch area. Firmer foam encircles the top layer of the FFB+ midsole providing an assured and stable ride, despite the N24 not a stability shoe. The star of the N24 is, of course, the FFB+ midsole. For what it’s worth, I agree with what the product specs except for the bit about the OG FlyteFoam Blast being soft. I’ve never found the Novablast to be particularly soft nor bouncy actually but FFB+ really ups the comfort level here. The surprisingly low stack height (26mm heel/16mm forefoot) ensures the N24 fits comfortably into the daily trainer rather than the max cushioned category and how it rides also reflects that categorization too. The zero break-in period for the midsole is a huge positive with the N24 feeling good from Mile 1.

While the upper and midsole received ASICS’s attention, the outsole retains the same design of its predecessor, not that it’s an area of concern. I like the minimalist approach, with ASICS Lite rubber placement. The low stack coupled with the deep flex grooves combine to give the shoe a smooth and flexible ride especially in the forefoot. As you can see from the photo below, the firmer AHAR+ heel plugs are untouched – most of my foot strikes happening in the midfoot area.

So how does the N24 ride? I’d say smooth and comfortable. In terms of weight bias, the shoe feels heavier in the heel, understandably so since there’s a lot more going on there, what with the voluminous gel, the thicker padding. So if you’re a heel striker, you’re going to get all the cushioning properties of the gel and FFB+ combo as you transition forward. The 16mm forefoot retains some ground feel but never uncomfortable, In fact, I prefer its forefoot ride to the Velocity v1’s [review]. I’ve run as long as 15K in the N24 but it’s capable of much longer distances, just don’t expect superfoam-level of responsiveness. It’s simply a stable and cushioned cruiser to get your mileage in. Most of my miles in the N24 have been around the 6:10-6:40 pace range although it worked pretty well at 5:20 pace too as I discovered in a recent 10K outing.

The Nimbus 24 rotates between the Rebel v2, Adios 6, Vaporfly 4% Flyknit Ekiden and Alphafly with a clear use case – protect my legs, get me through the easy days on heavy legs so that I’m ready for the SOS workouts. And I’m pleased to let you know that they’ve worked as expected.

The cushioned daily trainer segment is a crowded one and there are loads of options out there (ASICS’s own Cumulus 24, NB 1080v11, Hoka Clifton 8, Reebok Floatride Energy 3, Puma Velocity Nitro 2, Nike Pegasus 39 are but just a few examples), and it’s down to your ride/cushioning-weight preference. ASICS kept the pricing premium but if there’s a sale happening, you might want to give it a try.

My wish for Nimbus 25: reduce the amount of heel gel which will save a bit of weight in the heel section, and therefore increasing the versatility of the already sweet-riding shoe.

Disclosures: I bought the ASICS Gel-Nimbus 24 with my own money, so no obligations due to any parties whatsoever!

Reebok Floatride Run 2 – 50km Review

December 21, 2021

Let me start out by saying that this was an unexpected purchase. Indeed, I was looking out for a daily trainer to complement the Velocity Nitro [reviewed here] and I was on the brink of getting the 1080v11 from Running Lab. That the shoe ended up being a pair of Reebok was entirely due to value. Every shopping app went 12.12 crazy and the Floatride Run v2 (FR2) was going for only RM218 on Sport Planet. Slap on a few discount vouchers and limited-time additional discounts, I parted with just RM198 for this sophomore edition from a brand better known for Crossfit than running. The price just can’t be beat. The FR series isn’t new to me of course, having worn the debut version which I reviewed back in 2017.

Since a person’s wear experience depends in part on the runner’s build and paces, so here are some of my current stats:
Height: 176cm | Weight: Still below 60kgs | Gait: Neutral | Mileage: Week 3 of the 1st block of base training, getting back to the 60-70km/week volume.

The FR2 was released in December 2020, hence its bargain price but it has aged rather well in these days of midsole plates and super-foam thanks to the use of a PEBA midsole foam.

Let’s have a quick look below and see what’s changed and what has been carried over from v1:

- Same neoprene heel cup
- Same great Ultraknit upper
- Same Floatride PEBA-based midsole
- Same full coverage outsole, expect the same durability
- Same sockliner
- Same wide base for a very stable ride
- v1’s RM679 price tag was considered a premium price point then.
- v2 has a more traditional-take on the tongue
- Absence of EVA layer which means more Floatride foam!
- Slightly more pliable “cage”.
- Classic Reebok strips instead of triangle.
- Additional lace loops from 3 to 5, allowing runner’s knot.
- Traditional laces replacing the thick and heavy ones!
- Heel band functions more like a pull tab now than a heel lock.
- Nearly a full ounce heavier. Boo!
- Reebok is no longer owned by Adidas.

You’d be right to say that most of the updates are improvements over v1, except for the weight gain. It’s personally baffling since the FR2’s mesh seems thinner, the EVA layer’s gone, the full contact rubber outsole lugs are now less chunky and the laces trimmed down. What could have resulted in such a significant gain in weight? Could it be due to the plastic forming the additional eyelet or is Floatride foam heavier than EVA?🤷🏼‍♂️

Anyways, it is what it is. I bought the shoe for its value and 10.25oz isn’t a deal killer for a daily trainer. While the FR2 is certainly heavier than the Velocity and Deviate Nitro, Tempo Next%, and 1080 v11, it’s still lighter than the Infinity React FK 2, Invincible, Nimbus Lite 2, Kayano Lite 2, Supernova+, Boston 10, UB21, Vomero 16, and Structure 24. Besides, it’ll force me to go slow on those easy days.

I like what Reebok did to the stretchy mesh upper. It’s now thinner but still retains that high level of breathability. The more conventional-looking tongue also affords better coverage and comfort. It’s perplexing how many shoe manufacturers ignore this part of the shoe, there’s barely enough tongue for the laces to cinch down on. The plastic cage and neoprene cup are still here. The cage isn’t as bulky as the Ultra Boost’s but the strip that goes behind the heel cup no longer forms close to the neoprene back. Instead it now appears to function more as a pull tab than provide a supportive hold around the heel. I’m really not sure if the way it’s designed is necessary as the neoprene cup is already supportive enough. I’ve half a mind to snip that bit off to save some weight. A note of caution if you’ve wider feet: The plastic bands around the 1st eyelet may rub into and irritate your feet. It isn’t an issue for me but I can see how it can be, if you’ve Hobbit feet.

As you can see from the photo above and below, the midsole juts out a fair bit, forming a large base. Very distinct is the medial side where on top of the extra midsole width, the plastic moulding extends out a little forming some sort of a medial support. This wasn’t the case with v1, making the ride of the FR2 a very very stable one. I dare say that the FR2 is more a mild stability trainer in the same vein as the Fuel Cell Prism v2, than a cushioned neutral trainer.

The Floatride on the FR2 not only feels firmer in the hands but also rides firmer compared to the version used on the Energy 2 or 3. There’s a subtle hint of bounce but a firm one without as much compression as that of the Energy 3. There’s a little Infinity React FK in the FR2!

Outsole durability is very good at 50km with absolutely no sign of wear and I’ve yet to run into any issues concerning traction. If it was up to me, I’d reduce the rubber coverage by at least 30%. Some parts of the outsole just don’t need rubber protection. Because of the extensive solid rubber coverage, the FR2 isn’t as quiet as the Velocity or Rebel v2. But unlike the Alphafly or the Tempo Next%, you can still run in the Reebok at 5am without waking up the neighbourhood😏.

I’ve used the FR2 exclusively as a daily trainer but I did pick up my pace towards the end of most easy days. The shoe doesn’t feel ponderous although I don’t see why you’d want to sustain an extended up-tempo session in it. The Velocity is definitely more versatile and responsive than this one.

I mentioned that I’ve no issues with the increase in weight but I did set out to see if I could reduce it further. I swapped out the stock insoles with those from the Boston 5 (fits perfectly) and even thinner laces I fished out from my old Bag o’ Laces. The 2 quick hacks dropped the weight by 0.2oz or close to 5.7 grams. I’m not thinking of snipping off the rear plastic loop, at least not yet 😆. Switching the insole out brought another surprising positive – creating a bit more room for my right toes. They’ve been a little scrunched up but now they’ve a tiny bit more room.

So is the FR2 for you? It depends. If you’re on a budget and don’t have wide feet, my answer would be a solid “Yes” simply because there’s nothing legit around the sub-RM200 price point. You get a firm but still cushioned and stable ride, and in the Floatride foam and full rubber outsole, plenty of miles.

If you prefer something more fun and forgiving, the lighter and more versatile Reebok Floatride Energy 3 is a great alternative for RM80 more if you take advantage of Royal Sporting House’s clearance this month. Obviously, your options will be a lot more if you’re willing to plonk in more dosh so let’s not go there.

Disclosures: I bought the Reebok Floatride Run v2 with my own money so no obligations due to any parties whatsoever!

Puma Velocity Nitro – 100KM Review

December 6, 2021

I like Puma’s Nitro series. Other than the Magnify which is their take on max cushion, I’d try them all, funds permitting. But alas, money doesn’t grow on trees, so the heavily discounted Deviate and Velocity were the only great buys I found. The Nitro series gets many things right on top of the pricing – simple understated looks, comfortable, excellent Pumagrip and of course, the nitrogen-infused midsole. There’s certainly room for improvement in areas like fit and sizing consistency, but for the most part the shoes are pretty sweet to run in.

My current fitness level is bang average at the moment but with news that we may be seeing some in-person races next year, some purpose (*cough* urgency) has been injected back into my daily runs. Which explains why the Velocity’s mileage has seen a quick rise lately.

As you can see above, there’s nothing fancy in its construction. Just the usual boring stuff like open-mesh upper, semi-gusseted tongue, dual-density midsole and a durable outsole that’s super-grippy. Not unlike what’s found in the Deviate Nitro [reviewed here], there’s a TPU heel clip that doubles up as a stability device and also a reflective piece if you deem that as fancy.

The folks at Believe In The Run made the stack height out to be 32/22mm for a 10mm offset. My US10 comes in at 9.75oz, much lighter than the Pegasus 38 and increasingly bloated Zoom Fly series, and other daily trainers like the Boston 10 and Supernova, Ride 13, Nimbus Lite 2, Glideride 2, and 1080 v11.

I’d say that the Velocity fits true to size even if it feels like a 1/4 size too long. It has a relaxed and very neutral/friendly fit and while the photos show that I use a runner’s knot, that’s really just my preference. Unlike the Deviate Nitro, heel lockdown is great without the risk of heel slip whatsoever.

I felt that the shoe needed a bit of breaking in with the first few runs being a little underwhelming. Absent was the underfoot comfort and responsiveness of the Nitro foam that Puma wearers rave about. Only when I noticed that the firmer Profoam Lite EVA sits below the Nitro layer through the entire length of the midsole did I understand why. Add a full-contact rubber outsole and you get a ride that’s closer to the firmer end of the spectrum. It’s still a comfortable ride, and you’re still going to be protected from road harshness. Just don’t expect a plush one from the get-go.

However the more I run in the Velocity, the more I dig 💓 it. Just like the long-gone Epic React, this is a shoe that grows on you. The midsole softens up just enough and everything just moulds to your feet. I can see why Molly Seidel picks it as her mileage shoe in this interview. It can handle most of my pace range, making it versatile enough for 80% of the week total. And don’t get me raving about Pumagrip which gets my vote for Outsole of the Year if there ever was such an award. No condition fazes “The Claw”. As good as it is, however, I wished Puma exercised some restraint in its use. For example, both the lateral and medial strips could’ve been pared down, saving some weight and material.

Wear and tear is very minimal after 100km and just like the Deviate Nitro, this should get you to the 600km mark (much more if you’re like a couple of my regular pacers – #ifyouknowyouknow) easily. Zalora regularly offer the Nitro series on discount and when they do, they’re just too good to pass up. With version 2 slated for February 2022 release (watch BelieveInTheRun’s Running Event Puma coverage here), we could be seeing some discounted v1 coming our way. The Velocity Nitro gets my strong recommendation!

Disclosures: I bought the Puma Velocity Nitro with my own money. Neither am I affiliated with Zalora, so no obligations due to any parties whatsoever!

Adidas Adizero Adios 6 Tokyo – After 50km

September 29, 2021

A running shoe geek (RSG) worth his PEBAX super foam simply keeps abreast of shoe tech by any means necessary! So even if I’ve not run in Adidas shoes for a number of years, I’m still pretty much in touch with what they’ve put out.

My experience with The Brand with 3 Stripes dates back to the ’90s. I’ve ran in the Ozweego, Supernova Glide Boost 7 (Running Shoes Guru review), several versions of the Response, adiSTAR Cushion 6 (photo), F50, adiSTAR Ride, ClimaCool (photo), Energy Boost, OG Ultra Boost (my review), Adizero Ace 6 (my review), Adios Boost 2 (Solereview), Boston 5 Boost (my review) and the Ultra Boost Uncaged. I do have some Adi-History although the chance to run in the famous Marathon and New York (photo) models which featured the Dellinger Web, ZX or the EQT (Equipment) series modelled by one of my marathon idols, 3-time Boston winner Ibrahim Hussein eluded me.

The main reason for my sabbatical from Adidas since the Ultra Boost Uncaged, was their lack of middle-of-the-ground shoes (8.5-10 oz range). The comfy Ultra Boost series have not shed any significant weight and I really see no reason to wear shoes that heavy when there are lighter options which serve the same purpose. The Response and Supernova .The Adios line was too barebones for me. I want lightweight cushion and comfort! Think a Boston 5 with a few more millimetres of softer Boost in the forefoot.

The company stagnated (or took its time, depending who you talk to😏) and when they finally “modernise”, the Lightstrike EVA on the SL20 was so underwhelming – firm, stiff and unexciting. That’s disappointing for a shoe geek since even minnows like Reebok and Skechers have the underrated Floatride and Flight Gen respectively. When the Super Shoe Race took off, runners went bonkers with ZoomX, FuelCell, PWRRUN PB, Flytefoam Blast and Hyper Burst, while Boost and Lightstrike were the best Adidas could offer. That was until Lightstrike Pro and Energy Rods joined the party, late but a welcome option. In the Lightstrike Pro, Adidas finally has a midsole (and shoe) to compete with the rest and did the Adios Pro make an entry with Peres Jepchirchir’s Half Marathon World Record of 1:05.34 (broken twice since then). But this review isn’t about the Adios Pro but the Adios 6, so let’s finally get started with the review proper. That has been too long a preamble already.

My previous experience with the Adios was the Boost 2 and you can see from the photo above, how low-riding the shoe was. Compared to today’s beefy midsoles, the Adios Boost 2 was as traditional as racing flats come – very little cushioning and very firm, great for speed workouts around the track and up to road 10Ks for me whereas the elites will have no issues wearing them for marathons.

Adidas took a really big swing with their latest offerings namely the Adios 6, Boston 10, Adizero Adios Pro 2, and Adizero Prime X, with the Adios 6 (A6) and Boston 10 (B10) gaining substantial stacks and looking nothing like their predecessors.

Since you’re here for the A6, here are the specs:

Weight (US10): 8.9oz/253g (as weighed with stock sockliner)
Stack Height: 27mm/19mm (Runningwarehouse reports a 32/24 stack)
Offset: 8mm
Upper: Primegreen mono-mesh consisting of 50% recycled material
Midsole: Lightstrike, Lightstrike Pro, wishbone-shaped torsion
Outsole: Continental rubber

As usual, a person’s wear experience depends in part on the runner’s build and paces, so here are some of my current stats:

Height: 176cm | Weight: Between 57-58kgs | Gait: Neutral | Mileage: Between 60-70km/weeks, working towards the KL Standard Chartered Virtual Half Marathon.

The A6 is what the B10 should’ve been, at least visually, but Adidas has not only flipped the A-B’s designs on its head, they lowered the A6’s retail price to RM499, a full RM100 cheaper than the B10. They run true to size and weighs 8.9oz for my US10, just a half ounce heavier than the 2020 favourite, Endorphin Speed. On paper, the A6 finds itself in the same performance/up-tempo trainer/racer category but will it please this 51-year old?

The upper has plenty of old school vibes with suede overlays, traditional looking mesh and thin cotton laces that are all too familiar to us who grew up wearing Bata, Fung Keong and Power. The white colourway is gorgeous and classy, with vermillion accents on the heel tab, underlays and around the toe box. Adidas’ justifiably reserve the use of the translucent Celemesh 2.0 upper for the Adios Pro 2 and Prime X, so the mesh construction you get on the A6 and B10 are thicker and feels less refined.

Lots of lacing options courtesy of the many eyelets available, thus allowing you to freely experiment to get the best lockdown. The laces are also long enough for Runners’ Knot. The material used for the semi-gusseted tongue feels a bit like neoprene and has strategically placed padding to alleviate any potential hotspots.

I appreciate the restrained use of suede, just here and there to reinforce the stress points such as the strip around the toe box, the first and top-most eyelets. This approach keeps the weight in check.

The heel counter is internally reinforced, firm and stiff. Lockdown is easily achieved without a hint of heel slippage. This had me wondering a bit at first but I believe the flap under the cushioned heel tab functions as a pseudo pull tab.

The fit is generous but not overly so. The stiff plastic eyelet reinforcement strip feels cheap and doesn’t work that well together with the laces. Therefore, cinching down needs a little patience as the laces don’t slide easily through when pulled. On the positive side, once you get the tension right, this pretty much secures the lockdown. No slippage whatsoever. Heel and midfoot are snug enough but the toe box offers a roomy space for a bit of toe wiggles, unlike the old Adios.

Had it not for the presence of Lightstrike Pro, the A6 would’ve easily be an iteration of the SL20. I believe the use of both versions of Lightstrike on this stack height works. Any thicker, the firmness and clunky characteristics of the regular Lightstrike will simply negate the positives of the Pro. Case in point, the B10 which I noticed a number are selling off on the Facebook Marketplace. Compared to the regular version, Lightstrike Pro feels softer and bouncier to the “press-test” but denser that the nitrogen-infused midsoles like Fuelcell, Nitro and Hyper Burst..

Finally, in place of Energy Rods, a wishbone-shaped torsion system to lend some stability and toe-off snap.

Per usual, Adidas continue to rely on the tried and tested Continental rubber outsole. Greater coverage are provided on the lateral heel and ball of the foot push off area so durability shouldn’t be an issue. It remains to be seen how well the more sparsely-covered lateral forefoot section holds up.

The A6 crossed the 50km mark last Sunday after 8 outings with distances covered between 5 and 22km and I’ve to say that I quite enjoy the Adios 6!

It rides on the firmer end of the spectrum – definitely firmer than the Endorphin Speed – but there’s enough cushioning, support and stability to take it past the Half Marathon distance. I’ll have no qualms taking it to 25km but prefer softer options for distances longer than that. Breathability is good and my socks were never soaked. No hotspots nor blisters either. I’ve already said earlier, lockdown is great.

Unlike earlier versions of the Adios, version 6 will work as a daily trainer for those with a preference for a firmer ride. Nevertheless, workouts are what this shoe is all about. Lightstrike Pro simply comes alive the harder you push it. It’s easy to pick up the pace but not in the manner of a carbon-plated shoe. Achieving and sustaining MP over longer distances remain the specialties of the super shoes and comparing the A6 against those much more expensive options are simply not fair. However, the A6 easily stands up to the Fastwitch 7, GoMeb Speed 2 and IMHO even the Razor 3 by offering a more forgiving ride. I find the Adidas a more enjoyable shoe to run in than the three.

It says a lot about the shoes when these old legs still felt good after tackling longer distances and quicker paces in them.

I raved about how good Puma Grip is but the Continental rubber on the A6 are excellent too. It handled a variety of surfaces and conditions impeccably well be it sandy and pebbly patches, dry or wet conditions, tarmac or tiled sections. One of the “Leg Velocity” workouts had me running up and down a stretch of road and the hard switches and turnarounds were handled with aplomb.

The A6 isn’t too loud on the roads unlike the Tempo Next% and Alphafly. Instead of the two’s distinctive loud thuds, the A6 has a more “slappy” sound, if that means anything😅.

To wrap up this already long post, I’m glad I opted for the Adios 6 over the Boston 10 (which inherited a shocking 2oz weight gain). Even if the Adios does not have the range of the Endorphin Speed, it’s still a very good lower priced replacement for the Saucony. In the Deviate Nitro and Velocity Nitro, I already have great shoes for the easy days.

No surprises then that I rate the Adios 6 very highly in terms of performance and value for any workout and distance below 25km. Forget the Boston 10 and its Energy Rods. Get the Adios 6 instead. The shoe retails at RM499 but to my surprise, the check out price was just RM424 from the Adidas Malaysia website.

Disclosures: I purchased the Adidas Adizero Adios 6 with my own money, so no obligations due to any parties whatsoever!

Shoes I Bought But Wished I Hadn’t

August 8, 2021

We’re well into 2H’21 and things have remained pretty much the same. We’re still justifiably paranoid about COVID and its variants (damn you!) and there’s still no end in sight.

Despite that, I’m glad to be able to put considerable mileage into my shoe rotation over the course of GCM21 training and I’m fortunate that I’m still able to replace/complementing those with a couple of new shod. I’ll be quick to admit that some purchases were opportunistic grabs😏 .

Nike Zoom Alphafly Next% EK
This was definitely an opportunistic purchase🤦🏽‍♂️. Usually sold out in a matter of hours, I chanced upon it and impulsively fished out the plastic when I really shouldn’t have. Even if I was in the market for another “super-shoe”, a better choice would’ve been one from another brand – at least I’ll be able to experience another brand’s approach to a carbon-plated racer. And even if it had to be Nike, the considerably lower-priced and lighter Next% 2 would’ve made better sense.

With the wallet hit hard, the least I could do was to put the shoes to use. 8 runs and 52km in, I still have mix feelings about it. Sure, it’s bouncy as heck and I don’t find it particularly unstable on the straights but they sure feel chunky (I’ve mentioned they’re heavier than the Next%) and ungainly at the turns. My quads and calves were thoroughly hammered running long and at pace in them. I wrote about this in recap of my GCM21 attempt recently. The combination of the shoe’s soft and built-up midsole and the ridiculously frequent turns around my area were probable causes for flare-ups of my piriformis and quads. I hope to take the Alphas out again to Cyberjaya or Peremba when we’re allowed to, you know, for those 20Ks and above.

I’ve not reviewed the OG 4% nor the Next% (still new-in-the-box, which explains why) and I don’t think I’m going to be doing so for the Alphafly. A couple of reasons…

All these shoes have been reviewed to death.
They’d be passé by the time I get enough miles and have the time to write an in-depth review.

Next up, the Hoka One One duo of Rincon 2 and Carbon X 2.

We all know that first impressions can be misleading. That is why I reserve my shoe reviews until I get at least 80km in them. Even so, I’ve learned that feelings can change after 160km. One example was the Nike Epic React (yes, remember those?). I loved them only after 160km when the React foam was finally broken in enough to offer just about the perfect blend of comfort, cushioning and versatility.

So what’s wrong with both Hoka? I had a largely positive take on the Rincon [review] and a mix one for the Carbon X 2 [review] but both the Puma Deviate Nitro [review] and Saucony Endorphin Speed [review] proved indestructible at 300km and 500km respectively, and more importantly supremely enjoyable to run in. With these 2, any pace from Easy to HM are pretty much covered. And they work just as well for all distances too. Additionally, the Achilles heel of the Rincon started to surface right after crossing the 200km mark. Yup, the widely-reported poor midsole durability is true for the Rincon. I’m a lightweight yet the shoe no longer feels as protective nor cushioned anymore. The exposed outsole looks too trashed for me to even consider disposing it to a potential buyer.

As for the Carbon X 2, the shoe simply didn’t soften up even after 100km. I couldn’t understand why fans of the shoe call it bouncy and cushioned. Now, I could live with the X 2’s firmer ride and I believe the best rotation should have a mix of soft-firm, light-heavy and low-high stack shoes. But I already have shoes for that – Tempo Next% [review] for anything under 20km and Rebel v1 for 12km and under. A new owner for the X 2 was found quickly enough and proved to be win-win, with it a very good buy and a good fit for his HM training.

These 3 pairs of shoes cost me nearly RM2,400 and if I’d resisted the FOMO urges, I would’ve been able to parlay it into better shoes and more importantly bargains which are plentiful out there. If you’re in the market for training or racing shoes, consider the following:

Puma Nitro Series. The Deviate Nitro is serving me very well and I’ve logged a handful of easy miles in the Velocity. The Magnify, Liberate, Eternity and Electrify can be bought through Zalora but I’ve my eyes on the Deviate Nitro Elite.
Adidas Adizero Adios Pro 2 (if you can find it) and Adizero Adios 6.
Asics Metaspeed Sky or Edge.
Saucony’s Endorphin v2 Series are still as good as the first. They’re also great value with the Pro coming in under RM800.
NB Rebel v2, 1080 v11 available from a legit seller via Shopee.

A week has passed since my 2nd vaccination and I’m slowly getting back to running with a couple of short ones and this morning’s 10K. The average pace I’ve sustained over the sessions have been around 5:50 – 6:10/km, quicker than when I kicked off the pre-GCM21 re-building phase. All comfortable pace for sure since I’ve to keep things easy for now while I work to get the piriformis back in order. I’m looking forward to working the shoes again.

So do you have any regrettable buys? I’d like to hear what they are!

Puma Deviate Nitro – 200km Review

June 29, 2021

My singular experience with Puma (as a running brand) was some years ago and that was anything but pleasant. The Mobium was odd, clunky, stiff and the windlass system just didn’t work for me, causing various foot issues. Puma has been sort of like ASICS – a brand that’s been around for decades but unlike ASICS which has seen a resurgence with the Guidesole series and the Novablast (and Saucony with the Endorphin line), the German brand found making in-roads into the mainstream running segment difficult. The Faas series, decent shoes according to those who tried them, wasn’t something you’d deem a runaway success.

It was not until early 2021 when Puma announced that they’ve signed up several track and road athletes, Molly Seidel being the highest profile elite (catch her interview here), that the running world began to take notice. After some teasing on social media, several models were unleashed to the market:

Deviate Nitro (lightweight trainer/racer, plated)
Eternity Nitro (mild stability trainer, RUNGUIDE midsole sidewalls, non-plated)
Velocity Nitro (daily trainer, Nitro+ProFoam Lite combo, non-plated)
Liberate Nitro (up-tempo trainer/racing flat, non-plated)

There’s also the carbon-plated Deviate Nitro Elite which as the name suggests, is Puma’s top-tier Half Marathon and Marathon racing model. So what’s with all that Nitro? Well, if caffeine-high baristas served up Nitro Coffee, it was just a matter of time N₂ found its way into other materials.

You can search out the reviews of each model online but in this post, I’m going to cover the Deviate Nitro. It was a 3-way toss-up between this, Clifton 8 and Mach 4. The Deviate weighs the same as the Clifton 8 for my US10 but is at least an ounce heavier than the Mach 4. My decision to go with the Deviate was made based on tech, durability and versatility. Having sold the Carbon X 2 (reviewed here), I wanted a long run shoe that’s more forgiving to the legs. Having taken the Deviate to the 200km mark, I can attest that the shoe has met my requirements!

As usual, a person’s wear experience depends in part on the runner’s build and paces, so here are some of my current stats:

Height: 176cm | Weight: Between 56-58kgs | Gait: Neutral | Mileage: Averaged 95km/week over past 10 weeks, working towards Goal Marathon Pace of 4:45/km.

Here are the specs of the Deviate:

Weight (US10): 9.45oz/268g (as weighed with stock sockliner)
Stack Height: 36mm/28mm (some reviewers claim a 32/24 setup)
Offset: 8mm
Midsole: Nitrogen infused super-critical foam with INNOPLATE (split-geometry composite carbon plate, which you can see from the exploded view below).
Outsole: PUMAGRIP sticky rubber

If you’ve had the Nike Pegasus Turbo 2, you’ll be able to spot some similar design cues on the Deviate from the lacing eyelet chain, the upper pattern (more apparent on the red colourway), the minimal tongue and collar, to the shape of the forefoot. The red colourway is a looker but black doesn’t look too shabby either. I especially like that the printed Puma logo only appears on the lateral side and the medial-side embellishment is limited to a small leaping cat logo near the big toe.

The shoe’s upper is kept simple, no overlays. Even the Puma strips are printed on rather than glued. The upper is breathable, adequate toe box room and height, and just a hint of padding on the gusseted tongue to take the discomfort of lacing pressure. There are no padding around the collar but there are 2 strips of internal padding on the lateral and medial side of the ankle areas for added lockdown, although how effective they are are debatable. The laces are of a perfect length, enough for runner’s knot and also for double-knotting. To the rear, there’s a large vertical strip of reflective tape. The heel counter is rigid and provides the needed structure in the rear.

The fit of the Deviate is true to size but great lockdown is hard to achieve especially on my smaller right foot. If there’s one area Puma can improve in the next version, it would be the lockdown around the collar and heel. Perhaps re-position or re-configure the 2 internal padding? I find that skipping the 3rd eyelets provides me with the most secure and comfortable lockdown, at a cost of some bunching around the first set of eyelets. Those interested in the Deviate would be advised to try the shoe out for themselves. Other than this, I don’t have any other complains.

The concept of super-critical foam is not a new one. It has been implemented in Brooks’ DNA Flash and Skechers’ HyperBurst, of which I only have minimal experiences – a brief try-out of the Hyperion Elite 2 in the Brooks store and briefly owning the Skechers Razor 3. The Hyperion Elite 2 was too roomy for my regular size, firmer than expected and over-priced here in Malaysia, while I didn’t find the Razor 3 to be particularly versatile as reported. The Nitro, however, is something I can dig. It has just the right bounce without an exaggerated sinking feeling. The Deviate’s Nitro foam, while not as light as the performance-leaning Endorphin Speed’s PWRRUN PB, is more forgiving overall and thus offer more comfort as a long run shoe. The plate provides a very understated sensation of propulsion and the shoe is nowhere near as stiff and harsh as the Carbon X 2 nor Evoride. The horseshoe-shaped spoiler (I actually called it that before I came across the exploded view graphics above) at the rear guards against over-compression on heel strike. I didn’t think the piece of plastic is needed though since you’ve to pretty much be an extreme heel striker to impact that area. Could’ve saved some material and weight right there.

I’d say that the Deviate is the one for me on days that I just want to cruise along while the Speed would be my option for a progressive long run. That’s not to say the Deviate is an utter slouch because it can certainly move as well – in my case, hovering at 5:00 pace for a few kms. Between 5:15-5:45 range, however, is where it likes to play.

I’ve tried a fair number of shoes over the last couple of years, and here’s my ranking in terms of overall midsole compression-bounce-comfort, starting with the least:

HyperBurst (Razor 3, non-plated) < PWRRUN PB (Endorphin Speed v1, composite plate) < Nitro (Deviate, composite plate) < FlyteFoam Blast (Novablast v1, non-plated) < Fresh Foam X (1080 v10, non-plated) < FuelCell (Rebel v2, non-plated) < FlyteFoam Turbo (Metaspeed Sky, carbon plate) < ZoomX (Alphafly, carbon plate)

Do note however, that the Razor 3 is the firmest by virtue of being the lowest stacked. The thicker slab of HyperBurst found on the Max Road 4 would logically be softer, not that I’m able to confirm since Skechers SEA is totally hopeless in bringing their Performance range to these parts of the world.

The Deviate requires almost no break-in period. It was comfy from the first miles and at 200km, rides just the same.

The Nitro foam is not the only star here. PUMAGRIP is pretty impressive as well. No, let me rephrase that. PUMAGRIP is very very good! The forefoot consists of blown rubber while the heel is of a harder compound/mix. While it’s not Continental, Michelin or Vibram, they grip supremely well in all conditions and are inexplicably durable even for blown rubber. Just go check out what the other reviewers have to say, I kid you not. I reckon they’re going to be as hard-wearing as the Endorphin Speed’s XT-900 (which is indestructible even at 330km!)

You can tell that I’m really enjoying the shoe. The fact that I got to the 200km mark so quickly in the Deviate is a testament of that. After ASICS and Saucony’s revival, it’s great to experience a Puma refresh in the Nitro line. If you’ve been hesitant about trying them out, Zalora and SportsDirect Online are offering some sweet limited-time discounts.

Oh, fellow shoe geek Nick has the review of the Liberate in the pipeline. So do look out for his review!

Disclosures: I purchased the Puma Deviate Nitro (discounted, of course!) with my own money, so no obligations due to any parties whatsoever!

jamiepang: Blog

My Passions, My Life

Tag: Gear