Two very different shoes. Why wouldn't you get the On Cloudflyer or a more training based shoe in the On range. Hoka have the large meta-rocker and On seem such a flatter shoe designed to flex. I personally like to train and race in very similar feeling shoes.

I can’t seem to find an On shoe with cushion that is neutral

no. but i'm getting closer. i'll let you and everyone know what i think when i'm confident i can write accurately about this shoe.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

In your new article, you said this, which doesn't seem accurate: "Carbon X is more a lightweight trainer .... I suspect the closest Nike analog to this shoe is Nike’s $250 Vaporfly 4% Flyknit, which is more than an ounce heavier than the original $250 near-unobtainable racing flat."


Do you mean the closest Nike analog is the Nike Zoom Flyknit?

FWIW, I loved the ride of the Hoka Claytons, though they're the only shoe that ever blistered my arches. Only the Nike Zoom Flyknit and 4% have had comparable cushion and quickness. The Hoka Mach and Bondi were clunky disappointments after the Clayton and Clayton 2. I hope to try the new Hoka offerings.

---

<The Dew Abides>

no. i meant what i said. i think nike's racer is a 6.5oz shoe, the flyknit is a 7.7oz shoe or so, right? if i have that right, both nikes are about an ounce lighter than their HOKA analogs. mind, i prefer the extra ounce because of what that extra ounce gives me. and all of these shoes - the 2 HOKAs and the 2 nikes - are carbon plated.

i'm no expert in the nikes. i might have this wrong. but what i hoped to write is what i wrote. if i'm wrong i'm wrong on purpose ;-)

the bondis, 3 thru 6, are all someone disappointing compared to the original bondi b. but that bondi b is now reissued. i'm running in it now. with a couple of backups because you never know what the future holds.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Are you sure? Nike has 2 versions of 2 models:
The original Vaporfly 4% ($250)
The original Zoom Fly ($150 and an ounce heavier)
The newer Vaporfly 4% Flyknit ($250)
The newer zoom Fly Flyknit ($160 and an ounce heavier)

Flyknit is an update of the upper, not a model. Both models got that update and the non-flyknit models are no longer available. The 4% uses the lighter ZoomX foam while the Zoom Fly used Lunarlon and then switched to React, both of which add weight compared to ZoomX.

I think your comparison is meant to be with the $160 Zoom Fly (one ounce heavier than a 4%) for the Carbon X.

I have probably 150 miles, including a half marathon, in the Carbon X. My opinion continues to be "interesting." I migrated, somewhat unwillingly, over to Hokas a couple of years ago. I only moved because in my opinion Adidas ruined the Energy Boost - I bought 5 pair of the original and when they were gone I gave Hoka a try. I like Hoka but I am still searching for the perfect one for me. The Clayton was the best fitting/feeling shoe I have ever had, but they always felt a bit dead and didn't have the pop I was looking for. Clifton 3s were good, but then they changed that shoe and it isn't a preference of mine. The Mach 2 is OK, but a bit hasher than I wanted. The Carbon X feels a bit "funny" on my feet. Not bad . . . just something doesn't seem perfect. Interestingly, my last 3 1/2 marathons were in the Cayton 2. Mach 2, and Carbon X . . . and all three times were within a minute of each other; so, maybe it doesn't make all that much difference.

The Carbon X is reasonably stable. It has cushion without the sinking feeling. I don't know whether it is the carbon plate or the contour of the shoe, but it give a bit of that falling forward feeling. It also has a nice rebond that you can feel. The shape isn't exactly the same as the Clayton (I wish it was). The only irritating thing is that pieces of gravel get caught in the cut out on the bottom of the shoe. To me the Carbon X does not feel like a boat, but I am rather accustomed to the Hoka feel.

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

Have you run in the Carbon Rocket? I think that is more closely an analog for the 4% and its 7.3oz. I haven't tried the X, but I follow some pros and their accounts of the X are that it has more cushion and a slightly different ride than the rockets (whatever that means). I think this 'more cushioned' descriptor is deceiving as I don't like soft, but I like a dense cushion that is firmer in the forefoot. I had the Clayton 2, and I had a love/hate relationship with it because they didn't have the insole and the upper sized correctly and it would pinch or rub under the outside front arch of peoples feet. It was a reliable shoe, however, and had a good combo of being light and cushioned. It just wasn't as responsive (to me) as something like the tracer 2 and def not like the rockets.

I think if people want more of a racing flat to get the rockets (1mm drop), and maybe you can correct me if I am wrong in saying the X would be a more aggressive/competitive racing show similar to the Clayton.

So maybe a progression of Hokas line from 'softer' to aggressive would be like;

Mach ->tracer 2 -> Carbon Rocket

Mach ->Clayton 2(no longer in production) -> Carbon X

I feel like the mach has a little from both. I was debating suggesting the Clifton -> Clayton, but while its a great shoe, I don't think it belongs in that vein of road racing shoes like the others above. I don't even know where the Rehi would be at.

---

Use this link to save $5 off your USAT membership renewal:
https://membership.usatriathlon.org/...A2-BAD7-6137B629D9B7

Maybe Hoka will make them available in Canada by 2020..........

Carbon Plate does not dictate a comparison. So comparing the Carbon X to the Nike Vapor Fly is not really a fair comparison. Simply looking at the launch of the two shoes should tell us that. Nike set out to help running break 2 hours for the marathon. Hoka put the shoes on runners tryining to run world bests for 50K and beyond. We should expect a massive difference running in the two shoes and essentially that’s what everyone is saying. Weight as you know is a fairly soft measure. You can have two shoes that are two ounces apart yet feel almost exactly the same on the foot and you can have have two 6.5 oz shoes that feel in weight on the foot completely different.

As far as Carbon Plates in running shoes go, The New Balance 5280 will be out in September, the Saucony will probably launch around the US Marathon trials and the Brooks will launch at some point. Brooks has the absolute deepest testing with their shoe. Des won Boston in the first version, she ran in a second or third round in NYC and another version in Boston this year.

Now to the original poster. I have a buddy doing his first and probably last Ironman in Whistler. I say probably last but I’m sure he’ll be up there close to qualifying so if he qualifies for Kona he’ll go there too. He’s a runner turned triathlete. He ran in high school and college and now at 50 coaches one of the local high schools for cross country and track. He’s been running in the Clifton for a number of years now. Runs in the Challenger on the trails. He was deciding on a a shoe for Whistler and figured the Carbon X was worth the try. His current long runs are with the high school boys and he’s running with the front group. They are doing 12-14 mile runs at 6:45 pace. I’m telling you this to tell you about the type of runner he is. He’s still quite capable. He decided after running in the Carbon x and the Clifton multiple times that it’s the Carbon X for race day. He notices the same difference people have talked about. The shoe feels good running slower and it feels really good running faster. In between faster (race pace running) and slower running, he likes the Clifton better.

---

Dave Jewell
Free Run Speed

Thanks so much for the great review of this shoe. Convinced me to get a pair. Tried them for a speed workout and absolutely loved them. As a just under 160 pound triathlete, these are perfect racing shoes for me. Feel really fast in them.

I train in the Cloudsurfer for long runs and race in the Cloudflow. Super happy with both. Have gone the gambit with shoes from Saucony to Brooks and Hoka. Love the responsiveness of the On shoes. After running in Hoka and On would never switch back to Hoka.