If only they would make some super shoes wide enough for normal size feet

---

Yellowfin Endurance Coaching and Bike Fits
USAT Level 1, USAC Level 3

The metaspeeds are plenty wide

Lots of pros are wearing them now and they are winning. Alphafly still feels the fastest for me but you are right. MS feels the closest to normal shoes.

I have Nike VF 2 and Asics Metaspeed Sky. IMO VF are bouncier/faster BUT less stable so I wouldn't race much over 10k in them. I'll be wearing the Asics in Roth over the full distance (back door brag included).

Dan,

Interestingly, the Metaspeed Sky feel the best and the fastest to me; BUT, and I know I am an anomaly, they flare up knee and ankle injuries for me. Perhaps they just force my feet to strike in a way that doesn't work. I do not have that issue with either the AF or VF. In fact, and I know this doesn't make sense to others, I had medial ankle issues for more that 20 years after I twisted it at Ironman Canada in 1996. Tried orthotics, inserts, tape . . . everything, but the injury just continued to nag along. The I tried the VP at our local Fleet Feet. I told them I felt bad because I knew I would return them within the 60 trial period. Low and behold, ankle problems went away. Not problem whatsoever. Then, one long run in the Metaspeed Sky and I could feel the irritation coming back.

I agree that the AF feel a bit wonky, but I also think they work. For me, that huge forefoot is amazingly stable. I'm probably the only dork on earth that uses the AF as a recovery shoe!

Have a great trip!

---

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.

I'm run in the AP, next%s and like them although they are narrow for my feet.
I have about four runs in the MS skys and like them as they fit my feet better. After reading the review in your post maybe the Edge would be a better shoe for me. While I don't run quite at a cadence of 180, I definitely have a low vertical oscillation and shuffle type stride.
I thought the MS could use a bit more foam/cushion so these "plus" shoes are sounding pretty good to me!

Agree, I've run in all of those shoes and like them for various reasons and currently racing in the Metaspeed Sky. Looks like the choice between Sky and Edge might be a little different in that I may opt for the Edge vs. the Sky from what I read in the above write up... I fall in that 180 plus crowd and the plate might work better for me.

I'm also a fan of the EP and use that as my main training shoe... was looking forward to the EP3 but may just skip it with the Sky/Edge+.

There are a few independent studies that have been done on super shoes. They show that the best shoe for one person is not across-the-board the best shoe for everyone. I didn't have the funds to get a half dozen super shoes and test them all to see which one gave me the biggest boost. So, I started with the one that I could find the best deal on to see how they did. I lucked out. I got a 4-1/2% improvement with the shoe I got. Itt has been fun being able to run in 5K times that are 40 seconds faster than what I have been able to do with other shoes over the past 10 years, breaking 10K PR's, Marathon PR's etc.


I would NOT choose a shoe based on what race winners are wearing. There was a guy (Ben Pachev) who ran a 5K last year in 14:47 wearing crocks and he followed that up with a 1:06:33 half marathon is crocs.


If the MetaSpeed Sky make you faster than the Alphafly, Endorphin Pro, or Vaporfly great. If not it doesn't mean there is something wrong with the shoe or with you. Not everyone get the same response. We would all like to get the best shoe on the first try but that takes luck. Just choose the one that make the most sense for you (width, heel drop, running type, price, easy of lacing, loops, etc.) and make the best of it. Many people are going to see similar improvements from their top 2-3 shoe so they can't go wrong. Others may see a clear winner that gives them a better improvement than all the other shoes. Finding that shoe will take trial and error. You won't find it based on what race winners are wearing.

Agree with you 100% on this and makes me question what would supposedly be better for me with the MS Sky or Edge. I found the Nike VF 4% I can get a clear advantage with the shoe but around 4'/km pace. The Next % just feels like a soft responsive shoe but I can't find an advantage in it. I am a heal striker and have found that the 10mm drop seems to agree with me more and train exclusively in the Nike Pegasus Turbo. That said the Next % feels a better IM shoe at 8mm drop as it it is just a soft responsive shoe that feels nicer to run in at slower pace and my legs feel better at the back end of the run where I find the real advantages are found. The 4% is certainly better for 70.3 or shorter where I am at around 4'/km or faster.

The Edge has more drop and I like the profile of the shoe more. I have long legs and certainly am not a cadence runner so I should buy the Sky? I think pace you are running at plays heavily into these shoes added with your running style be it heal, mid or forefoot runner. Then throw in cadence, weight, leg length and a few other variables and you may find your perfect shoe???

100% agree with this - it's what works for you... and honestly, I always think that it's a matter of degree - does say a Vaporfly help you a smidge more, well, who really knows in a real-world race?

The only pushback I have on "race winners"... it's a fact that some pros have been racing some shoes without marketing deals... ie. running in shoes that aren't paying them. Nike especially. So that is instructive - the wisdom of crowds, etc.

However, I think everyone has to ultimately find what's right for them... and totally agree with you, likely through trial and error. All of the shoes I've tried have turned into training shoes for me... have logged a lot of miles on all of them, even when their "efficacy" as super shoe loses it's luster. Expensive trainers for sure... but believe have helped me as I do put in pretty decent volume.

All the trial and error make the Sky the one for me (what I raced in two 70.3s and 1 IM last year, Boston this spring). Certainly not because a bunch of pros winning races with them now.

It's pretty hilarious though... I now see other shoes - Adidas, or whatever.... and immediately think "Ah, can I get 5 sec a mile more with that shoe!?!?" Of course, the answer is likely no. But I give the shoe industry marketing serious props for stoking that kind of reaction...

interesting is that i rarely run in anything less then 8mm drop. but according to Asics approach to these shoes i should be running in the Sky+ which is a 5mm drop.

I run sub 180 strides a minute consistently regardless of pace. not by much though. like 88 per foot.

---

@rhyspencer