Looks like a great shoe. But I don’t know about for Tri. The only review on the Spesh site says: “The shoe is not super easy/quick to get into, the inner sock/bootie is snug and hugs the ankle.” Probably even hard to get on with wet feet after a swim.

I wondered about that. Thanks for sharing that review. Probably not a short course athletes shoe but maybe some long course folks might find it’s worth the trouble.

Headline: Specialized S-Works Ares is hard to get on, but oh-so-comfy to ride in

https://www.velonews.com/...so-comfy-to-ride-in/

So if T1 time is nbd and you want to run in $425 cycling shoes, why not?

---

no sponsors | no races | nothing to see here

I was looking a triathlete's (can't remember who, it was a woman ITU athlete) post about them on IG and I was wondering about transitions - will be interesting to see if their triathletes use them.

My experience with the Nike epic react sock liner is terrible unless I wear long socks - it wears a hole in my achilles tendon. Another possible downside for triathletes.

The sole looks just like the road 7 sole, which I think is among the very best in the whole industry and they say they behave stiffened it up. I bet you could use it to jack up your car.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

The S-Works 7 vent has FACT 13 carbon sole. The standard S-Works has FACT 15 sole. So, yeah, I think you're right about stiff soles on the new Ares. But I won't try jacking my Nissan with them.

Subjective: my Shimano S-Phyre 9 shoes (with the relative stiffness rated at 12) feel more stiff than my S-Works 6 (also FACT 13), FWIW.

---

no sponsors | no races | nothing to see here

There's no standardized stiffness scale. You can't really compare those numbers between manufacturers.
It's not even clear that within a manufacturer that the scale has any meaning beyond one sole is stiffer than another. Is a shoe rated 11 10% stiffer than a shoe rated 10? Who knows? It's all just marketing.
I'm thinking about rating the soles on our shoes at 16, just so we can be the stiffest. [/pink]

Edit - Also, stiffness alone is not the most important aspect impacting performance of a sole. It needs to be stiff *enough* and have that stiffness in the right place. Extra stiffness is not helpful. And what is stiff enough? In many ways it's kind of personal preference. As long as you are not getting plastic (permanent) deformation, or dampening/losing energy to heat generated in the sole (honestly, that is not a problem with any shoes but people talk like it's a big thing) all you need to worry about is does it feel right to you. When you sprint does the flexiness bother you? Get stiffer shoes. It doesn't bother you? No problem. The shape design and manufacturing method to give the required stiffness where it is needed, not providing it where it is not required, and using a manufacturing method that provides that in a combination that makes it light and affordable and in a shape that fits and with a range of cleat positions that works are all much more important.

Finally - and we are the only ones considering this - the shape of the sole is very important for aerodynamics.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

I did a fit test on one of the VERY early prototypes for this shoe. A year ago? Two? Time is weird now... It'd be fine for Ironman - especially with socks. But I wouldn't recommend for anything shorter. But for sure you're note putting this on while riding. But I don't think that's allowed for AG athletes anyway in IM, right? But it's a super comfortable shoe. I'm about to see if I can snag a pair. This final design is a bit different than the early prototype, but the sock liner remains. One notable feature is that it was designed to specifically accommodate the anterior tibialis tendon, which tends to be quite thick on sprinters. But I think this is something runners will appreciate as well.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Interesting about the tendon. I've struggled with tendonitis in the past but had been pain free for about 8 years before swapping from the 2012 s-works to the s-works 7 and about the same time I've been plagued with return of achilles for last 2 years. Now in fairness, going back to the 2013, taking time off the bike, and other things still haven't cleared it up, but I do have really thick achilles and muscles that run really low there.

Now I'm not off to grab these on the offchance, but for long-term that type of feature / design is of interest.

I say Javier Gomez got a pair of these and so I'm interested to see when he uses them. I say that because he was also very positive about his shiv on his social media ....... ;-)

The anterial tibial tendon issue might be from feedback they have had about the road 7. I might guess that any issues people had with that is that Spec. has been making the upper of that shoe out of very stiff materials. Even just the tongue can feel like it is putting pressure in that area, and the collar in that area is very stiff indeed. A sock liner vs. the tongue may alleviate that. But I think just nicer, more supple material choice for the upper would be better.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

It's an interesting shoe for sure.

I have the sworks 3 and 7. My right foot has an issue with the collar with the 7, I have to wiggle the tongue in a particular angle to avoid rubbing that particular tendon. It's stiff for sure and not really an issue after I find the right spot. Hope to try the new Ares for sure!

Just received mine. I’m now a roadie only and still thinking of returning them. As I said to my buddies, not sure I want to be carrying shoehorns around to get into my cycling shoes.

 “
Just received mine. I’m now a roadie only and still thinking of returning them. As I said to my buddies, not sure I want to be carrying shoehorns around to get into my cycling shoes.[/quote]





Damn...that bad? You might have just saved me $425.

I went and tested a pair out last week, they are very difficult to put on (Annoyingly). They however are very comfortable and I think the new material, BOA system and placement is great.

I wear wides and was really hoping the toe box with the updated material would work for me but in the end they just did not.

What sizes did you get for the Sworks 6, 7 and S-phyre (which model was that?). I'm really over my S-works 7 and the achilles issues, so thinking of going to the s-phyre. I had some shimano shoes in the past - TR-02s, but interested to see how the two brands compare. Really hard to tell even if I can try on (5 hour round trip) as of course the fit you need to be right is after 5 hours riding, not 5 mins in store.

For both Shimano and Specialized I wear 46.
The Shimano S-Phyre 901 are noticeably narrower in the toe box, and also feel stiffer than the Specialized.

---

no sponsors | no races | nothing to see here

I bought a pair a couple months ago. I don't find them annoyingly hard to put on. You wouldn't be slipping into them on the bike obviously, but for a daily road bike shoe I don't find putting them on to be any kind of challenge or annoyance. I think they may have gotten slightly easier since the very first time I put them on, but again that was no struggle. They run true to size for me. I am usually in either a 44 or sometimes a 45 for shoes that run small, and I went with 44.5 and they feel great with thin socks. They are pretty comfy and you don't have to have them super tight to feel locked in. The only criticism I have at all is the price but they aren't out of line compared to similarly featured shoes; let's hope they last 10+ years like my last road shoes.

Sorry, I know this is detailed stuff, and I am appreciative of your time to reply.

What running shoes do you use, and are you in normal width of those. I wear 47 wide fit Brooks and am fine in the S-works 7 'normal' width.

No apology necessary.

I wear 12.5 in Brooks, normal width. Same for Altra, Newton, and Saucony.

---

no sponsors | no races | nothing to see here

Posting for anyone else - the RC902 47 wide fit was way too small for my feet - the 48 standard S-works is if anything too big in toe box. The old 2012 s-works 48 was 'ok tight'.

Trying to explain the shape of the RC902. If I stand back to a wall, then my little toe is almost as far forward as the big toe. The S-works have a 'blunt' front end. The RC902 come down at an angle, so you need your little tow to be a fair bit further back - shoes are elongated teardrop shaped, even in the wide fitting. I honesly have no idea what the normal shoe looks like as they are undoubtably the narrowest looking shoe I've ever seen. Once wearing they weren't as bad as they looked, but still slightly tight for my feet.