The NYT article showed they were 4% better than.. not sure exactly. It showed they were 1% better than the Nike Zoom Streak, on average. So technically you could call it the "Nike Zoom Streak 3%".

What Nike has never said is, the Vaporflys are 4% more efficient than what, running barefoot? Running in sandals? If it's *every* other shoe, then that doesn't say good things about the other running shoes they sell.

I'd have to look and see what the NYT article showed exactly.. but it definitely wasn't 4% better than everything else.

No. The best part is seeing someone get off the bike in T2, sit down and spend 60 seconds tying their Vaporfly shoe laces before getting out on the run. Chances are any difference the shoes make (if any) offset the minute they spent tying the laces. Sure, people can buy elastic laces, but the lack of awareness about that point is pretty amazing. A pair of Zoot TT shoes (or similar idea) that you can slip in on six seconds seems like it would make the most sense for any distance 70.3 or below.

And even more so is the addition of variables in triathlon that could have an effect on the run performance. In a standalone marathon, there are so many variables that can throw off a shoe experiment. I imagine the fatigue of swimming and biking beforehand makes it even tougher to quantify the difference they make. Give Lionel Sanders some Vaporflys.. will he catch Patrick Lange at Kona?

It's like the disc wheel of running. In a lab, perhaps. For an elite rider who is really pushing it, even more perhaps. For an age grouper.. I'd bet it's more placebo than anything.

No. The best part is seeing someone get off the bike in T2, sit down and spend 60 seconds tying their Vaporfly shoe laces before getting out on the run. Chances are any difference the shoes make (if any) offset the minute they spent tying the laces. Sure, people can buy elastic laces, but the lack of awareness about that point is pretty amazing. A pair of Zoot TT shoes (or similar idea) that you can slip in on six seconds seems like it would make the most sense for any distance 70.3 or below.

And even more so is the addition of variables in triathlon that could have an effect on the run performance. In a standalone marathon, there are so many variables that can throw off a shoe experiment. I imagine the fatigue of swimming and biking beforehand makes it even tougher to quantify the difference they make. Give Lionel Sanders some Vaporflys.. will he catch Patrick Lange at Kona?

It's like the disc wheel of running. In a lab, perhaps. For an elite rider who is really pushing it, even more perhaps. For an age grouper.. I'd bet it's more placebo than anything.

Where are they available? Not in Nike plus

Not seeing availability either.

I just hope they come in a different color way than “LOOK AT ME!!! green”, haha!!

Not seeing availability either.

I just hope they come in a different color way than “LOOK AT ME!!! green”, haha!!

There's a video going around with the Nike designers of the NEXT%. They actually say they chose the color because it is the most visible color to the human eye (or something like that).

They are fugly as hell. Hope they tone it down to something in the more "normal" color range that can color match more kits. It is part fashion show out there y'know! If you don't race well, at least you should look good & neon green "ain't cutt'n it!"

Huh? My Vaporfly Flyknit 4%’s don’t really even need laces. You are just making shit up.

Well, to each their own. I like the color, and it won't match my kit (blue and orange) at all. (And you probably already knew this, but I'm pretty sure the *very last* think Nike was thinking about was triathletes. I don't think Nike puts a single cent into this sport--no sponsored athletes that I can think of, no ads, no race or team sponsorships. Nothing.)