I do NOT have a pretty stride and am not fast. I have close to 200 miles on a pair of Next % - some gravel trail and dry off road. Off course I have some wear but they have plenty of life left. I'll echo everyone else that they simply don't beat you up. I am 59 and 165 lbs.

---

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.

Me too, I train in the Zoom Fly 3 and its great. Agree its much heavier and less bouncy but still a great shoe. The upper is much nicer, IMO, then the Next, and sockless its very comfortable. That said I still race the Next with Speed Laces. I wore them for this past weekends Arizona 70.3 and ran a 1:31, a time I haven't run in a number of years on the course.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

I also "ran" into this problem with the 4%. A few short test runs and raced Santa Rosa and Cruz 70.3 in them. Spraiined my ankle for the first time in years on a test run just days before Santa Rosa. Developed pretty bad insertional Achilles tendinitis (right where the shoe chafed my heel). Sprained my ankle again! during Santa Cruz, developed VERY bad peroneal tendinitis, and my doc says I can't run for a month. I'm going nuts. At least I got through my whole season.

Like a moron, I'll probably try the NEXT% also, because the free speed is like crack, but man it can mess you up.

You can buy the Next (with possibly similar issues), or :

1) try the Carbon X : nearly same efficiency, much more stable
2) wait for the reviews of the (upcoming) New Balance FuelCell Racer and Saucony "Carbon Ward" (no official name yet), possibly same efficiency and hopefully more stable.

Also coming soon in the "carbon plate" series : the Skecher Speed Elite, but probably less cushioned.

Without carbon plate : the Hoka Rincon and Skechers Razor 3 are very light, great cushion, and nearly as efficient at a much better price.

"1) try the Carbon X : nearly same efficiency, much more stable"
---------------------------
Perhaps I am an anomaly, but I didn't find this to be the case. I *thought* I would LOVE the Carbon X . . . it repeatedly gave me knee twinges (with or without inserts). The Next % gives me no issues at all and no inserts.

---

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 saw some rumblings about an Adidas carbon-plated equivalent, possibly amongst all the talk about the pros in Kona and the prototype shoes they were running in.

Does anyone have any more info about this? I'm surprised they've been so slow off the mark with it.

The Carbon X work for me, while the % does not
The % work for you, while the Carbon X does not

That's life ;-)

However, I think it is clearly established the Carbon X (and most shoes in the world, in fact) are more stable than the VFs

Do we know that the Carbon X gives the same benefit as the Next%? I don't know either way, but am generally curious. I train in Hokas but got the Next% for racing and it's clearly faster. I don't find it very comfortable, but since I just use it for races I put up with it. I'm willing to try the Carbon X, but I am not sure how it compares, especially since many top pros seem to prefer the Next%?

I have both of these, despite the fact that I'm a pretty average runner. The best comparison I can make is that the Next% has really great bounce, in that you can really feel the shoe spring back. The foam feels magical, and I've never run in a shoe like it. It's going to be my 10K / Olympic and half marathon / 70.3 shoe. When I first got them, I would pick a target pace but not look at my watch to see how close I could get. I was always faster than I thought I was going, around 15 sec/mile. Very unscientific obviously.

The CarbonX feels light and smooth, even though technically it isn't a very light shoe. It gives a sense of gliding you forward. I do my long runs in these and plan to use them for my first Ironman next year, mainly because I've never done a really long run in the Next%. And, frankly, because I fully expect to have to walk and run slow for parts of the marathon. Next% would be a waste at those speeds.

Never seen a serious / scientific result about that yet.

Hopefully, when more shoes available (NB FC Racer, Saucony, ...) we will have some real comparison study made between these 4+ shoes.

From my experience with running in 4% and Carbon X, and reading of the scientific tests around the 4%, i would say (not bullet proof) :
If you are heel striker and can handle medial lack of stability, the VF is the best
If you are midfoot striker and prefer a stable shoes, Carbon X is better

In between... don't know

Thanks for that. I'm thinking about trying the Carbon X. I suppose if I don't find they give me the benefit of the Next%, they can still serve as a very nice training shoe.

Your description of the Next% is basically my experience with them as well. Have you tried the same pacing experiment with the Carbon X's? If so, was your pace also faster than expected? I realize, this isn't scientific, just trying to get a sense of how they compare.

This is similar to my experience. 38m, ~67kg, I ran 3'20" in the VF 4% at Roth earlier this year. I'd only done a couple of very short shakeouts runs in them before the race. I found them fine during the race, though definitely at times unstable (esp with some cobblestones!). In recover post-race after I took them off I thought 'jeez, my ankles, lower leg, stabilizers etc. feel a little more sore than usual'. Fast-forward ~1 week and I went to do my first very easy run (in other shoes), made it 5' down the road before I was limping with very bad lower leg pain (just one leg). A month of physio appt's later (diagnosed as peroneal tendonitis) and I was finally able to run again for more than 10'.

I haven't run in them since (but haven't had a need either), I'll probably bring them out again next race if there's no alternative on the market yet (I'm a NB guy normally, so hopefully they have an offering). If I do run in them again, I will likely try some other Nike high-end models in the lead-up and/or use the VF4% more in training and get the Next % for race.

TLDR; I'll be very cautious using them again.

Similar story

Few runs to get used to them. Then running a half-marathon with them. Happy, they are efficient, but ankles hurting at the end.
Then, posterior tibialis problem, clearly from the lack of medial support, out of running for a month.
I use them sometime for very short tempo runs.

During the last 4 month, done 2x 70.3 and a half-marathon with the Carbon X : not a single issue

But are the Carbon X as fast as the Next %?

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

For me, yes.

Is their a consensus after some time of the best training shoe to complement the next % as a pure racing shoe?

---

Gone with the wind

Instagram: palmtreestriathlon

Consensus, no. I like the Pegasus Turbo 2 for my long runs.

---

Let food be thy medicine...

The Nike Zoom Fly 3 is probably the closest trainer to the Next %

---

https://www.strava.com/...tes/zachary_mckinney

I’m mainly using the Vaporfly Flyknit as a daily driver, with some longer runs in the ZF3.

I guess there is some good from these shoes? Girl wearing the next runs 17:10 to win $500 in the shoes, vs a doper who typically wins not using the shoes 18:44




but what if a doper used the shoes...

To clarify: did you go with 11 for the Next%?

My Escalante racers are US 11 and they fit perfectly. Don’t have a Nike store nearby so hoping to get the size right on the first order.

---

Darren
https://www.strava.com/athletes/12385497

Yea - 11 in the Vaporfly Next% fit about the same, length wise, as the Escalante racer.

Anyone know how these would hold up on gravel/light trail? Not much rubber on the outsole, wondering about races like Victoria 70.3 and Ironman Canada. I know they were designed for road..

It's great to get reports that add some balance like this. If anyone could make a shoe that allowed everyone to run in for the first time during a marathon race, and have less wear and tear than their previous favorite shoe, then that would be a huge achievement. Even if it came with no speed gain. I don't doubt that for lots of people it is going to be great. But it seems unlikely that it is a panacea.

So understanding who it might and might not suit is important. A common stated rule is if it's comfortable it should be good for you. Any warning signs before post race soreness?