Has anyone else had trouble with the prominent arch in the Alphafly?
I finally bit the bullet and bought my first pair. I was very excited to try them, but ended up somewhat disappointed. There is certainly a light springiness like I have never experienced, but the arches are so prominent that they were uncomfortable. When I first put them on, I actually thought I left some packaging in the shoes. I went for a six-mile run and the first mile was particularly rough. I was worried I would end up with bruises on the bottom of my feet. After a while I got somewhat accustomed to them, but the feeling of a lump in my shoes never really went away. I have read some reviews that mention a prominent arch but most seem to say it’s not a problem. Based on my one run, I’d say it is more an annoyance than a major problem, but I only ran six miles. I’m worried what it might be like in the last 10k of a marathon or Ironman. Have any of you had similar experience? Is it something to which you got accustomed?. These are pricey shoes so it’s a bit tough to just put loads of miles into them in order to figure it all out.
In case it matters, I’m 140 pounds, I’ve been running in the Hoka One One, and I run a 1:30 half-marathon and full marathons in the low 3-hour range. The Alphaflies that I bought are the same size as all my other running shoes and seem to fit fine everywhere else.
I notice it if I am running at a slower pace where my strike is more mid foot and at the slower paces there is also more ground contact time. Once I pick up my speed to tempo pace and I am striking fore foot, the arch feeling virtually goes away.
I notice it if I am running at a slower pace where my strike is more mid foot and at the slower paces there is also more ground contact time. Once I pick up my speed to tempo pace and I am striking fore foot, the arch feeling virtually goes away.
Thanks. That makes me think they may be better for a shorter race where I both run faster and maintain a more consistent pace. The end of an Ironman is likely to be pretty slow for me and the possible range of paces is pretty high. I certainly don’t want to add to my discomfort. Would you describe the feeling you have at slower paces as painful, uncomfortable, a slight annoyance, or something else?
I notice it if I am running at a slower pace where my strike is more mid foot and at the slower paces there is also more ground contact time. Once I pick up my speed to tempo pace and I am striking fore foot, the arch feeling virtually goes away.
Thanks. That makes me think they may be better for a shorter race where I both run faster and maintain a more consistent pace. The end of an Ironman is likely to be pretty slow for me and the possible range of paces is pretty high. I certainly don’t want to add to my discomfort. Would you describe the feeling you have at slower paces as painful, uncomfortable, a slight annoyance, or something else?
At the slower paces, it’s seriously uncomfortable but I just ignore it knowing I’m just warming up before a tempo run. The BETTER shoe in my opinion is the previous Next% shoe…the Vaporfly Next%. The arch is a little less intrusive and I use those for runs that are also runs mostly at Z2 pace as it is barely noticeable at slower pace and they feel so good. The AF is just a “harder” shoe that requires you to run fast to really feel it shine. The only place I would use my AF is for a standalone running event or in training doing a tempo run. The VF is a shoe I would absolutely use in my IRONMAN marathon.
In the last month or so I have seen three pro triathletes in Australia sell basically a new set of Alphaflys on Facebook marketplace and all when questioned have said they prefer the Next%. Of all the others I know who have run in them have all said the same thing. I don’t find the Next% a faster shoe but it is soft responsive shoe that is kind to the legs even at slower speeds and maybe faster over a marathon for that reason.
I’m a front pack runner with a fastest overall marathon split at a full IM. Good running form, cadence and slightly wide feet. I recently did a HM in the alphafly to test early in my training after a reset, on not many miles a week. Ran a 1:12 in them which I was happy with, but the alphafly destroyed my feet. By the 6km mark I could feel the burn on my inner arches, and I had bad blood blisters for a week+ on each foot. I tried a size down to see if that would solve since Nike has a great try for 30-60 day policy, but those were too snug. I’ve decided they just don’t work for me and I’m sticking with the vaporfly next. Not tempted to try them again just because of the airbag, the vaporfly are plenty fast and i feel I run more natural in them
Similar experience here. Front of pack runner. Normal arches, midfoot strike, high cadence, low knee lift. Did a test run on a hilly 10K loop course in preparation for the actual race in January with the Alphafly. The shoes were definitely painful to wear at 90% of my race pace and I was always conscience running in them. Will be racing in my Next% instead.
Don’t know what is meant with “prominent arch”
(here https://teachmeanatomy.info/lower-limb/misc/foot-arches/
there are defined 3 arches, but which is the prominent arch?)
but I do not have problems with the Alphafly. Did a marathon with them no problem. Also have the 4% and the next% they’re all ok for me. I’m a heavy (86 kg) healstriker.
I have bad arch pain in mine when I put them on but the pain disappears after I get going at marathon pace. I’ve set two marathon PR’s in mine so far. My take: they’re top of the line race shoes built for speed. They will work for some, but are not designed to be a one size fits all shoe that every single athlete will be suited for. Thankfully the VF Next% seem to be more comfortable by most accounts and are probably just as fast.
I’ve switched out the insoles and found them to be much more comfortable. To get the insole out, you may need to pry it off with a screwdriver because its glued. You’ll really notice how narrow the arch area is once you pull out the Nike insole. Hope this helps.