Last year I switched to Zoot Ultra Kalani’s after playing around with too many different shoes. By far my favorite shoes. So now I’m in need to replace these.
I’m always confused trying to figure out differences based on website info (I’m trying to buy a new TV as well and talk about being confused)…anyway, so what’s the differences between:
any real difference between the Kalani and the 2.0??
is the Ultra TT just ligher weight with no laces? Is the smaller midsole heights going to feel greatly different??
I’ve used all three, am a forefoot striker, weigh 188-195lbs and currently train in the Kalani 2.0’s. I’ve had two pairs of Kalani’s in the past, loved 'em as well. Really no noticable difference between the Kalani and the Kalani 2.0 for me (both are virtually seamless inside which is nice when running without socks). For races, I use the Ultra TT if the run is under 7miles, and the Kalani 2.0’s if over. It just comes down to comfort for me on longer distances. The Kalani and Kalani 2.0 have more cushion (but still stiff with the carbon sole), the Ultra TT has less cushion and feels more stiff/responsive (great for runs with hills), but no other noticeable differences for me. Hope this helps.
Last year I switched to Zoot Ultra Kalani’s after playing around with too many different shoes. By far my favorite shoes. So now I’m in need to replace these.
I’m always confused trying to figure out differences based on website info (I’m trying to buy a new TV as well and talk about being confused)…anyway, so what’s the differences between:
any real difference between the Kalani and the 2.0??
is the Ultra TT just ligher weight with no laces? Is the smaller midsole heights going to feel greatly different??
Michael
What sort of differences are you looking for? The Kalani is the most popular shoe - overall - that Zoot sells. The TT is the most popular “tri” shoe that they sell. The TT is a lot “bouncier” (in my opinion) than the Kalani, because of the rubber used. It’s significantly lighter - almost 20% - as well, also largely due to the EVA. The TT is more of what most folks would call a lightweight trainer. The Kalani is more of a general purpose neutral shoe. Doubt you’ll notice the difference between 12mm vs 10mm. The difference in EVA blends is going to be - I think - much more noticeable.
My $0.02 - if you like the Kalani, as you appear to, stick with that. The TT is quite a different shoe, overall. I think the Kalani upper is superior to the TT upper. That’s my personal opinion. The 2.0 was designed to be a pretty consistent refresh to the Kalani, so you shouldn’t really notice any changes.
Probably in a similar position to the OP in that I have been looking at Kalani for training and Ultra TT for racing. I am also conscious of the shift towards lower heel drops, which is again why I was considering the TT.
I current run in Ultra Kane but was told by physio and ortho that a neutral would be a better option.
I am a midfoot striker, 6’1" 180lbs and have somewhat tight calves. I was told that maintaining the higher drop of the Kalani would help my calves, but, am I just using that as a crutch? Is the higher drop part of the issue? Is there any real need to go to a smaller drop if you are a midfoot striker? By reducing drop to a 10mm would it actually help to stretch my calves out alongside the physio and stretching I am doing? Or as someone who logs quite a few miles (IM age grouper), who is a little heavier, should I just go for the cushioning of the Kalani?
Lowering drop to reduce fatigue and injury is a very tempting prospect. I don’t want to miss out but don’t want to jump on something just because it is a trend. Which sounds like a similar situation to the OP so hope I am not derailing the thread.