newer nike pegasis...harder?

And that .5 ounces extra per shoe added about 4 seconds to your tempo run.

I definitely noticed a difference between the new and the old. I loved the old ones, but the new ones just don't seem to fit me as well. I really wish they wouldn't have changed them. I'm getting blisters on the inside of my big toe and the inside of the middle of my foot. It seems like they did something with the arch which was what always annoyed me about Ascis shoes. I hate the feeling of something pushing up from underneath my foot. Those bastards.

Everyone should train in 5oz racing flats.

Alan

Facts: the new Pegasus is on a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT LAST. That change makes for a technically different shoe. The transition, feel, and roll will be entirely different. "Difference" isn't necessarily BAD, it's just necessarily DIFFERENT. "Over-analyzing" is a red herring; engineering differences are quantifiable differences.

haxor, you are pretty close. Conditioning as measured by resting pulse is the same but the shoes are costing me 4 to 6 seconds per mile. Over analytical? We are talking about an activity where people throw one foot in front of the other and measure the results with a timepiece. What the hell else is there to do?

MR.runna wrote:

What do you guys think of the new nike shox nz? Pros and cons?

cons:stiffer than the shox d, the very rigid shox pillars do shorten the time from heel phase to toe off...the only problem is that the increased speed also increases the amount of impact on the forefoot, and the forefoot only has a compressed eva(called phylon) and a small piece of softlon) Nike sez that the shox pillars will give you 1,000 miles, unfortunately a compressed evea will give you about 300miles. They are asking 100dollars for a shoe without forefoot air. Even the moto has zoom air in forefoot.

pros: wider in the toebox.

Is it still possible to buy the old pegasus anywhere?

As another listed stated, the 2002 has a different last, so there is indeed a major difference between the two models.

In general I would agree with you about over-analysis, but the new 2002 is so different than the old that I cannot run in them. Money down the drain.

Yeah, I know how you feel. I thought I could just get used to them but I think I may have to get different shoes. My feet are torn up with blisters.

4 to 6 seconds total, there, rick

Hi there. What's with the new Supernoval Comp? Just my 2 cents, but the lateral heel is pretty firm, the arch is over-kill, and the forefoot is so narrow. The cushioning does feel nice, however. I would be interested in knowing what your sales pitch is on them. Thanks.

To whom it may concern,

I have been working at a local sporting good store with TONS of running shoes. During my free time at work, I try on almost every one from asics to Nike. I am a pretty neutral runner and most shoes work for me. What i learned about trying so many on is they generally are the same in the midsole and upper. Each company has there own "air" tecnology, like the absorb for NB and Gel for asics. When I run insane intervals or track workouts, my whole focus is on my breathing and finishing my workout at my best, not the extra four ounces a shoe carries. Point being made, as long as its comfortable, thats all that matters, we should concentrate on getting better, not the minor weight or "feel" differance of a shoe.

Important that when changes are made that some people will have problems. A friend had numerous knee problems (attributed to the new shoe) He had been in Pegasus for years without trouble. Beware!!!!!

EPBerlin

Thanks for the feedback. The shoe hit the market on January 1, and feedback thus far has been somewhat limited. The Supernova Competition is more "marathon type" cushion/stability shoe than true racing flat. The "Comp" updated the Taper, which was a bit wider, and less stable. The goal with the "Comp" is to have a better fitting, more stable version (than the Taper) for fast training/long races. Good specific feedback on your part. I will have to ask others about your above points, and take note.

Mike

Thanks for your response. I'm glad that you took my post in the way that I intended it--that is constructive. I'll add the following points in addition to the ones that I made in the original post. I should note, however, that I only put on a few miles in the shoes because they were a tad short, the toe box felt too narrow, and with several great shoes in my line-up I saw no reason to proceed. I would have preferred to put more miles on them prior to expressing these sort of opinions. I really felt like I was not getting a nice, natural foot-strike. This was my biggest concern. It felt like the lateral heel was very firm, causing a bit of a lever effect, which pushed the foot into the almost absurdly built-up medial arch. In addition that built up medial arch extends farther into the forefoot than I would prefer. For me, the toe box was uncomfortably narrow. Perhaps a half-size up would help, but I doubt it. In addition, the lacing options kind of left me scratching my head. On the other hand, the cushioning felt very nice, the shoes seem quite smooth, and they look sharp in my opinion. Feel free to e-mail me if you would find more detailed comments helpful.

What I cannot understand with Nike is it is quite apparent that the Pegasis' where very very good for a large amount of runners. Why change it then? They had something great and decided it wasn't what they wanted? The way I see it is don't fix it if it's not broken. Yes in fact the storm pegasis are cool expecially for running in foul weather but they're not the old pegs. So why not stick with the old ones (change around the color schemes as much as they want so they can claim a new shoe each year) but keep the jist of it the same. An for things like the storm peg, that's fine too if you make it as another line, like a special edition pegasis. It seems as if the pegasis have this curse. We all remember years upon years ago when many loved them... suddenly they were discontinued. Well that's what's in store for them now, or so i'm guessing. If you change something great to something sub-par, you'll most definitely lose sales and once again history will repeat itself and the pegasis will be discontinued yet again.