Love That Adidas Boost

From appearances as well as feel, I think the Rocket Boost shoes have the most cushion overall, but it seems a bit too much to me. They also don't look as sturdy as some of the other offerings. Here's a good video that shows various shoes, both Adidas Boost and Nike Lunarlon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF6snTlyv6k

And here's another good video comparing various models of Boost shoes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTnm6CvVeOE

You gotta admit, this is a very effective video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxMFXiBUYBg

looks like the boston boost is now available - but good god who wants red running shoes? I know adidas tries to be fashion forward, but god - I wince every time I look at them

http://www.runningwarehouse.com/adidas_Adizero_Boston_5_Men_Inf_Blk_70_D/descpageMRS-ABS5M1.html?gclid=CjwKEAjwg_afBRD3rpChlqiKt1ESJACwY6NkSph1xhMB8FBs2T0HdK2_Ha6QmcF78TQWygKnCoHBcxoCIKfw_wcB

I think I'll wait a month til the more reasonable colors come out

ackeryly wrote:

looks like the boston boost is now available - but good god who wants red running shoes? I know adidas tries to be fashion forward, but god - I wince every time I look at them

http://www.runningwarehouse.com/adidas_Adizero_Boston_5_Men_Inf_Blk_70_D/descpageMRS-ABS5M1.html?gclid=CjwKEAjwg_afBRD3rpChlqiKt1ESJACwY6NkSph1xhMB8FBs2T0HdK2_Ha6QmcF78TQWygKnCoHBcxoCIKfw_wcB

I think I'll wait a month til the more reasonable colors come out

Those are pretty hideous. Only good if your team colors are RED, and even then . . . They do look like nice shoes, though. Thanks for the link.

Today I ran four miles in my brand spankin' new Saucony Cohesion 6 running shoes. I really liked the Cohesion 5, and when I got the Cohesion 6 I really liked them, too. They seemed well-cushioned and bouncy, and I was quite happy with them. But since I finally gave in and bought my Adidas Boost Supernova Glide 6 with Boost, I'm spoiled. The difference between the two shoes is very noticeable. The shock from the pavement is much less in the Boost. In fact, with the Saucony I had to concentrate more on softening my footstrike than with the Boost, and the spring just wasn't there. My legs feel much more tired and even a bit sore (especially in the knees) than they do when I run in the Boost shoes. I also have some new Saucony Guide 6 running shoes, and they are slightly better than the Cohesion 6, but neither comes close to the Boost. So today I decided that my Saucony Cohesion 6 will be reserved for occasional treadmill use until the EVA midsoles lose their cushion. I may also start using the Saucony Guide 6 shoes as a walking and weekend family activities. Which leaves me with the Boost and another new pair of Adidas with "Adiprene" midsoles because those are also much better than regular EVA. When I bought the Boost shoes, I thought it would be nice to have four pairs of shoes to rotate, but now I can't stand running in my Saucony shoes. If you're currently running in a shoe with conventional EVA, give the Boost a try, and you'll probably want to ditch your old shoes, too.

Has anyone tried the Response Boost?

Wonder wrote:

Has anyone tried the Response Boost?

I haven't tried it. The Supernova Glide 6 Boost is my first of the series. Here's a nice little video of my shoe. He's holding the color I bought, too. Love these shoes.

This is the most ridiculous thread.

Shawn H is an adidas intern.

Bumping his on thread repeatedly and mosting Adidas promotional vids.

The real question

Glide Boost vs Boston Boost vs Zoom Elite 7??

wat wrote:

This is the most ridiculous thread.

Shawn H is an adidas intern.

Bumping his on thread repeatedly and mosting Adidas promotional vids.

I have no affiliation with Adidas at all. I could tell you my real job, but then I'd have to . . . well, you know. LOL. I don't sell anything, and I get paid nothing for saying nice things about any running shoe. But when you have been running most of your life as I have, you learn a few things. I have more experience with running than 90% of the people on this forum even if I was never a famous runner. SOOOOO . . . when I find something that really works, like my new Adidas Boost shoes, I'm doing people a favor by letting you know my impressions.

Now, today I went to two different malls with my wife and daughter. While the girls tried on clothes, looked at purses, shoes and make-up, I went to four running shoe stores and just looked at and tried on running shoes. Top of the line shoes from various top brands. One shoe that I tried on was the new Adidas Response Boost. I didn't care for it. The glove-like fit in the forefoot was constricting. Not even close to as nice as my Adidas Supernova Glide 6 Boost. And none of the other shoes from any brand I tried came close to the feel of the Supernova Glide 6 Boost. That's my impression. Yours may differ, of course. I don't plan on continuing to harp on this topic, but I'm happy to have given a good review of a shoe that really, really deserves it. Adidas did a helluva job. Now, of coruse if Adidas wanted to pay me, a non-famous, older middle-aged nobody to endorse their shoes, bring it on, Adidas! LOL.

Shawn H,

The Saucony Cohesion is a shitty cheap version of the Saucony Ride that is only sold at cheap big box stores like Dicks or Academy to people that barely run. If you call yourself a runner, stop wearing the cheap ass Cohesions. Also the Adidas Response Boost that you probably found at the Finish Line inside the mall is a fashion version of the boost... it is not a running shoe. It also is made out of cheaper material and its target market is not a runner. Go to a specialty running store and let one of the employees tech you on what you need. Stop looking at shit shoes that will end up hurting you.

Charming Charlie wrote:

Shawn H,

The Saucony Cohesion is a shitty cheap version of the Saucony Ride that is only sold at cheap big box stores like Dicks or Academy to people that barely run. If you call yourself a runner, stop wearing the cheap ass Cohesions. Also the Adidas Response Boost that you probably found at the Finish Line inside the mall is a fashion version of the boost... it is not a running shoe. It also is made out of cheaper material and its target market is not a runner. Go to a specialty running store and let one of the employees tech you on what you need. Stop looking at shit shoes that will end up hurting you.

Wrong. the Response Boost IS a decent running shoe with many of the same features as the other Boost shoes. If I liked the foot-hugging, sock-like upper, I'd recommend it. It has the same Boost material midsole, and many of the same features as the original Energy Boost. I just don't care for the fit and narrower toebox. As for the Saucony Cohesion series, it has served me well in the past as a cheap, low-mileage shoe. You can buy it for less than 30 dollars in some stores. It's about 50 in Sports Authority, but I wouldn't pay that much for it. I know there are some really high-priced running shoes out there with all kinds of features, some great and some just gimmicks. But consider this: When I began running, the best shoe on the market was the original Nike Waffle Trainer. Later, other shoes came along like the original Brooks Vantage, the New Balance Trail 355, the original Saucony Jazz, Adidas Boston, etc. I sold all of these and wore most of them when I worked in Footlocker management for a couple of years in my youth. All of those shoes were top-of-the-line at one time, yet none of them was even as good as the current Saucony Cohesion series. But they really served millions of runners well. Generally, if you buy into a shoe's quality by the size of its price tag you're a fool. You do get what you pay for, to a point, but different things work for different people, and not everyone needs a $180 shoe. The more features and the more hype, the higher the price. The reason I've been hyping the Adidas Boost series in this thread is because, in my opinion, the Boost midsole--not the rest of the shoe--is truly innovative and high-performance. They're especially good for old guys like me whose legs don't handle the pavement as well as they once did.

The Boost Response was not created as a running shoe... it was created as a fashion shoe. I recently talked with an Adidas specialty running rep that confirmed this. Most of all, the sole and tread that was added to the shoe is cheap rubber that will cause you to slip once you hit any kind of condensation.

Not anywhere did I say the more expensive the shoe, the better the shoe. I said the Cohesion is made out of cheaper material and therefore will not hold up as well as the Ride. I know this from experience with both shoes. The Ride is a $120 shoe at most. If you were to go to a locally owned running specialty store you would notice that they most likely will not have a shoe that is $180 dollars. Most high quality shoes are going to be between $100-150. Hoka One One and Newton (as well as several others) each have a couple shoes that are specialty shoes running at most $175. The most expensive Adidas Boost shoe is currently the Energy Boost at $160...not $180. Although, I do expect them to release one that is slightly higher yet more specialized and not necessarily for the average runner. Shawn H, you are an idiot.

You were doing so well, actually making some sense, and I was going to tell you that I agreed with much of what you wrote. Then you had to totally blow your credibility with the childish statement "Shawn H, you are an idiot." Better to say something like, "While you have some valid points, Shawn H, I disagree with some of what you wrote." Then you could be taken more seriously.

Now, let me address what you have said, point by point. I don't usually do this with some of the morons on this forum, but you're not a moron and you obviously have some experience. Ok, first, here is an Adidas link for the Response Boost:

As you can see, the Response Boost has the same "Techfit" material upper, "Boost" material midsole, and "Adiwear" outsole as the upper end Boost shoes. There's nothing "fashion" about it. If an Adidas rep told you this, perhaps he or she was trying to get you to buy a more expensive model. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say the Response Boost is made of cheap materials, when they're the same materials used on the other models. The real key for me, and the reason I've been touting the Boost line is the Boost midsole material itself, which my experience thus far in running with my shoes--which, believe it or not, I bought and began using BEFORE I saw ANY of the YouTube video links I posted on this thread--is that the Boost material has a unique feel and ride that I haven't experienced before in other midsole materials. As for the Response Boost, as I said, I really don't care for the "Techfit" material. It stretches around your forefoot kind of like a compression sock. They obviously did this for comfort, and I'm sure this material is very good at eliminating abrasion on the top of the foot, but I really don't care for it.

Second, you're absolutely right that the Saucony Cohesion series is the lower end of the Saucony line and not as good as the Ride series. I also have the Saucony Guide 6, which is also not on the high end of the Saucony line, but still better than the Cohesion. The point is, the Cohesion is STILL better than many of the once top-rated running shoes that I grew up and ran in when I was just a young runner and having some success in high school and a four-year track and cross country scholarship in college. No, it's not as good as the best models, but I've never NEEDED the best models. Some of the features on the best models are gimmicks or simply cosmetic, while others are legitimate improvements. What's great about the recent innovations such as the Adidas Boost midsoles, the Nike Lunarlon midsoles and, I'm told, the maximalist trend of the Hoka shoes, is that for runners who live in places like big cities where almost all of their running is on cement and pavement, these new materials offer new life to older feet, legs, and joints. I have thus far found the Boost material to be as good as advertised.

Third, you are right that there are not many high-end running shoes that cost $180 dollars. Yesterday I saw two. One was an Asics shoe--I think it was the Mizuno Wave Creation 15. Obviously this was overpriced because you can find it for $160 or less online. No, I've never run in Mizuno, but someone out their has probably bought this shoe for $180, and I hope they're happy with it. It certainly has an odd midsole configuration that looks gimmicky to me, like the Adidas Springblade, which common sense tells me is pure garbage. My daugher saw the Springblade and couldn't stop laughing yesterday: "Dad, it looks like you could get a big rock stuck between those things." If you don't know how ridiculous the Adidas Springblade looks, check it out online. You're right that most high quality running shoes will be between $100 and $150. Which brings us back to the $100 Adidas Response Boost. I believe the Response Boost can be a good shoe for many runners. Same materials as the high-end models, especially that Boost midsole. Worth checking out, although my personal favorite of all the ones I tried on at an Adidas store is the Supernova Glide 6 Boost.

It sounds like you are confused on what kind of shoe you need. You should have someone at a run specialty store take a look at your gait. You have mentioned that you are in both neutral shoes (Cohesion, Ride, Glide Boost) and stability shoes (Guide, Response Boost). Where do you typically see your shoes wear first when you are in a neutral shoe?

The Response Boost has much less boost material than any of the others and it also does not have continental rubber like all of the running versions do. I just asked an online rep about the Response and they stated that it is a "fun run/trainer" while the others are "distance running" shoes

http://i59.tinypic.com/b3jree.png

.

As for the Mizuno Creations, they are the "Cadillac" of the Mizuno neutral running line and its MSRP is $160 (you should really find a new store if they are trying to rip you off for $180). Its comparable to the Asics Nimbus, Brooks Glycerin, and Saucony Triumph... all super cushioned neutral running shoes that typically would help control some supanation. The Creation uses its a plastic piece for its Wave design for a more rigid yet light cushion instead of just filling the sole with EVA foam like the others do. Yes it looks different than the other shoes but I do believe that they did this to compete with a different product and feel among the other similar shoes that I mentioned. I don't see as this as a fashion statement... because, as you described, it looks like a warped ass whole that could get a rock shoved up it. But let's face it, MOST of the world buys their running shoes based on looks.

While you have some valid points, Shawn H, I disagree with some (if not most) of what you wrote.

Thank you. That's much better. Oh, and I forgot to mention, the other 180 dollar shoe I saw yesterday was the new Nike Air Max. But here's the thing: Different colors were priced differently at Finish Line. The nice colors were 179.99. The less attractive colors were as low as 129.99. It's a nice shoe, and one that I would recommend, but not at 179.99.

I know all about shoe stability, neutral shoes, overpronation, supination, etc. When I was younger and running a lot more miles, I noticed the outside heel area wearing down faster than the inside heel area. But a strange thing happened as I became more efficient: I became more of a mid-foot striker. Some of this depends on the show. Higher heel-toe differential encourages greater heel-strike, obviously. More recent running shoes have less heel-toe drop, encouraging more mid-foot strike. But it also depends on the terrain on which you run. Run a lot of hills, and you'll necessarily run a lot of downhills, which will cause more heel-strike. Oh, and I tried on every shoe you mentioned above. Nice shoes, but not worth the money in some cases. Today I went on another run in my new Adidas Boost, and all I'll say about that today is "Wow!"

The Adidas shoes use "Adizero, which is Goodyear Continental Rubber. If the Response isn't using the same thing, then the Adidas website is falely advertising. You could be right, but I'd tend to believe the website unless you find something to prove otherwise. I'd like to see it and be proven wrong. That would be good information for everyone, myself included, if it's true. But if the Response uses "Adizero," your point is pointless. How many times do you actually run down your outsoles and still have plenty of life and bounce left in your midsoles. It just doesn't happen, unless of course you really drag your feet, in which case you aren't a true runner.

And yes, you are right that many people buy their running shoes on looks, but I also believe that most buy for feel. Especially runners with any kind of experience at all.

Thanks for a nice post.

The wear on ~95% of runners shoes are always going to show on the outside heel no matter if they overpronate or supinate. If you actually knew anything about your gait, you would know that. What matters is where you land your mid-foot. You've once again proven your stupidity so I digress.

For every other running shoe with traditional EVA foam, I would agree that the rubber tread does not matter because the EVA will break down much faster than the tread. For Adidas Boost though, I suggest that the quality of the rubber tread is much more important due to the fact that the Boost foam does not break down like traditional EVA (as stated by Adidas:

http://www.gearinstitute.com/gear-news/industry-news/item/adidas-unveils-springy-new-midsole-foam

). If the Boost foam preforms as stated, the quality of rubber tread will make a larger difference because you will need tread as long as your Boost foam holds up.

You are correct that the Adidas Response and a version of the Energy Boost uses Adizero rubber, which is their lower quality rubber. The higher priced, higher quality shoes, like the Sequence Boost (

http://www.adidas.com/us/product/womens-running-supernova-sequence-7-shoes/ILL75?cid=M29716&breadcrumb=1z13071Z1z11zrfZ1z128vz

) use a Continental rubber that, as claims, lasts 30% longer than traditional Adizero rubber (

http://www.continentaltire.com/www/download/tires_de_en/themes/news/download/dl_2013_12_06_adidas_case_study_en.pdf

).

Do you want me to continue or do you get the picture yet?

The Adidas Response is made out of cheaper material than the higher priced and higher quality Adidas Sequence. You are paying for higher quality... not looks and not just inflated egos.

Once again, you've said a couple things that I believe to be true. But I do think that you confused on several principle aspects.

Glide Boost vs Boston Boost vs Zoom Elite 7??