I've put over 100 miles on a pair. The futher I run (i.e. beyond 10 miles) the less bounce I feel from the midsole. I'm not a heel striker and I'm very light. Maybe my form gets sloppy. I'm just not impressed with this shoe. The symmetros was better and a fraction of the cost (although the upper on the asics is much better).
It’s a bit over rated
Soft and not too heavy but not as bouncy as advertised.
Are you using the original Novablast or V2?
Dang. I just bought a pair of these suckers for $75. I was hoping they would be really sweet. If I thought they were just going to be run-of-the-mill running shoes I would have just gotten something for $40-60.
I've got 2 pair. 1st pair over 400 miles - as well as 10 other running shoes. Very versatile I love 'em the most for daily trainers, tempo, even 400/800 intervals on track. Not as much for runs over 12m.
You run 400s in the Novablast, but not over 12 miles?
This is the exact inverse what I'd think of this shoe?
I have two pairs of the first edition. Absolutely love them, they’re bouncy and very secure. I prefer the Novablast over the Pegasus 38 any day.
Just got the v2. I completely agree. Dead rubber with high stack just means dead heavy ass shoes. Spoiled with pebax foam. Won't make another mistake buying anything else despite any hype. Only thing worse than a used cars salesman is a shoe salesman.
No not overrated at all. Both versions are fantastic trainers for long runs. My only complaint would be that the midsole is not very durable.
Funny, I always wonder if they are too bouncy.
To squizy for me. Ok, I never feel sore or tired, I give'em that, but I feel like I'm sinking into the midsole. Especially after the initial 250 miles. I won't buy anymore of them.
I have 100 miles on v1. No signs of wear on the sole. Still bouncy. I run between 5 and 7 miles and day. Hard packed trail. I like them for daily running.
Didn't like them on the track, not even for the warm-up.
You can't always trust ads
I somehow also fell for advertising and was disappointed. Since then I buy something only on the recommendation of friends or relatives
I really like the look of these ones.
Are they the first or 2nd version? It sounds like V1 is way better than V2 so I'd like the original version, but I'm guessing Amazon is only showing the latest model...?
I don't think the nova would work well for me because of its central outsole "pod" under the forefoot. That area takes the most wear/abuse with my shoes as can be see after logging 100+ miles. With the Nova, once that area wears out then its feeling would become amplified since there is no outsole around the pod which would effectively create a convex area under the forefoot center not allowing even distribution of metatarsal pressure.
In contrast, a comparable shoe, the NB 1080 has full outsole coverage in the Right place(the entire forefoot).
Does anyone else share this concern?, or have first hand experience on how the outsole wears for a mid-to-forefoot runner?
kellyjo wrote:
You can't always trust ads
Definitely true. It’s more surprising that the reviews were so great.
Asics shoes are still best for peoples facing different foot problems. i also write reviews on different <a href=”https://shoesadvice.com/”>shoes</a> brands.
i have 4 pairs of the original. Still love the ride 300 miles in on some of the pairs.
Went for the first "run" outside today in the Novablast 2.
I am 64 and attempting to start running again after 10 years off due to various factors.
My run consisted of 30 second slow jogs with a 1 minute walk in between.
The fact I could even do it is encouraging.
The shoes where amazing, plenty of cushion and bounce. Really I cannot think they could be any better.
Work good just for walking too.
Even though I was running very slow I could tell these would not hold me back if I increased the pace.
I first tried on the original version by mistake and the Novablast 2 was clearly better.
Also tried Mach 4, Rebel 2, Clifton 8, Beacon3 and the Novablast where the best for me.