birdbeard wrote:
Clydesdale clogs wrote:
you're implying that those three are comparable? the Invincibles are much heavier and taller than the others. But hey, you're obviously ready for a 2:20 marathon if you're out at 2:54 pace for 20 miles wearing clogs.
I’m saying notwithstanding the weight, they are faster than the 1080 and Velocity Nitro.
Hard to know who to believe, random LRC poster with braggy numbers, or literally every review of the shoe plus my own experience.
hmmm.
tough call.
"The Nike ZoomX Invincible Run Flyknit... exceeded expectations on longer, slower-paced runs...."
"These are perfect for someone that wants a super-cushioned daily trainer for long runs, slower-paced efforts..."
"The only thing I wouldn’t use it for is short races that are 21 kilometers or under because its midsole is too compressive and it’s too heavy...The Invincible can handle a lot of different types of runs and paces but it feels best on easy or steady runs at 5 minutes per kilometre or slower."
"This shoe is not meant to go fast. I mean, any shoe is fast if you want it to be (anyone who’s been passed in a race by a runner wearing adidas Ultraboost knows this). But the Invincible is a cruiser, not a bruiser. It’s soft, so you are not going to get that pop you want if you’re trying to pick up the pace..."
"If you are expecting the Invincible to be a speed shoe without a plate, you will be disappointed. This is a soft comfy daily trainer that can go the distance. Just not as quickly as its siblings..."
'If you are expecting the Invincible to be a speed shoe without a plate, you will be disappointed. This is a soft comfy daily trainer that can go the distance. Just not as quickly as its siblings...."