I plan on doing a nice amount of road racing this summer and I am looking for a real good racing flat. I've heard great things about the Hyper Speed and Zoom Streak, and I'm looking for some feedback from you if you have previously raced in either of the two. It's a tough decision, but I think your help will lead me to a good choice!
The HyperSpeed 4 is a wide shoe. The Streak XC is a narrow shoe. The HyperSpeed 4 has a mm or two of extra cushion.
Those are the two biggest differences.
Shoebacca wrote:
The HyperSpeed 4 is a wide shoe. The Streak XC is a narrow shoe. The HyperSpeed 4 has a mm or two of extra cushion.
Those are the two biggest differences.
- Streak XC is more flexible
- Streak XC is lighter
- Cushioning is about the same
- Hyperspeed gives more support
Those shoes aren't really all that similar.
130#, midfoot striker. Nike user. I like a narrow toebox and find the other brand a bit "roomy" up front.
Over the past 3-4 years I've raced from 5k (road and track) up to marathon in 3 various models of the Zoom XC. After a season of race use I move them over to track workouts logging up to about 200 miles before discarding...they still have life left. Never had any abnormal wear patterns (like I do with the LunarRacer2 I train in). Currently using the green one; I like the mesh upper but the tounge can be a hassle to get positioned and comfortable without wrinkling. I switch between a really thin sock or a thicker CEP compression sock and have no issues with fit wearing either pair.
Until the Zoom XC came out I thought the old Air Mariah was the greatest race shoe, this may be better.
Yes, the Nike is narrower, but I have wide feet and don't have a problem running in them. The mesh makes it easy to accommodate wider feet. I also don't think they're very similar shoes. The Asics is a more traditional, heavier shoe with more support and a steeper pitch; the Nike is lighter and flatter with less cushioning. If you're looking for a race flat, I'd go with the Nike. Just finished a marathon in them without any complaints.
Have you tried Adidas Adizero Pro? They are also very nice racing flats.
The Nikes have a much better heel, the Asics feel like they might slip off if you don't have them pretty tight. But I went with the Asics because I overpronate and wanted a more supportive shoe and there's really nothing bad I can say about them except for the heel, which isn't really a problem if they're tight enough. I can't help but think most people would like the Nikes better because they're lighter, more flexible, and of course, have a better heel. I plan on trying them in the future. So I'd say you really can't go wrong with either, but unless you're concerned with having a more supportive shoe, I'd say you should get the Nikes.
Search function, people. There was an exact thread like this a couple weeks back, so I'm not going to rehash what I said there, but Streak XC 2 FTW.
The heel is really strange.If you put the shoes on it feels like they slip off if you run they feel better.
The Hyperspeed is good but the heel is shit.
I have run in both extensively. They really are not that similar.
The Nike upper is mesh and is about as minimal as it gets save for the mayfly. It is about 5.4 ounces for a size 9. Not much support at all. It is designed for the 3000-10,000 distance, but you could of course wear it for intervals of a shorter distance.
The Asics is a little heavier at around 7.2 ounces for a size 9. You get a little more support from it. It is designed for 10k - marathon distance. I don't know what people are talking about with regards to the heel, it is fine for me.