I looked at the Nike site, but I'm specifically looking for real-world anecdotes or opinions on the difference between the two; also which shoe is better overall in terms of the ride, stiffness, responsiveness... are they both basically minor takes on the same shoe or not.
Basically if you had to only own one or the other, what would you choose and why. Thanks, LRC.
16:11
33:37
I already told you. The bottom is the same on both. The upper on the SP is slightly more supportive.
David S. Pumpkins wrote:
I already told you. The bottom is the same on both. The upper on the SP is slightly more supportive.
So, more rigid?
Can you compare both uppers to current shoes/spikes?
So I have run extensively in both as well as the VP 4%. I was very excited when I saw the SP as I figured it would be lighter (it is), and the heel counter less rigid ( it is). The shoe is basically the Fly with the 4% upper!
Here is what I found. While the upper is from the 4% in design which is lighter and more flexible in the heel, the material used is not good. It's plastic like, not breathable, and for some reason, they run much smaller, almost an entire size! The ride is basically the same as the Fly, and it feels a touch better since it's lighter, but the upper sucks so much I had to send them back as it just didn't fit right and wasn't breathable. I'm convinced now that the SP is a lifestyle shoe and was not intended for serious runners. Now if it had the same actual upper material as the 4%, it would be a winner! In fact, my dream version of the Zoom Fly 2 would be just that, the same lunarlon midsole with the exact upper from the 4%. The shoes would be lighter and fit better and still have the wider supportive platform.
With that being said, the Fly doesn't even come close to the VP 4%! Damn, best shoe ever. Nike just needs to figure out their production issue and get it going. My only change on v2 of that shoe would be to make it slightly less curved, which would give it a tad more support, while adding a touch of weight, which wouldn't matter all that much.
Hope that helps!
nikemann wrote:
So I have run extensively in both as well as the VP 4%. I was very excited when I saw the SP as I figured it would be lighter (it is), and the heel counter less rigid ( it is). The shoe is basically the Fly with the 4% upper!
Here is what I found. While the upper is from the 4% in design which is lighter and more flexible in the heel, the material used is not good. It's plastic like, not breathable, and for some reason, they run much smaller, almost an entire size! The ride is basically the same as the Fly, and it feels a touch better since it's lighter, but the upper sucks so much I had to send them back as it just didn't fit right and wasn't breathable. I'm convinced now that the SP is a lifestyle shoe and was not intended for serious runners. Now if it had the same actual upper material as the 4%, it would be a winner! In fact, my dream version of the Zoom Fly 2 would be just that, the same lunarlon midsole with the exact upper from the 4%. The shoes would be lighter and fit better and still have the wider supportive platform.
With that being said, the Fly doesn't even come close to the VP 4%! Damn, best shoe ever. Nike just needs to figure out their production issue and get it going. My only change on v2 of that shoe would be to make it slightly less curved, which would give it a tad more support, while adding a touch of weight, which wouldn't matter all that much.
Hope that helps!
Huge help ??
The SP sounds like a major no-go for sockless racing.
I have both the standard Zoom Fly and the SP. I prefer the SP as the upper is more flexible in the heel. As others have said the upper is a thin translucent plastic material that takes a little breaking in. Overall a great shoe.
Also, I wouldn't wear these sockless.
The zoom fly SP is shorter at the toes than the standard zoom fly, but is way more loose in the heal region. I have narrow feet so I have to tie the SP super tight to keep it from slipping. This then causes irritation on my medial foot tendons. The NYC SP edition looks amazing, but I definitely prefer my standard zoom flys. I might not even ever use my SP again as it took 2 weeks for the tendon pain ( did not actually affect my running, just constant soreness like a bruise) to resolve.
If I had wider feet and did not have to tighten the shoe so much, I would probably prefer the SP because it feels lighter and “breathier”
For those with experience with the Fly SP....
How did use it within your shoe rotation? Any issues/problems moving between shoes with differing stack heights, drops, etc.? Say, Pegasus 34-Streak- Fly SP....?
Fly SP good for sub 3-hour marathons (compared to Streak 6)?
Bought both, tried both, returned both.
Upper on the SP is a nylon diamond mesh. Not as breathable but more durable.
Both get me bad foot pain, blisters, and the stack height was too much felt like I had to come to a complete stop rounding corners and rolled my ankle a bit.
If youre used to that height probably love it but felt like hokas with a nike logo....I'm good.
Yesterday as I was running through a public park I noticed a fat guy wearing either the Zoom Flys or Vaporflys (light blue with a dash of red). He looked like the guy on the fat boy slim cover, seriously.
:
Soon gangster rappers will be wearing them.
Where can I get the Zoom Fly SP's?
I saw a guy trying to sell a pair of brand new Zoom Fly SP Fast at a one of those sneaker fest shows for $700.
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Strava thinks the London Marathon times improved 12 minutes last year thanks to supershoes
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
NAU women have no excuse - they should win it all at 2024 NCAA XC
Clayton Murphy is giving some great insight into his training.
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
