No, the foam is completely different between the two shoes. (I’ve had both.) I’m not saying this to be an annoying prig...the difference in foam is enormous...there’s really no comparing the shoes. They’re not the same shoe or even all that similar. The Reebok RunFast is closer to the VF4% than the ZoomFly is.
That's the highest praise I've ever seen a Reebok garner. Might have to check them out! Did you like them?
I don't! But I also don't like the VF4%.
The experience is similarish in some ways for me, but far from the same. In the VF4% (and ZoomFly for that matter), you definitely have the falling-forward feeling (and reality) from the huge stack height and drop. For me the VF4% were too squishy, and even at faster paces I just couldn't find a rhythm where I didn't feel like I was wasting jigowatts of energy. The ZoomFly is so stiff as to be almost torturous at times, but it much more fits my mechanics and I get a quick rotation etc (but after suffering in 4 pairs of ZFs, I've stopped running in them). Anyway, the Reebok in all ways but one feels like a traditional running shoe....It's the foam. They're super light and responsive, as are the VF4%s, but you're much closer to the pavement and not falling forward (or over to the side...as much) in the Reeboks. They are also a little sloppy, though. The similarities then with the 4% are: superlight, cloud-like cushion, and nice responsiveness. I think perhaps like the 4% they will perform better at faster paces.