I am 2/2 on calling great shoes early. The Skechers GoRun Razor 3 is the next Great Shoe. You heard it here first.

Hi TheJeff,

Thanks for the link re skechers GOrun Razor 3.

I think the roadtrailrun beat you to it , see link:

https://www.roadtrailrun.com/2018/10/skechers-performance-gorun-razor-3.html

This is a great website for hearing about new running shoes and they often compare with other shoes also in their reviews.

So impressions: how does the beacon compare with the Razor 3's. Responsiveness, comfort, breathability , softer/firmer etc

Cheers

Steve

I hate to say it, but I also think people gravitate towards Nike models because the shoes look fast and sexy.

These Skechers honestly look like a 4th grade arts and crafts project.

"Kids, ... what's a fun word we should add to the side in gigantic letters?"

"Ohh ... ohh! SPEED!"

Seriously, WHAT ARE THOSE!?!?!

Get with it, Skechers ... and HOKA.

Note: I primarily run in HOKAs, but - really - some of these models and color ways (dark navy and brownish "gold") are the worst.

stevenn wrote:

Hi TheJeff,

Thanks for the link re skechers GOrun Razor 3.

I think the roadtrailrun beat you to it , see link:

https://www.roadtrailrun.com/2018/10/skechers-performance-gorun-razor-3.html

This is a great website for hearing about new running shoes and they often compare with other shoes also in their reviews.

So impressions: how does the beacon compare with the Razor 3's. Responsiveness, comfort, breathability , softer/firmer etc

Cheers

Steve

This is something of a spinoff thread from the main Boost-ish thread. See page 18, 2/3 of the way down:

Yes, RTR is a fantastic resource for reviews. I love that they give so many different POVs from runners of different abilities. They also seem to be the go-to for new releases. And yes, they also seem to really like the Razor 3s, even compared to the best shoes out there right now, including the VF4%, RFrFast, and Beacon.

To your question: Razor is definitely softer than the Beacon - which normally I don't like - except that these give you the sensation of immediately being sprung back into the air after the initial compression. So, Beacon firmer / more responsive.

Comfort: Toss up. Both 9+ comfort. I will say that both shoes will optimally really have the laces cinched down for the best performance. Both have good laces / tongues.

Breathability: Nod to Razor 3. Thinner upper than Beacon by a long shot.

The real differences are the weight (Razor 3 by just over an ounce, I think), energy return (I have no way to scientifically test this, but there is a noticeable difference in perceived exertion), and expected durability (assuming the Hyperburst is a TPU blend and/or that the marketing of 30% better durability over FlightGen is legit, plus much more outsole rubber on the Razor despite being lighter).

interested to try it but needs a more pleasant colorway and price $100 or less

are there any Skechers shoes hitting clearance that are worth looking at?

shooo smooo wrote:

interested to try it but needs a more pleasant colorway and price $100 or less

are there any Skechers shoes hitting clearance that are worth looking at?

Go Meb Speed 5. Outstanding racing flat. 18/22, under 6oz.

Some people really like the Razor 2. I didn't.

YungRuzzy wrote:

I hate to say it, but I also think people gravitate towards Nike models because the shoes look fast and sexy.

These Skechers honestly look like a 4th grade arts and crafts project.

"Kids, ... what's a fun word we should add to the side in gigantic letters?"

"Ohh ... ohh! SPEED!"

Seriously, WHAT ARE THOSE!?!?!

Get with it, Skechers ... and HOKA.

Note: I primarily run in HOKAs, but - really - some of these models and color ways (dark navy and brownish "gold") are the worst.

lol, no argument here on the graphics.

I WILL say: these feel nothing like Hokas. Hokas feel like marshmallows to me, almost like walking thru a swamp. These feel like you have catapults on your feet.

JEFF HAS MASSIVE CLOWN FEET. HIS ADVICE ON SHOES DOES NOT APPLY TO THE 99.9% OF RUNNERS WHO ARE NOT YETI-FOOTED BEHEMOTHS. THIS HAS BEEN A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

Don't do it wrote:

I refuse to wear cheater shoes like the 4%. I hope that our governing bodies do something about these shoes like swimming did with the wetsuit. Olympic medals shouldn't be decided by who has the best pharmacist or shoe sponsor. Eventually it will just be a contest to see who can run with the biggest spring in their shoe.

Dumb comment.

Should golfers not be allowed to use titanium clubs? Or graphite shafts?

Should receivers in football not be allowed to use gloves?

Technology advances. Unless everyone runs naked and barefoot, technology is going to be involved. It's arbitrary to draw the line at a place that you see fit.

Tell me how flexible are these shoes are in the metatarsal area where the forefoot meets the mid foot?

How hard are these at the base of the achilles (I may have a bone spur)?

Gotta say, I did see your summer post on the beacon - my first NB in 30+ yrs. of running. It’s my go-to shoe now along w/ adidas tempo - although honestly, the beacon is just way more comfortable. No superfluous tech stuff, just a comfy, stable ride. I’m wondering if the razor 3 would be a decent complement to the beacon? - I am a flyweight at ~130. Thx much for the heads-up.

theJeff wrote:

Jeremy R wrote:

Does the razor 3 run true to size? How does it compare to the escalante racer size wise?

Yes, true to size.

Any Altra will fit very differently from most any other shoe out there, except maybe Topo. That being said, there is more room in the Razor 3 toebox than most typical shoes, and certainly more room in the toebox than other LD racers.

Sorry theJeff, I meant lengthwise. My last Skechers were so long, I should've downsized a half or full (Go Ride 5's a couple years ago). I think the Skechers have a nice toebox

Do we know what the expected durability of these shoes are? Is it similar to VF where it's 100 miles and you're done, or can we expect the more traditional 300 for a flat?

Subway Surfers wrote:

Tell me how flexible are these shoes are in the metatarsal area where the forefoot meets the mid foot?

How hard are these at the base of the achilles (I may have a bone spur)?

1. Above average flexibility

2. Not hard at all. Much softer than Beacon, for instance (which, again, is not a characteristic I usually like... but this shoe gives it a very different sensation.)

Fidgit wrote:

Gotta say, I did see your summer post on the beacon - my first NB in 30+ yrs. of running. It’s my go-to shoe now along w/ adidas tempo - although honestly, the beacon is just way more comfortable. No superfluous tech stuff, just a comfy, stable ride. I’m wondering if the razor 3 would be a decent complement to the beacon? - I am a flyweight at ~130. Thx much for the heads-up.

I am glad I was able to help someone withOUT giant clown feet! :-)

Please update if you end up trying the Razor 3. Would love to hear your impressions either way.

Jeremy R wrote:

theJeff wrote:

Yes, true to size.

Any Altra will fit very differently from most any other shoe out there, except maybe Topo. That being said, there is more room in the Razor 3 toebox than most typical shoes, and certainly more room in the toebox than other LD racers.

Sorry theJeff, I meant lengthwise. My last Skechers were so long, I should've downsized a half or full (Go Ride 5's a couple years ago). I think the Skechers have a nice toebox

lol, no worries :-)

Pretty much my only beef with the GoMeb Speed 5 is that I feel it runs just a tad long. The Razor 3 is a much truer fit lengthwise; spot on, actually.

Easy Peasy wrote:

Do we know what the expected durability of these shoes are? Is it similar to VF where it's 100 miles and you're done, or can we expect the more traditional 300 for a flat?

They say "30% more durable than FlightGen", which so far is holding up just fine for me. So, if marketing is true, it should be no problem.

That being said... I don't plan on running in them much except for races, so it will be a while before I can answer that one personally :-/

Jeff I'm a Hoka guy, but now am intrigued with these. Im all about cushion. So, how do they compare in that regard. Oh, and the SPEED, I'll take all I can get even if it's just written on the side of a shoe. Thanks

Tmad wrote:

Jeff I'm a Hoka guy, but now am intrigued with these. Im all about cushion. So, how do they compare in that regard. Oh, and the SPEED, I'll take all I can get even if it's just written on the side of a shoe. Thanks

Both have comparable amounts of cushion, but the way they feel is night and day.

Hokas feel like marshmallows. Not a fan. Running in the Clifton 4 felt like running thru a swamp.

These feel like springs. Approved.

How do they compare size-wise with other Skechers models? I have just bought a pair of Razor 2 in 11's (my Nike's are all 11.5 & NB's are 11's) and own some Run 5's in an 11 as well. The 3's aren't available in Australia and may not be for a while, as RunningWarehouse Australia is the only place who does Skechers Performance and that took its time happening, too. I was hoping the Razor 2's might become my Lunaracer replacement (they may still be) but these look like they might do very well over the longer distances.