Non Vaporfly4% wearers prayers about to be answered!!!

Firmer so may not get the full benefit of the carbon plate. Still going to be the best alternative to the VF4%

Everyone thinks the carbon plate is what gives VF4 it's big advantage, when in reality it's the ZoomX foam at such a nice stack height that gives you that bounce AND allows your legs to stay fresher over the entire marathon distance. A hard plate is nothing new in shoe technology and has been put in track spikes widely and some other shoes for years. Sketchers doesn't have the R&D to come up with a comparable foam, so their shoe won't be nearly as effective.

I will not buy anything with a carbon plate in it.

So now buyers of non-Nike shoes can have career-ending PF issues, too?

uninformed ppl wrote:

Everyone thinks the carbon plate is what gives VF4 it's big advantage, when in reality it's the ZoomX foam at such a nice stack height that gives you that bounce AND allows your legs to stay fresher over the entire marathon distance. A hard plate is nothing new in shoe technology and has been put in track spikes widely and some other shoes for years. Sketchers doesn't have the R&D to come up with a comparable foam, so their shoe won't be nearly as effective.

Nike didn't "come up with a comparable foam," they discovered a product already made that would work for them. (As in Research & Development was actually Search & Stumble Onto Something.)

Shunpo wrote:

Sketchers proto coming very soon. Lower stack height, lower heel to toe drop, hyper foam, carbon plate.

Thank the Lord!

This won't compete as the stack height and drop is what allows the pivoted plate in the Vaporflys to maximize their benefit.

uninformed ppl wrote:

Everyone thinks the carbon plate is what gives VF4 it's big advantage, when in reality it's the ZoomX foam at such a nice stack height that gives you that bounce AND allows your legs to stay fresher over the entire marathon distance. A hard plate is nothing new in shoe technology and has been put in track spikes widely and some other shoes for years. Sketchers doesn't have the R&D to come up with a comparable foam, so their shoe won't be nearly as effective.

React is better.

Both you and Tarckstar are off. Nike didn't "discover" the ZoomX foam, which is a blown PEBA (a kind of plastic). It apparently was developed by and licensed from Zotefoams, a UK company. This is a similar situation to Adidas and Saucony licensing their boost and everun foams from BASF, a German chemical company. So, in other words, Skechers is totally capable of obtaining a comparable or superior foam from a foam specialist and we've seen that Nike does not have a monopoly on light PEBA foams as Reebok is using a PEBA in the Floatride shoes. I have no idea of course whether Skechers' new racer will be great, but Skechers is putting out good products with its new Hyper foam so I'm definitely interested in checking it out. And can people please stop spelling "Skechers" with a "t". It's not that hard!!

uninformed ppl wrote:

Everyone thinks the carbon plate is what gives VF4 it's big advantage, when in reality it's the ZoomX foam at such a nice stack height that gives you that bounce AND allows your legs to stay fresher over the entire marathon distance. A hard plate is nothing new in shoe technology and has been put in track spikes widely and some other shoes for years. Sketchers doesn't have the R&D to come up with a comparable foam, so their shoe won't be nearly as effective.

More pool foam shoes.

Maybe they work for 5k's, but the low stack height and the odd contours of the footbed suck with sketchers. Tried the razor 3 and was totally not impressed - would rather pay the same for on sale zoom flys or vaporflys

You shouldnt want low stack height unless your form/foot/whatever needs it (minority of runners)

That's not answering my prayers. Answering my prayers would be the IAAF banning them.

Saywhat2 wrote:

React is better.

Why are my ZoomFly's so much heavier? React is not better, but it does last longer.

The Floyd wrote:

...

This is a similar situation to Adidas and ....

...

And can people please stop spelling "Skechers" with a "t". It's not that hard!!

Stop spelling adidas with a capital "A". The corporate name is all lowercase.

Double Saywhat wrote:

Saywhat2 wrote:

React is better.

Why are my ZoomFly's so much heavier? React is not better, but it does last longer.

2oz heavier big whoop when going from 6 to 8oz not really a big deal. When you consider you are getting a more durable and responsive foam.

See the VF has the plate which firms up the shoe from how soft the Zoom X is to "save" your legs allowing you to run more efficient longer. The ZF Flyknits felt firmer and more responsive too me.

The VF and Peg Turbos I felt were too soft for a racer. But different strokes for different folks.

Shunpo wrote:

Sketchers proto coming very soon. Lower stack height, lower heel to toe drop, hyper foam, carbon plate.

Thank the Lord!

And the price? will it be 249.95 to make it "cheaper" than the VF?

uninformed ppl wrote:

Everyone thinks the carbon plate is what gives VF4 it's big advantage, when in reality it's the ZoomX foam at such a nice stack height that gives you that bounce AND allows your legs to stay fresher over the entire marathon distance. A hard plate is nothing new in shoe technology and has been put in track spikes widely and some other shoes for years. Sketchers doesn't have the R&D to come up with a comparable foam, so their shoe won't be nearly as effective.

Well spoken man. The idiots think it’s the plate but that damn foam is the most responsive soft thing to ever hit the market. It is ten times softer than any Hoka. The plate was for marketing and so the shoe didn’t just break into pieces after 10 runs because the foam is so soft.

Shunpo wrote:

Sketchers proto coming very soon. Lower stack height, lower heel to toe drop, hyper foam, carbon plate.

Thank the Lord!

Same thing was said about hoka's carbon plate shoe and adidas sub 2 shoe. Don't see any pros blogging about either.

To each his or her own. I really like the Razor 3 and loathe the Zoom Fly (which I made the mistake of buying). But your comments about low stack height and the footbed are misguided. The Razor 3 is decidedly not a low stack shoe, it has the stack height of the "performance trainer" category and has literally the same stack height as the Kinvara. I can't imagine what you'd think of a an actual racing shoe if you think the Razor 3 and Kinvara are low stack.

ughhhh wrote:

More pool foam shoes.

Maybe they work for 5k's, but the low stack height and the odd contours of the footbed suck with sketchers. Tried the razor 3 and was totally not impressed - would rather pay the same for on sale zoom flys or vaporflys

You shouldnt want low stack height unless your form/foot/whatever needs it (minority of runners)

tarckstar wrote:

So now buyers of non-Nike shoes can have career-ending PF issues, too?

Where did you get this? I had a left foot problem that I am mending since training exclusively in Zoom Fly w/ carbon plate. I have no idea if that is the reason but if read anything concrete about it.

uninformed ppl wrote:

Everyone thinks the carbon plate is what gives VF4 it's big advantage, when in reality it's the ZoomX foam at such a nice stack height that gives you that bounce AND allows your legs to stay fresher over the entire marathon distance. A hard plate is nothing new in shoe technology and has been put in track spikes widely and some other shoes for years. Sketchers doesn't have the R&D to come up with a comparable foam, so their shoe won't be nearly as effective.

It’s not just the responsiveness; it’s also how much it compresses. You could have a very responsive foam that doesn’t store a ton of energy (replacing active muscle contraction with the passive and metabolically free action of the shoe), because the foam is too firm.

There’s nothing like ZoomX, but the tech is not Nike’s, as others have pointed out, so options should proliferate. Hopefully some will have plastic or nylon plates to shut up the idiots who think that the carbon somehow makes the shoe ethically dubious.