I know that everyone has been waiting for this day. The Hoka One One Carbon X is for sale on their Website, but it won't be available at stores until 1 Jun, 2018.
I know that everyone has been waiting for this day. The Hoka One One Carbon X is for sale on their Website, but it won't be available at stores until 1 Jun, 2018.
1 Jun, 2019
Compare and contrast them with the Nike 4% and next% shoes.
TIA
fuglyshoes wrote:
Compare and contrast them with the Nike 4% and next% shoes.
TIA
HOKA pros: less expensive, intended for Marathon - Longer distances, better expected durability, more volume in upper
I consider the HOKA to be a Long Distance Trainer that you could also race in
VF4% pros: lighter, intended for Marathon - Shorter distances, more pop, more snug fit
I consider the VF4% to be strictly a racer
Both: propel the foot forward through a combination of heel drop and a carbon plate
theJeff wrote:
HOKA pros: less expensive, intended for Marathon - Longer distances, better expected durability, more volume in upper
I consider the HOKA to be a Long Distance Trainer that you could also race in
VF4% pros: lighter, intended for Marathon - Shorter distances, more pop, more snug fit
I consider the VF4% to be strictly a racer
Both: propel the foot forward through a combination of heel drop and a carbon plate
cool story bro
How does its efficiency compare with the Vaporfly 4%? Is it like 3%? 2%?
Light and resilient PROFLY X foam sits above the carbon fiber plate while rubberized foam sits below the plate
I wish shoe companies would actually tell you what kind of midsole they have instead of using a bunch of proprietary mumbo-jumbo.
Is any of this stuff blown pebax?
I'll be eXcited when I get a pair of Nike's Next%.
Nike 2, Hoka 0.
Hoka marketing flunkie goes home DEVASTATED.
Definitely looking forward to trying out a pair.
Compare it to the Zoom Fly Flyknit because that's what it's closer to.
Nelson. wrote:
theJeff wrote:
HOKA pros: less expensive, intended for Marathon - Longer distances, better expected durability, more volume in upper
I consider the HOKA to be a Long Distance Trainer that you could also race in
VF4% pros: lighter, intended for Marathon - Shorter distances, more pop, more snug fit
I consider the VF4% to be strictly a racer
Both: propel the foot forward through a combination of heel drop and a carbon plate
cool story bro
Don't "bro" me, Cuz.
I was responding directly to a question, and it wasn't yours.
1% if they’re lucky. Nothing special about the foam which is where the magic happens.
theJeff wrote:
fuglyshoes wrote:
Compare and contrast them with the Nike 4% and next% shoes.
TIA
HOKA pros: less expensive, intended for Marathon - Longer distances, better expected durability, more volume in upper
I consider the HOKA to be a Long Distance Trainer that you could also race in
VF4% pros: lighter, intended for Marathon - Shorter distances, more pop, more snug fit
I consider the VF4% to be strictly a racer
Both: propel the foot forward through a combination of heel drop and a carbon plate
You have a firm grasp on the obvious, give you that.
Hi, Fat Jeff. wrote:
theJeff wrote:
HOKA pros: less expensive, intended for Marathon - Longer distances, better expected durability, more volume in upper
I consider the HOKA to be a Long Distance Trainer that you could also race in
VF4% pros: lighter, intended for Marathon - Shorter distances, more pop, more snug fit
I consider the VF4% to be strictly a racer
Both: propel the foot forward through a combination of heel drop and a carbon plate
You have a firm grasp on the obvious, give you that.
It's kinda obvious that you are being an @$$. You mean like that?
I was trying to be helpful. You should try it. Have you worn both? If so, please tell us your experiences. If not, kindly shut it.
I have 3,092 miles on my semi- retired Hoka Bondi. I doubt I could get that many miles out of the carbon X so I would say I am not excited. I'll keep rocking the Cliffon 1 (repop) like I have the last month!!
Shunpo wrote:
1% if they’re lucky. Nothing special about the foam which is where the magic happens.
So if it’s just the foam, how fast would the Vaporfly be without the plate? Still 4%?
LoneStarXC wrote:
Shunpo wrote:
1% if they’re lucky. Nothing special about the foam which is where the magic happens.
So if it’s just the foam, how fast would the Vaporfly be without the plate? Still 4%?
Isn't the Pegasus Turbo just the foam? No one says that's fast, going off of what I see people write here (haven't tried any of the plated or new foam shoes).
zzzz wrote:
LoneStarXC wrote:
So if it’s just the foam, how fast would the Vaporfly be without the plate? Still 4%?
Isn't the Pegasus Turbo just the foam? No one says that's fast, going off of what I see people write here (haven't tried any of the plated or new foam shoes).
So then is it the plate or the foam? Now I’m confused.
Clifton 1 best shoe ever....... wrote:
I have 3,092 miles on my semi- retired Hoka Bondi. I doubt I could get that many miles out of the carbon X so I would say I am not excited. I'll keep rocking the Cliffon 1 (repop) like I have the last month!!
That is a carp load of miles. Are you over/under 88 lbs? ?
In seriousness, long term durability IS one of my long term concerns for this shoe... I wish a shoe designed to be a mileage hog used something more compression-resistant than EVA... but if the Clifton lasted that long for you, you (specifically you) might needn’t worry.
LoneStarXC wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Isn't the Pegasus Turbo just the foam? No one says that's fast, going off of what I see people write here (haven't tried any of the plated or new foam shoes).
So then is it the plate or the foam? Now I’m confused.
It’s the plate and foam combo. The positive properties of the foam is what makes it fast and the plate is what stops the negative properties of the foam slowing you down.
Sorta makes sense.....