Vaporfly Next%... an interesting take.

It may only perform at the "4%" level for one or two marathons, then it eventually is beat down enough to where it's like other types of flats.

I still argue that it's not any different. I have 4%'s, only race in them. My workouts before and after the 4%'s were the same, and my races with and without the 4%'s were the same. In fact one race with the 4%'s was actually worse. I think that was to other factors, but I do not think they give you a great advantage, they are just more comfortable and prevent injuries better than other flats

So I have tested 2 pairs of them by being a nike product tester. I must say I have put 300 miles on each pair and felt like they could last double that. I don't why a rep would say they only last 1 marathon. The cushion is fantastic. I was sad that I had to send them back. Don't know if I'd pay the 250$ price tag but it's a great shoe. I only run 40 miles a week but these shoes could last 3-4 months.

At it's best* for one marathon wrote:

It may only perform at the "4%" level for one or two marathons, then it eventually is beat down enough to where it's like other types of flats.

I still argue that it's not any different. I have 4%'s, only race in them. My workouts before and after the 4%'s were the same, and my races with and without the 4%'s were the same. In fact one race with the 4%'s was actually worse. I think that was to other factors, but I do not think they give you a great advantage, they are just more comfortable and prevent injuries better than other flats

I actually have had the same experience. I wouldn't say "no" different, but not much different. My 4%s MIGHT be 2-3% faster than my Asics Kayanos. Maybe. I think it's more like 2%. I did 5K threshold runs on a track in back-to-back weeks running by effort, Kayanos 18:55, VF4% 18:39. Since it wasn't all-out, it's a little difficult to judge, but I had the same lead-up to both and the effort felt the same. The studies I've read have compared the 4% to other racing flats, not to trainers, so I expected, if anything, it would be more than 4%. Obviously anecdotal, and it could be that my striking pattern or biomechanics work against the shoe, or any other number of factors. Who knows. But I've done "tests" like that more than once and I never really notice an enormous difference (although there is some difference).

I will say that the longer I run, the fresher I feel. It's almost like there is a warm-up period for the shoe each time--I kind of struggle to hit the splits I think I should be able to run, or if I'm running by effort, I end up behind my goal pace for the first 2K-3K, get a little bummed about it, but then the shoes kind of come alive (or I'm fresher due to the foam, not sure) and the last 2K+ feels fantastic. So I do think there is some advantage, just not (for me) 4% from other racing flats.

I think if I were to get a new "cheater" shoe, I'd probably try out the NB FuelCell 5280 or try to find the Reebok Floatride Run Fast Pro.

I have one pair of OG Vaporfly with 200+miles on them that I’ve been using for workouts lately. they still feel great. Not 4% improvement but certainly several seconds per mile over Adios, Boston or Zoom Fly.

Not to hijack the thread, but

1. what are your thoughts on the lifespan of the foam if it’s an old shoe but with low miles? (I have another pair of the OG Vaporfly that’s almost two years old but only 20 miles on them). I’ve always thought that EVA goes downhill with age, even if there aren’t many miles on the shoe. Not sure if this applies to Pebax?

2. For those who have the Next % and the Flyknit and/or original Vaporfly, does the Next% seem faster to you?

3. Any word on the next release (probably a new color for Chicago or something?)

Next release is coming in the fall. It's a hideous white and red color. Definitely just pick up another green one if it matters to you because it is real ugly.

I have the 4% flyknit and I recently purchased the next %. I ran 4 half marathons and 2 10k's in the flyknits. I still use them for workouts. They feel just the same after about 200 miles. The outsole looks all wrinkled but they looked that way after my first race in them.

I just did a 2 mile race in the next percent. I ran the fastest time over that distance in over 3 years (I'm 55). I was able to size down a 1/2 size as they fit looser than the flyknit. The next percent is faster for intervals and shorter distances. I haven't run a longer race in them but I would suspect the advantage over the 4 % gets even bigger. The shoe feels more stable, yet it's lighter. Also, my foot feels more locked down in the shoe with that strap that goes inside the heel cup. I suspect the next % will be even more durable. They show no signs of wear like the 4%.

In Rojo's recent thread on the Vaporfly it was 2.9% more efficient than the Mutumbo spike. So it is decent at short distances.

Honestly this doesn't seem revolutionary to me. So the shoe breaks down, like other shoes do, the more miles you put on them? Marathon #1 out of the box is gonna be better than races that follow but the shoe still holds up well into the 300 mile range.

TesterofProduct wrote:

So I have tested 2 pairs of them by being a nike product tester. I must say I have put 300 miles on each pair and felt like they could last double that. I don't why a rep would say they only last 1 marathon. The cushion is fantastic. I was sad that I had to send them back. Don't know if I'd pay the 250$ price tag but it's a great shoe. I only run 40 miles a week but these shoes could last 3-4 months.

Throwing out this review as you work for Nike.

Spikes are faster than 4% on track as track is bouncy anyway. Spikes are lighter and more grippy hence all pros wear spikes in track races

I wish you people would post actual race times rather than these vague endorsements of the 4%.

Creaky Bones wrote:

My 4%s MIGHT be 2-3% faster than my Asics Kayanos. Maybe. I think it's more like 2%.

This is consistent with the study that Jared Ward and Ian Hunter did at BYU.

I think they get the most response for 50 miles and then lose a little, but not much. I have burned through 4 vaporfly pairs as I use them for my long runs (only shoe that doesn’t give blisters). Still fine after 300 miles for training, though I beat the hell out of mine so the foam in the heel was wearing down bad. The next % feel a little wider Andy hoping the better rubber placement makes them last longer.

I have zoom flys 3 and fk as well for shorter stuff. I tend to feel the plate with the, on stuff over 11 miles. Not bad shoe, a little bottom heavy but good fit.

Btw, I love the new vaporweave offset lacing on nexts. No more pinching

No real difference between 4% and next %, other than fit, a tad wider, and better outsole. Speed wise, they are the same

I have some 4% and Next%.

I’m still laughing that people think these shoes are going to make you significantly faster. The bonus they offer is finally companies are making a marathon racing shoe that has some cushion.

The shoes are comfortable and fit great that helps a ton over the marathon distance. I like the plate because it helps my foot relax.

As for durability my next% seem way more durable but maybe way to soft? I can’t tell but they feel like bouncy castles and might be better with some miles in them just to make them a bit firmer?

wnvkwnvwjeg wrote:

TesterofProduct wrote:

So I have tested 2 pairs of them by being a nike product tester. I must say I have put 300 miles on each pair and felt like they could last double that. I don't why a rep would say they only last 1 marathon. The cushion is fantastic. I was sad that I had to send them back. Don't know if I'd pay the 250$ price tag but it's a great shoe. I only run 40 miles a week but these shoes could last 3-4 months.

Throwing out this review as you work for Nike.

As a former product tester for Nike I can say that when I was a product tester I was not a Nike employee. They would send me shoes, I would run in them as much as possible during a set test period, and then I would have to send them back. I would have to record lots of information regarding my runs, and answer numerous questions about the shoes.

No $ was exchanged. I got to try shoes, and they received feedback and real world wear and tear on the shoes to evaluate.

I always had to return the shoes at the end of the test period.

I would frequently put over 500 hard miles on pairs of test shoes in a 7+ week test period. Significant climb and descent weighing 170 lbs. including miles on gravel roads and trails are hard miles and hard on shoes. Almost all shoe models were dead by the time I had to return them. Midsole compression.

I did this for over 10 years and noted a shift in Nike shoe technology during that time. Shoes generally were lighter and felt better when new, but durability and longevity of midsoles decreased.

I sent back some test shoes that were just too weird or bad to run much in. Life is too short to run in really bad shoes.

It was also frustrating as they would sometimes significantly modify shoes between testing and public release. There were test shoe styles I really liked that I actually purchased once they become publicly available, but I did not like the modifications they made to them.

I do not work for Nike. I'll 2nd this person's post about being a product tester. Why on earth would you " Throw out" my review I just said I tested 2 freakin pairs of them but yOu wRoTe a pOsItIvE rEvIeW aNd i dOnT LiKe iT . GTFO .

Nike has sent some real POS shoes and some real nice one's.

The Vaporfly was a solid shoe and to go off what the previous poster said. These were modified. I don't believe I can share a details about them but I'll again said I believe you can get 500 plus miles out of them.

Back to the OP's post. I suspect that people are repeating what they have heard - I doubt that this is Nike's advice for this shoe. When I shopped for my first pair, I was informed by the store employee that he had heard that the shoes were good for only one or two races. In truth, I believe this as they are lightweight and somewhat delicate. They will definitely get you through training and racing a marathon and you might even get a second or third race out of them. I have 135 kms and 1 marathon on my VF4% pair and they are still (almost) as good as new. I expect to get at least another 200 kms on them as I train for an October marathon, which I plan to run in my recently-acquired Nexts.

I think that the conventional wisdom about the poor durability of the Zoom-X foam is driven in large part by what people could see with their eyes: The VF midsole gets creases on the side immediately (it often comes out of the box with some creases), and the outsole has a lot of exposed foam that starts shredding right away. This makes the shoes look like they're falling apart.

But in my experience and that of most people I know, they actually feel pretty good for a few hundred miles. They're definitely not a one-marathon shoe. I get new shoes for every marathon anyway, but I wear the old VFs for other races and for key workouts, and they still feel bouncy. I do think the Zoom-X is RELATIVELY poor in durability compared to other foams (especially TPU foams like Boost, which last far longer than the outsoles and uppers of most shoes), but they aren't dramatically worse.