Forums >Gears and Wears>Adidas Energy Boost Reviews
First off, let me say that I always run in cheap ass shoes (no more than $30) and I run in them until they fall apart, but I've come to learn that many runners like the more expensive shoes and they actually retire them after a certain amount of mileage (not necessarily wear).
However, the only reason I'm asking for opinions about this shoe, which I normally don't do, is because when I was in my local running store (registering for a race) they had a display in which you dropped a heavy steel ball on the cushioning foam of traditional shoes (EVA foam) vs. Adidas Energy Boost foam and I was a little impressed on how much more bounce was imparted by the Energy Boost foam.
Yet when I read this review it was less than stellar; it wasn't bad, but wasn't great like I would expect, because I thought it was all about the impact reduction. http://www.runningshoesguru.com/2013/11/adidas-energy-boost-review-2/
Please educate this pedaling fool on WTF...
Go figure
I just purchased and have been running in the new Glide Boost. I've also tried on the Energy Boost and have done a few demo runs in them. The problem with the Energy Boost, for me, is in the upper, not the foam. Anyway, I do think the new Boost foam is pretty good. It feels a little like a Hoka (extremely cushioned shoe), but is more responsive and less bulky. I'm also planning on switching from the Nike LunaRacer to the Adios Boost for my marathon and racing shoe after trying the Adios on recently.
Again, there's a combination of responsiveness and cushioning with the new Boost foam that I haven't felt in other shoes. If you just take a shoe with the Boost foam in your hand and flex it, it seems to "spring" back more quickly than another shoe. I'm assuming that action occurs within the stride as well. By no means are they are a miracle shoe, meaning that I haven't felt less fatigue following a run or felt like I've been running more easily. Still, they work really well with my foot and I've been more than pleased with the results so far.
Trying to find some more hay to restock the barn
Again, there's a combination of responsiveness and cushioning with the new Boost foam that I haven't felt in other shoes.
+1 on this. I had a runner friend highly recommend these to me and tried them because I was curious. At slower speeds, the feel very plush and comfortable. At higher speeds, they feel very engaged and connected with the road. I am not sure how they pull this off but they are a good shoe. As to the claims about increased energy return improving runner efficiency.....seems like marketing to me.
I will say that they stay pliable in very cold temperatures where shoes made with traditional EVA foam get a bit hard. I only have about 80 miles on my pair but I find myself reaching for them more often when I pull out a pair of shoes to go for a run.
Rebuilding my aerobic base....racing next year.....nothing to see here....move along now.
not bad for mile 25
Ha, I thought this thread meant that Adidas was marketing something like 5-Hour Energy.
I have been wearing the Adidas Energy Boost since last fall. In general, I like them. I have been searching for my go to running shoe for the past couple of years. I wore Brooks for a while, I tried Saucony, I even wore Newtons for a spell. I tried these because of the upper, I get terrible blisters on the tips of my toes and these are the first shoes to noticeably reduce the number of blisters I get. I like them overall and even bought a second pair to rotate back and forth. The gal at my LRS told me that I because of the new foam I should get 700-800 miles out of them, I am hoping with rotating them to get a full years worth of running out of them.
My biggest complaint though is on the side of the shoe, they have their traditional adidas logo on a hard plastic shell and it just so happens that on my blue pair (but not my yellow pair oddly enough) when I step down, my ankle bone hits that plastic piece and on long runs I will end up with a bruise along the bottom of my ankle bone. I can only wear that pair on shorter runs and sometimes have to rig up cotton balls or bandaids over it. I am thinking about taking a hammer to it (it is only on my right foot that it causes a problem) or perhaps even trying to have my husband whittle it down with a knife.
overall though, I really like these shoes. They are comfortable without being cushy like a Asaics shoes ( i dont like running on clouds) the different style of upper keeps my toes happy (unlike the Sauconys) and they seem to work really well on long runs and on short strides.
Did 18 in them today. No complaints. Solid shoe.
Why do we not try ASICS GEL-Nimbus 16 Men's Running Shoe ?
Because you can't get them on the "cheap", not unless you wear a size 7 or 14. I think that steel ball gimmick is smoke a mirrors, kinda like when you want to upgrade windows for a home a the sales person brings out that heat light, and says......See, you can't feel a damn thing. I think it boils down to what you know, or read about. I'm sure $30 buck shoes do just fine, I however, dig the Nimbus and will keep using them until Asics Effs up and tries to improve them, which will ultimately eff them up for sure, then I will move on.