1

Adidas Tempo/Aegis v. Mizuno Elixir (Read 65 times)


Smashy!!!

    Anyone have experience with the Adidas Tempo or Aegis? Im interested to hear your feedback, especially if you can compare them to the Mizuno Elixir? Mizuno's canning the Elixir, and I'm starting to search for alternatives, and the Tempo and Aegis seem to have similar properties.

    PRs: 21:35 (5K); 1:46:46 (HM); 4:30:46 (FM)


    slogger

      I'm no help, but just started researching the same shoes fr the same reason. My main concern with the Adidas is the narrower toe box. I need to find the tempo and aegis locally to compare to my 8's.

      RunAsics


      Person of Interest

        My primary shoe is the Asics DS Trainer but I like to mix it up with my shoes within the "performance stability" shoe category.

         

        I have the Adidas Adizero Tempo 5.  I also had the Adidas Adizero Mana 5 last year.  The fit of both of these is a bit off - they rub my little toes raw as an overlay hits just the wrong spot.    The Tempo 5 feels light and stable.  I ran a fairly quick 6 miler out of the box but the shoe just killed my forefoot as well as rubbing my toes raw.  May be it is a fraction too narrow for me and is squeezing my foot?  I loosened the laces and it generally seems OK on the treadmill but outside or on the track it's just not working for me.   I'm about to return them.

         

        I ran in the Elixir (marathon training and race) back in 2009 and the Maverick in 2005 (shorter distances).  These had more road feel with a smoother transition.  No fit issues but there was less stability in the rear foot.  I'd take the Elixir over the Tempo 5 and wish I had.  I'd stock up on the Elixir if I works for you.  I did the same when Saucony f'ed up my race shoe.

         

        The new DST (18) appears to be retooled and lighter putting it in the same ball park at the Tempo and Elixir.   I'd take a look at them as an alternate. .

         

        I had the Saucony Mirage last year but they felt bulky and overly squishy - they just didn't work over 10 miles.  I don't like New Balance and the only Brooks I have are Mach 14 XC spikes (very good I might add).   I did checkout the Brooks Pure Cadence.  Great fit but chewed up my calves.  Maybe worth a look?.

        "Only a few more laps to go and then the action will begin, unless this is the action, which it is."
        CeeDotA


          I just started running in the Adidas Tempo 5. I have very flat feet and overpronate, so the arch support in there feels like a lot of support. I feel almost as though my feet (right foot in particular, which overpronates far more than the other) are fighting it, trying to roll but the support keeps them from doing so. I find them very similar to the Nike Lunarglide 3 in this regard, but with the support coming from the bottom as opposed to the side.

           

          I do like the shoes as they're quite light. Just taking some getting used to in terms of the arch support.

          Current PRs:

          5K: 27:06 (11/10/12) | 5M: 44:03 (6/1/13) | 10K: 1:00:48 (7/4/12)

          15K: 1:27:53 (3/17/13) | 10M: 1:30:25 (4/13/13) | HM: 1:59:55 (4/28/13)

          Next race: Ashland 4th of July 10K

            Mizuno's canning the Elixir,

             

            .... in 12 months.   Wink

            ---------
            (twitter) @SethGOrun
            (email)  seth@skechers.com

            runlikeagirI


              I had been wearing Brooks PureCadence for about 18 months.  Tried the PureCadence2 and after 2 of 3 runs, ended up with a bloody toe on my R foot even though I didn't feel any discomfort-oddly enough, I did feel that the shoe was rubbing my left foot and expected a blister or rawness there but found nothing.  Exchanged them for the Adidas Tempo 5 a week ago..and jury is still out on those.  Even though it is light (even lighter than what I was wearing before), it feels very structured.  On runs up to 90 minutes it seems to be OK but I did a 20 miler in them this weekend and not sure I can handle feeling that ridge in the shoe for that long.  It really became uncomfortable after 14-15 miles.  Again thought there might be a blister but luckily not.  I have a feeling that I'll be exchanging these as well.  Desperately trying to find a pair of PureCadence ones in an 8.5!

               

              FYI, when I returned the PureCadence2, I tried the Wave Elixir 8 as well.  My pronation seems to be mostly on my right side, and I rolled more in the Mizuno than in any other shoe I tried.. even Saucony Kinvara!


              Smashy!!!

                RunAsics and Ceedot, thanks for the feedback.

                 

                Another shoe I hadn't thought of was the Saucony Fastwitch. When I tried them out before, I recall them feeling capable of daily training, like fast workouts and such. Any thoughts out there on the Fastwitch?

                PRs: 21:35 (5K); 1:46:46 (HM); 4:30:46 (FM)

                tarzancoe


                  Hi. I happen to use the Tempo 5's for my marathons. I am 6.7 and 200 pounds, size 14 shoe, and slightly overpronate. My time is between 3.30 and 4 hours, so I do not go fast and my legs take lots of pounding because of that. The Tempo 5 just work. No knee problems, and the amount of support feels just right.

                   

                  I also have used the fastswitch 5 for marathon distance. Because I do not go that fast, the support was too little and I could feel that it was not enough the last third of the run. However, I love them: Support is just about perfect. I used them for my fast runs and repeats (i.e. yesterday for my 9 1-mile repeats at anaerobic pace).

                   

                  I also use a pair of hokas when I feeel I need them, as I found out I recover better. However they do not work for me for long distances, they kill my calves once I get tired and I start loosing form and heel striking. For the record, I also run in fivefinges on trail, up to 10 miles with them, and I can pretty much go on my tip toes up to that distance. So, is the hokas, not my calves Smile

                   

                  I am considering getting the Aegis for the LA marathon, instead of a new pair of Tempo 5. Cushioning is pretty much the same, and who knows they might serve me better. Only one way to find out.

                  tarzancoe


                    Hi. I happen to use the Tempo 5's for my marathons. I am 6.7 and 200 pounds, size 14 shoe, and slightly overpronate. My time is between 3.30 and 4 hours, so I do not go fast and my legs take lots of pounding because of that. The Tempo 5 just work. No knee problems, and the amount of support feels just right.

                     

                    I also have used the fastswitch 5 for marathon distance. Because I do not go that fast, the support was too little and I could feel that it was not enough the last third of the run. However, I love them: Support is just about perfect. I used them for my fast runs and repeats (i.e. yesterday for my 9 1-mile repeats at anaerobic pace).

                     

                    I also use a pair of hokas when I feeel I need them, as I found out I recover better. However they do not work for me for long distances, they kill my calves once I get tired and I start loosing form and heel striking. For the record, I also run in fivefinges on trail, up to 10 miles with them, and I can pretty much go on my tip toes up to that distance. So, is the hokas, not my calves Smile

                     

                    I am considering getting the Aegis for the LA marathon, instead of a new pair of Tempo 5. Cushioning is pretty much the same, and who knows they might serve me better. Only one way to find out.