While you don’t get tipped forwards so much in the Alphafly 2, it still feels like it’s delivering an efficient, energy-saving ride, and during and after long runs in the shoe my legs have felt very fresh. It’s a more comfortable shoe, and once you’re locked in to a certain pace it feels like it makes it easier to hold it. Whereas you know you’re running quickly in the Vaporfly 2, with the Alphafly 2 I was consistently surprised at the pace I was logging on runs given the perceived effort I was putting in. The Alphafly 2 is more of a cruiser, though no less fast. It’s more nimble than the Alphafly and makes it easier to attack corners at speed, thanks to its more grounded feel. The Vaporfly has a more aggressive feel, like it’s tipping you forwards, and it’s firmer underfoot as well. I’ve run 82km in the Alphafly 2 ahead of its launch, including a 20-mile (32km) long run, a parkrun, and two workouts with long spells at different race paces.Īlthough they use the same ZoomX foam and a carbon plate, the Vaporfly 2 and Alphafly 2 feel very different when running. Both shoes have helped me log several PBs, including 15min 30sec over 5K in the Vaporfly 2 and 2hr 29min in the marathon in the Alphafly. The original Alphafly and Vaporfly 2 have been my go-to racing shoes in recent years: I prefer the Vaporfly for shorter events like 5K and 10K, and the Alphafly for half marathon and marathon distances. The Vaporfly weighs 7.3oz (207g) in my UK 9. Nike lists it as weighing 8.8oz (249g) in a US 10/UK 9, though my two UK 9 shoes actually weighed different amounts at 8.6oz (244g) and 8.9oz (251g). The Alphafly 2 looks close to the 40mm limit set by World Athletics, while the Vaporfly is a millimetre or two lower. Nike lists both shoes as having an 8mm drop from heel to toe, but doesn’t give official stack heights for them. There is a lot of exposed foam on both shoes, but the key impact zones are covered with rubber to improve grip and durability, though both shoes are clearly designed for road running alone. The two shoes have similar outsoles, with two strips of rubber running in parallel on the outsides of the back of the shoe and rubber covering the forefoot. Nike Air Zoom Alphafly NEXT% 2 (Image credit: Nick Harris-Fry / Future) In the second edition of the Alphafly, Nike has added a sliver of ZoomX foam under the pods, and the shoe also has a wider base than its predecessor to improve stability, especially at the heel. Both shoes also have a full-length carbon plate running through the midsole. These have a slightly firmer feel than the foam alone, and provide a bit more pop in your toe-off. It has pull tabs on the tongue and a collar to help you get your foot in.īoth shoes use Nike’s PEBA-based ZoomX foam in the midsole, but while the Vaporfly 2 has a full ZoomX midsole, with the foam running all the way through the shoe, the Alphafly 2 adds two Air Zoom pods under the forefoot. I found that both shoes fit me perfectly in my normal size, though the Alphafly 2 is not the easiest shoe to pull on since it has a bootie design rather than a separate tongue. It’s more structured and supportive than the Flyknit used in many Nike shoes, and on the Alphafly 2 the heel is built up to offer greater stability. Nike also updated the upper on the second edition of the Alphafly NEXT% 2, which uses a knit material called Atomknit 2.0. Nike Air Zoom Vaporfly NEXT% 2 (Image credit: Nick Harris-Fry / Future)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |