I got both speed ultra & speed shoes back in March. First I doubted about rug depth & rocker shape because here in South Korea we have very technical trails in Mtn, however surprisingly! it worked very well on both granite rocks + lose gravel trails even on downhills. Plus, my family loves to watch your youtube channel. Cheers!!! f/ very far east
Non plated (or non energy rods) option is a "trainer" option if ou consider the less stiffness / energy return makes your feet little muscles work more, and it suits me just fine.
Hi guys, you seem have missed the fact that the cushioning of the Agravic Speed (what you feel under your feet) is 100% Lighstrike pro. The lighstrike is only a rim for stability. And the Lightstrike pro have 2 different densities (the front is softer than the rear); just press on the outsole in the front and the back to see the difference.
yeah good point. its really a rim for stability and also better durability. So as Brett said you get your guidance from the 'firmer" foam but still have full hight Lightsrike pro under foot.
@@scherry2900 Hmm yeah the both you mentioned are from what I know and see really a core and shell, so the superfoam is completely encapsulated. Which might help even more with durability and stability, but takes away more from the superfoam feeling. The Agravic Speed has more a rim sitting on the top half of the superfoam ... kind of like a crown ... haha all these terms get kind of confusing but I guess you get it when you look closely at the shoe.
I bought the speed ultra. They are insane - first trail shoe that feels like a supershoe! I did not have any fit issues however, and was happy for a bit more room in the toes; I bought these for ultra racing, and with foot swell, etc. it made sense. I recently rolled my ankle BAD in these on a training run a week before an ultra in April and am scared to put them back on. I live in Pennsylvania, and our trails are all really technical. These shoe scare me haha!
When Terrex was giving away free shoes in Chamonix, they used a foot measuring device to determine the exact shoe size. I ended up with a US 8 2/3 when I normally wear a US 9.5.
Couldn't agree more re. sizing - I would / will definitely go down half a size in future, but didn't have the option to return mine, so I was so relieved when the heel lock lacing worked for me and have loved running in the Speed more than any other trail shoe I have ever had - the lightness of the shoe is key for me, and the responsiveness too - running much shorter trails than these gentlemen do, so for a daily trainer it is perfect for my needs!
Been looking forward to your thoughts on these! I got both quite recently. Regarding the sizing: the Speed is true to size for me, the Speed Ultra runs a little bit big and I have to wear thicker socks to prevent some heel rubbing issues. I instantly fell in love with the Speed: this is the no nonsense, modern training shoe that I expected Salomon to make for years now! I’m still breaking in/getting used to the Speed Ultra. It’s smooth and efficient, but not as bouncy as for example the Ultrafly and Endorphin Edge. On flat, non-technical terrain (we gave a lot of that here) I think I prefer those. But on downhills suddenly the Speed Ultra makes a whole lot of sense 🤩 More testing needed, I might race in them in the Alps this fall!
I definitely had a similar underfoot experience as you with both shoes. Seems like no two are alike with the sizing, which is a shame! I agree, the Speed Ultra makes a whole lot of sense when descending!
I initially went with my true-to-size in the Agravic Speed Ultra and after about 40 miles decided to swap them for a half-size down. About 100 miles and one 50km technical trail race later, I can definitively say that going down a half-size was the correct choice.
Thanks for the review guys. I have Bulldog 50k and Ray Miller 50 miler coming up. Currently running in the Hoka Mafate Speed 4 (almost end of life), Asics Trabuco Max for training and Nnormal Torir 2. Got a $500 Amazon gift card recently so thinking of getting either the Speed or Ultra. 6'4/224 lbs.
The Speed would feel more familiar since it doesn't have a plate and is less aggressive of a rocker, but if you're curious about the potential economical benefits of the rods plus full super foam of the Speed Ultra, sounds like you've got some money burning a hole in your pocket and it might be worth a try!
Got the speed a few weeks ago, it quickly became my favourite shoe, love the low stack and ground feel, but with the fun lightstrike pro bounce!! Let’s you run very fast on all terrains. Tried the ultra in the shop and it felt unstable just walking around. Don’t have the strongest ankles, so that shoe maybe not for me..
I really wanted to like the speed. Unfortunately, after finally getting my correct size, I went on a 10-mile run, but had to cut it short because after 5 miles I got a quarter-size blister on my arch. I also noticed that on steep hikes the rocker made me lose traction on the toe.
Enjoyed that a lot, thanks. I've had the Speed for 200km and it looks like the top by my big toe will blowout by the time I reach 400km. Pity. Been using it as a race and trail tempo shoe and really liking it. Looking forward to a Zegama 2, Tomir 2, Prodigio face off.
Loved the speed’s foam and mid-outsole. The upper broke it for me. Due to the “plastic” upper, you can only cinch them down so much, cuz the material won’t budge. My tongue actually came apart after 50 miles. The tongue itself came unstitched from the wrap on the inside. The heel was fine, toe box was great. Realize it’s a race upper but I really want that lower half of the shoe on a more comfortable upper for long runs.
I had to sell my Speed Ultra's as the rocker was just far too aggressive for my liking and I found that it dug right up into the arch of my feet. Gutted as I love the midsole foam
Aww that's a bummer! The Agravic Speed definitely doesn't have as aggressive feeling of a rocker. It also doesn't feel quite as magic as the Speed Ultra, but close!
Agree about sizing, I would have gone down half size in the Ultra. I’ll let you know how they do for more than 60 miles when I put them on after the high country at Western States this weekend!
@@ConversationalPace i put them on at Robinson Flat and wore until the finish. Right out of the aid station I had to retie them twice to get it right, but never touched them again. I kicked a rock and stick that hurt like hell but but it would have with any shoe. And the small hot spots on my arch was possibly avoidable with sock changes, but wet feet all day from sweat, creeks and water dumps was abnormal to many other race day conditions. In the end my feet felt good, the cushion was great and they definitely kept my legs in great shape to run well the final 40 miles of Western States. I totally recommend for a less technical, runnable ultra.
It's so difficult to not get any hot spots at States. With all the ice and water you dump on yourself, and the creeks past Robinson, it's a combination for soggy feet. Congrats on the finish and great feedback on the shoes!
Thank you both for this great video. I’ll keep using my 2nd pair of the old Speed Ultra and I don’t run long enough races to get the $220 one. Hope you can review the VJ Maxx2 in the next few months!
Two comments about the Speeds, but first, thank you for reviewing them. 1.). It’s the budget version of the speed ultras. I’m the type of runner who can not afford $220 race only shoes. $160 is a lot more affordable, and ai still get a super solid shoe. 2.). Foam orientation: is just like Brett said, a crash pad, but like a rock climbers pad. Firmer foam to absorb the strike and press out against a larger surface area of the softer foam. Thanks again, keep up the solid work!
Edit, this is about the Speed Ultra. Sizing: I followed online review rec and went a half size down size 11 (all my running shoes are 11.5, except foe my Kjerag which also recommended a half size down). They fit length wise, room in toe box wise, but the lacing lockdown is tricky. The laces are elastic and have the serrated/ribs/notches, but thus far I can't get them how I want, they just feel really tight on the last loop but I dont want to slide forward. Overall I feel like the laces dont have any give, so yeah adidas lacing continues to disappoint (prior experience only with sl20.2/.3 and a prior year supernova). First impressions: Only 18 miles in them unfortunately, as I tweaked my back on the first run (not the shoes fault, but didn't help getting back home). Second run was better, but the next day my right foot was upset, but cant describe the feeling... Hoping to eventually break these in and race them for a fall 50k and then Black Canyon 100k in 2025. If I can't adjust to them ill have to consider another shoe or strengthen my feet to go long in the Kjerag.
Guess I didn't really give a first impression, will come back after I get a quality long run in it. Very first run did feel super shoe like, though firmer. Have used it three times in total, all with a decent road to trail commute. I did also use a different retailers 20% off one item to justify the purchase so yeah, no regrets yet. Hoping to get out of the shoe as much as I can.
Went for an 18 mile long run (no elevation gain/loss unfortunately) on about 2/3 roads and 1/3 hard packed trail with minimal roots etc. This took the shoe to 30+ miles and may be considered broken in now. I warmed up in the Zegama v1 and then my pace at the same effort increased switching into these much lighter, much less cleat like, much more responsive shoes. The miles flew by and I did a progression at the end getting down close to marathon paces despite the heat and humidity. Didn't have to adjust the lacing or anything and basically forgot about them. Love that I can run fast on all terrain and the easy and uptempo miles were totally fine, thinking ahead to 50mi/100k races in the fall/winter.
Really selling me on the Ultra. Was planning on Nike Trailfly for 50k in CO mtns but was concerned about tech sections. Loved how first Speed Ultra fit my foot but that shoe was lacking in midsole for ultra races. Just having a heart murmur thinking about spending that much money for two pair of trail shoes.
Thanks for watching! Yes, I figured the hike time can be valuable to some as well, as these shoes are getting so different, some just aren't going to be very comfortable to hike in!
Ultra Sizing: No size down ;-)) perfect TTS for me. Identical size in the Prime X2 Strung as well. I think you hit the reason on the nail: The shape of the heel, if you're older your heelbone stands out more, then they fit perfectly, no heel issues. My heelbone stands out. Upper: I love the upper, 0 stretch is lovely, the tongue is stupid short though as you pointed out. The forefoot shape is awesome. Tuning: The midfoot section is too harsh, too hard, it is bouncy but it is a very harsh landing. (75kg) I'll be drilling a few holes to provide the foam some expansion space and tune the stiffness down. The shoe improves with the INOV8 insoles the fit goes from good to perfect, I assume this would improve the speed a lot. Magical: And yes this shoe might be magical, they magically crap up my legs as well, I've not gone over 15 in these. Socks: Rockay trail socks, the combo is awesome. Speed: Is that a fast hiking / hiking shoe? (especially with Finns concept of deeper lugs..) Both Genesis are too narrow. Awesome review again. Thx guys.
@@ConversationalPace It's a wild shoe 🙂 I drilled holes in the sole today. The "ball feeling" under the arch was super annoying. So i drilled about 10 holes in the shoe (gauge first wher the the rods are) The i put in an innersole from Asics. Boy this is a nice shoe now. Lost some bounce, but way more controllable, way more comfortable. (I'm a cyclist, if a bike doesnt work we adapt it, why not with shoes..)
@finn I think it's hilarious how much you love the Duo 1.5's. I got them for like $30 on Runningwarehouse, as they were deeply discounted due to terrible customer reviews (heel cup cutting into the foot). I don't run much in 0 drop, but they have been my work shoe for the past several years!
I have the agravic speed , it truly is pretty amazing shoe , the dual density foam make its it responsive and fast , I think I have used it more on roads then trails 😂 and I also had size issues which used lock lase fixed it , great review guys and also I saw the speed for 65$ already
Great review. I haven’t yet been able to try the ultras - unobtanium on the Adidas app despite much more opportunistic pricing in Europe at around $280… The speed is also expensive (app) at $210 but are already available on offers at $140… I have a pair of Speed (150km so far) and yes, my usual size 44 is defintely long - the 2nd pair I’ve ordered is a size smaller - they arrive later this week. Shame I only learn of the agravic 3 now… maybe because of the larger size I still had (bloody) ankle problems on off-camber ground - fast downhills amplify that but a flat road brings no problems - But only my left foot! - I’m hoping the smaller size fixes that so I don’t have to resort to my scissors! The upper, though I like the ‘ankle-sock’ of the Zinal 2, seems more stable with the Speed and so my foot doesn’t slop around after 25km like it does in the Zinal I wish the lugs were deeper, like a Zinal 2, in wet or muddy conditions they don’t offer a lot of grip but these are the only trail shoes you can go out and attack 5 miles on the road!! So I like them enough to try a better fitting second pair - I’d like to try the ultras but european prices and availability haven’t yet allowed that.
Interesting there is such a price difference between the US and in Europe for the shoes. The Zinal outsole is one of the best of all time and would have been fantastic on either of those shoes. Hope the smaller size helps the ankle collar issue!
@@ConversationalPace Just finished my 3rd run in the Euro 43 & 1/3 (!) size, instead of my usual 44. This time around I paid about 150 swiss francs - they are still 210 in the Adidas app - the non-carbon Speed. Obviously less roomy vs the 44 - but they hold the feet brilliantly well with a runner's knot - and no ankle issues - a first for me with any Terrex. That's only from 40km but 5h45mins and 3,120m of climbing - very stable and consistent on the down too. I'm happy with them, so will use them in a couple of (smaller!) UTMBs over the next month (Eiger + Kat100)... Thanks for your review !!
Great review. I purchased both before seeing this and bought my usual size and they have been great. Perhaps if you have a wide foot like mine you won’t need to size up?
Yeah my guess is that you wouldn't need to size up, as if you need to do that to get the width right, they'll likely be way too long and then it's probably just not the right shoe for you
Great review! I have the Speed Ultra and was tempted to buy the Speed when I found them on sale now. Seems like I don't need to jump on those. Regarding the sizing; I bought Speed Ultra in my usual Adidas-size (same size as in Boston 12 and Takumi Sen 9), and I think the fit is fine. I have about 1 finger width of space in front of my big toe in the Ultras. Is that too much in a trail shoe?
I don't think it's too much, but it really depends on who you ask. I prefer about that much space in my trail shoes, while Finn prefers about half that space
As I've seen some comments about arch hot spots and blisters in a few places with these (for some people), I'm a bit curious now...what is the shape of the insole at the arch? Meaning...is it completely "foot shaped", or does it curve OUT toward the medial side and thus ride on TOP of the edge of the midsole? I hope I'm making sense here... The only shoe I've ever experienced arch blisters in was the Hoka Clifton 6, where the medial midsole edge was rather pronounced, and the "foot shaped" insole didn't cover it. THNX!
I think I understand what you're saying, and interestingly, the insoles in the speed ultra are cut quite narrow and don't ride up along the side of the midsole. I found the arch feel comes largely from the strange shape of the midsole foam
@@ConversationalPace I just found a conversation on Reddit discussing this over in RunningShoeGeeks with pics that confirm what I was describing in the insole.
In the true rugged mountain terrain of the Sierra Nevada, the Hoka Tecton X and Altra Mont Blanc Carbon are vastly superior shoes, for me. For gentler rolling terrain, the Speed Ultra reigns supreme. They're damn near Adios Pro 3s for trail. IMHO, of course. As for the Speed Trail, it's a nice responsive and lightweight trainer that shouldn't be compared to the Speed Ultra. They feel and perform completely different, much like a Takumi Sen versus an Adios Pro 3.
With your point about the lugs being spaced differently, it reminds me of mud tyres on a truck. The more dispersed the lugs, the better they are at performing in mud. Possibly the Speed version is better for muddy conditions?
I am having a hard time finding a plated trail shoe that doesn’t want to collapse my ankles…. I ran in the Speed Ultra for a 50k a month ago, but that was around the Zion area so pretty rolling non technical hills. Is the Speed much more stable? I am just about to give up on plated trail shoes. Not worth it IMHO. Thanks for the review!
@@ConversationalPace Vectiv Pro 2 (very unstable for me, especially in the Rocky Mountains of Utah), Tecton X (which was decent, but haven’t tried out the X2).
You had me when you compared the Speeds to Pearl Izumis (and old Kigers). It's probably just nostalgia at this point, but man, I miss the feeling of those shoes.
@@ConversationalPace Jesus Christ man, that's like a treasure. I would definitely love to listen to that. And I think I am not the only one, those shoes had a following at some point.
I have 238 miles in the Speed Ultras. I think calling the sizing a mistake is a mistake. I bomb down steep descents on most of my runs (training for Speedgoat) and my toes thank the Adidas designers. The key is lockdown. I did have arch and toe hotspot trouble at Desert Rats, but only had about 25 miles in the shoe at that point. Needed breaking in. Otherwise it was perfect for those surfaces. I tend to get lace bite on my right foot with Adidas racing tongues so I put in tongue pads. My Nike UFs are relegated to puttering around the house and walking the dog. I suspect that nurses would also really like the UFs. But the Agravic Speed Ultra has no competitors at this point IMO.
Personally, I would absolutely go down a half size for my next pair and I'm confident my toes would be just fine. This shoe has just had such a wildly different response from everyone with sizing and I suspect it's a combination of the shape of the rocker relative to the heel and heels are just going to sit back there differently
I have the Ultra in my normals size and since then tried both half size down which would be the right size for me. Made it work in my size but they feel soo much nimbler and racier in the smaller size. I would love a report on the Speed Ultra after a steep 1000m+ euro style mountain hike up. My calves blew out both times on 30k long runs involving these kinda hikes somewhere in the run. Anybody with a similar experience?
I had that issue the first ~40 miles in the Speed Ultra, but then my legs started to adjust. Either that or the shoes broke in a bit more. I definitely didn't do anything euro steep though!
Great review! Loving the Speed so far. The only thing I’m not crazy about is the outsole and feel Vibram would be a better choice over Continental. Put the outsole from the Kjerag on the Speed and 👌🏼
I wasn't able to tell a difference between continental outsole and Vibram, but I don't regularly run on that tough of terrain either. That Kjerag outsole is tough to beat though!
Thanks for the comparison. In your opinion, is there anything like the Saucony Endorphin Speed for the trails? The plastic rods you described in the Adidas Speed Ultra seemed similar somewhat to the Endorphin Speed’s plastic plate.
The plastic rods are probably about the only similar feeling bit, as the Speed Ultra is just shaped so differently than the Endorphin Speed. Honestly, off the top of my head, the shoe that might come closest to the Endorphin Speed is a Hoka Tecton X 2, as the dimensions are similar and the TX2 has a tiny bit of flex. It is firmer though by a bit
Ive run in the Hoka Tecton X2 and the Nike Ultrafly. I like the ultrafly for the width. Interesting that you think the speed Ultra is so much faster, presumably it is the rocker that makes it so. @@ConversationalPace
Yeah I think it's really all about the shape here. Nike has just of good materials, and I'm sure if it was shaped just like the Speed Ultra, it would be incredible too!
I haven't had the chance to run in the Agravic 3, but fro those who I have talked to that have worn it, due to the more normal heel cup, it fits more true to size. For example, I'd wear my usual 10 in the Agravic 3 and a 9.5 in the Agravic Speed and Speed Ultra
I would much prefer you wait to review until you obtain the proper size. I get that you feel pressure to publish or perish, but a lot of review value is lost in sizing complaints and swimming in them for mileage. Oh well. I went 1/2 size down in both models and fit is perfect; a very narrow foot might work at a full size down. I’m delighted with both: the TST is fun and nimble on up to moderate trails, while the TSU’s extra structure adds stability for longer runs. I still want a *full* gusseted tongue, as then a simple gaiter would keep out all gravel
If we had the option to swap sizes on a reasonable timeframe for this review, we would have absolutely done so, but it was tough getting both of these shoes in our regular sizes anyways, so we just had to make do with what we had. Definitely hear you though, it would have been more valuable to have that half size down
To answer your final question about who is going to buy the speed: I’m primarily a road runner, I’m extremely happy with the Speed to use on long moderate trail runs, usually once a week…nothing crazy, 20-25km. The Ultra could do the same job (or even a better one), but I prefer a non plated option for those runs. The fit and the consistency/feeling of the foam under my feet is pretty similar to other Adidas road shoes in my rotation….in fact the fit and the upper is probably better than the Boston’s or the Pro 3. I know my use case is pretty limited!
Just got my Speed Ultra juries still out decided to ignore your advice about no good for wide feet blister after 6km 🙄 surprised how good they were down some technical trail & they certainly shift on smooth trails! Surprised nobody’s mentioned how shit the heel is feels worse than the Mont Blanc felt like my feet were trying to escape all run !
I found that the more I wore them and figured out how to lace them up for my foot, the heel hold got better. Really kicking your heels into the back of the shoe before tying them up helped me get a more secure lock back there
Another brilliant review gents! One question for those of us strapped for cash, what road to trail shoe would you recommend to both train with and for race days?
This Agravic Speed definitely checks those boxes, but being so new, it might be hard to find on sale. In terms of some great road to trail shoes that you can likely still find last years models on sale for, the Hoka Challenger 6 if you want higher cushion. The Nike Pegasus Trail is a great all around option as well.
Would you recommend these for Grindstone 50K? Looking for a race day shoe, however am on slower end with more hiking on climbs. Currently training in Speedgoat 5. Thanks!
Coming from the Speedgoat 5, the Agravic Speed will feel super light and fast, which could be nice for Grindstone! As long as you get the right size, the lockdown on the Agravic Speed can be good enough for any technical bits of trail out there. The continental outsole is great for grip too
Hi guys ! You mentioned the Agravic 3, any plans to try them ? I have been using these shoes since 100 km and very nicely surprised : feeling very light and fast but protective responsive at the same time. Protects the feet but not too soft. Very nice surprise for me. Wonder if I should try the Speed for their dual foams that are apparently a great combination ? Thanks
We're definitely interested in testing out the Agravic 3! It sounds like after testing the Speed, I would almost prefer the Agravic 3 on a daily training basis due to the burlier outsole and more traditional heel cup. The Speed is a bit lighter and more nimble of a shoe, which makes it much more approachable for faster days.
Dear frieds, thanks and congrats for your reviews, top!!! I saw your reference to Kjerag, so, main differences and similarities with normal kjerag? Which one is more confortable underfoot and which one protects best in stone terrain, those small and sharp stones? Thanks!!
They're similar weight, with the Speed having more room in the forefoot and more cushion. The Kjerag feels more nimble and agile over technical terrain. You can feel rocks with both shoes, but there's enough underfoot where it would take a bit to bruise the foot. I was so surprised at the underfoot protection of the Kjerag. It'll really come down to whether you want that firmer, more minimal feel of the Kjerag, or more relaxed and higher cushion feel of the Speed. Hope this helps!
We had this issue with (I think) the rabbit dream chaser, where my 10 felt true to size, and Finn's 12 felt a little big, so it's tough to say for sure. We've talked to a lot of people and read a ton of other reviews/comments about the sizing, and these ones to seem to consistently run big across the board.
You'll probably get a little bit of bunching with the upper as that happened to me, but didn't have any abrasion issues. It's a roomier toe box for sure, but a good lockdown can still be had on a narrower foot. The arch of the Speed Ultra is pretty apparent, so having a higher arch should line up nicely with the shape of the shoe 👍
@@ConversationalPace That's great info, thanks! Bunching is OK if there is a tongue, if it was a bootie-style shoe then it would suck. I was mainly worried about having a baggy midfoot arch area. Also helps if the shoe has a banana shape.
Currently using the brooks catamount 3’s for training and racing since it has a good balance of kinda being able to do it all. For someone who would kinda want one shoe to train and race in would the agravic speed work for that too you think?
I still don't think it's a 100 mile shoe for me. Perhaps if I spent a considerable amount more time training in it, but it just feels too fast for my 100 mile kind of paces.
Definitely has a lot of similaritites! I would say that the Kjerag is still better on technical terrain being a little narrower and having even better lockdown. Great comparison though!
Would you consider the Agravic Speed ultras stable/grippy enough to wear for the speedgoat 50k? For context, did all of my racing including mountainous races up to 50miles and 11k of vert in Kjerags and then ran my first 50k this year (north fork 50k, around 3k not technical vert) in the agravic speed ultras. I’m between running speedgoat 50k in the agravic speed ultras but also considering ordering a new pair of kjerags or maybe even s lab genesis for speedgoat. Thoughts? I’m worried the Agravics are too tippy/not grippy enough for a techs course like speedgoat and that the Kjerags would be better. It Would be nice to have all that foam though! PS: Brett I’m the guy that asked you as P2P aid station last year if you had any random baller juice. Love the channel and the reviews,always enjoyed and appreciated!
Both the Kjerag and Genesis are going to be more stable than the Speed Ultra on a course like Speedgoat. I'd recommend getting out on similar terrain in the Speed Ultra to see if it's too tippy for you. With how confident I feel in that shoe, I'd be comfortable at speedgoat in it, but that's definitely going to come down to the runner. Hope you find some random baller juice at Speedgoat!
i like adidas' plastic-y mesh uppers (takumi sen as well for example) for lots of reasons but i agree with you on matryx . however, i think both the pulsar 2 and the updated s/lab ultra 3 have superior matryx blends. breathability on both of those shoes is better than the kjerag, and the matryx blends are more comfortable. so i'd say yes to matryx upper, and a quicklace system. Edit : actually, either a quicklace or traditional lacing system would be fine. i think the lacing system on the kjerag leaves somethign to be desired, whereas adidas has it pretty dialed in.
Hello guys thanks for the review, speaking of sizing it's more like adidas (and other brand) are f*cking ret*ards about that, i go the old adidas ultra speed and 43 1/3 or 9.5 is to small it would be better for me to have 44, i got adidas boston at the same size and it's relly fine i got adizero 7 in 44 and it's to long...and it's even worse when you change of brand (i could go 43 aka 9 for some and 44.5 aka 10.5 for other)... So maybe when you are speaking about size it's better to add lenght of your feet, like mine are 27cm / 10.63 inches and i use size 44 / 10 and to long/small/perfect. I would be easier to us to relate. More over sometimes brand told to add one size for trail running shooes.
I got both speed ultra & speed shoes back in March. First I doubted about rug depth & rocker shape because here in South Korea we have very technical trails in Mtn, however surprisingly! it worked very well on both granite rocks + lose gravel trails even on downhills. Plus, my family loves to watch your youtube channel. Cheers!!! f/ very far east
Glad they're working out for you and thanks for finding the channel!
Non plated (or non energy rods) option is a "trainer" option if ou consider the less stiffness / energy return makes your feet little muscles work more, and it suits me just fine.
I've noticed the non plated version also works better on more technical terrain due to being more flexible
Hi guys, you seem have missed the fact that the cushioning of the Agravic Speed (what you feel under your feet) is 100% Lighstrike pro. The lighstrike is only a rim for stability. And the Lightstrike pro have 2 different densities (the front is softer than the rear); just press on the outsole in the front and the back to see the difference.
yeah good point. its really a rim for stability and also better durability. So as Brett said you get your guidance from the 'firmer" foam but still have full hight Lightsrike pro under foot.
Means the same "stable rim with super foam core" concept as in the Saucony Exodus Ultra and Nike Zegama 2.
@@scherry2900 Hmm yeah the both you mentioned are from what I know and see really a core and shell, so the superfoam is completely encapsulated. Which might help even more with durability and stability, but takes away more from the superfoam feeling. The Agravic Speed has more a rim sitting on the top half of the superfoam ... kind of like a crown ... haha all these terms get kind of confusing but I guess you get it when you look closely at the shoe.
Thanks for the insight! I hadn't realized that it was more of a donut and that what was under my foot was lightstrike pro!
@@ConversationalPace Donut might be the technical term we were looking for!!
I bought the speed ultra. They are insane - first trail shoe that feels like a supershoe! I did not have any fit issues however, and was happy for a bit more room in the toes; I bought these for ultra racing, and with foot swell, etc. it made sense. I recently rolled my ankle BAD in these on a training run a week before an ultra in April and am scared to put them back on. I live in Pennsylvania, and our trails are all really technical. These shoe scare me haha!
They are definitely big ankle roll eligible and require quite a bit more focus, but for some trails, it's worth that for the speed that you gain
When Terrex was giving away free shoes in Chamonix, they used a foot measuring device to determine the exact shoe size. I ended up with a US 8 2/3 when I normally wear a US 9.5.
That would have definitely been helpful when figuring out which size to get!
Couldn't agree more re. sizing - I would / will definitely go down half a size in future, but didn't have the option to return mine, so I was so relieved when the heel lock lacing worked for me and have loved running in the Speed more than any other trail shoe I have ever had - the lightness of the shoe is key for me, and the responsiveness too - running much shorter trails than these gentlemen do, so for a daily trainer it is perfect for my needs!
Glad you were able to still lock it down despite the larger size!
I tried these on in a store and had to go up half a size which I’ve never done. We had opposite experiences
That's fascinating! Good thing you were able to try them on in store. Out of curiosity, what store was it and where?
Been looking forward to your thoughts on these! I got both quite recently. Regarding the sizing: the Speed is true to size for me, the Speed Ultra runs a little bit big and I have to wear thicker socks to prevent some heel rubbing issues.
I instantly fell in love with the Speed: this is the no nonsense, modern training shoe that I expected Salomon to make for years now!
I’m still breaking in/getting used to the Speed Ultra. It’s smooth and efficient, but not as bouncy as for example the Ultrafly and Endorphin Edge. On flat, non-technical terrain (we gave a lot of that here) I think I prefer those. But on downhills suddenly the Speed Ultra makes a whole lot of sense 🤩 More testing needed, I might race in them in the Alps this fall!
I definitely had a similar underfoot experience as you with both shoes. Seems like no two are alike with the sizing, which is a shame! I agree, the Speed Ultra makes a whole lot of sense when descending!
I initially went with my true-to-size in the Agravic Speed Ultra and after about 40 miles decided to swap them for a half-size down. About 100 miles and one 50km technical trail race later, I can definitively say that going down a half-size was the correct choice.
Yeah seems like for the majority of folks, that half size down is the way to go. Glad you were able to swap out!
@@ConversationalPace Running Warehouse
Thanks for the review guys. I have Bulldog 50k and Ray Miller 50 miler coming up. Currently running in the Hoka Mafate Speed 4 (almost end of life), Asics Trabuco Max for training and Nnormal Torir 2. Got a $500 Amazon gift card recently so thinking of getting either the Speed or Ultra. 6'4/224 lbs.
The Speed would feel more familiar since it doesn't have a plate and is less aggressive of a rocker, but if you're curious about the potential economical benefits of the rods plus full super foam of the Speed Ultra, sounds like you've got some money burning a hole in your pocket and it might be worth a try!
Got the speed a few weeks ago, it quickly became my favourite shoe, love the low stack and ground feel, but with the fun lightstrike pro bounce!! Let’s you run very fast on all terrains. Tried the ultra in the shop and it felt unstable just walking around. Don’t have the strongest ankles, so that shoe maybe not for me..
Sounds like you made the right choice!
Excited to try the Ultra
I really wanted to like the speed. Unfortunately, after finally getting my correct size, I went on a 10-mile run, but had to cut it short because after 5 miles I got a quarter-size blister on my arch. I also noticed that on steep hikes the rocker made me lose traction on the toe.
Dang, that's such a bummer to find out. I've had arch blister issues on shoes as well, and it's so hard to predict which shoes might do that and not.
Enjoyed that a lot, thanks.
I've had the Speed for 200km and it looks like the top by my big toe will blowout by the time I reach 400km. Pity. Been using it as a race and trail tempo shoe and really liking it.
Looking forward to a Zegama 2, Tomir 2, Prodigio face off.
Hopefully the material holds up! Prodigio is getting put through the ringer right now!
Nice! Been wanting to see a comparison of these two
Thanks for watching!
Loved the speed’s foam and mid-outsole. The upper broke it for me. Due to the “plastic” upper, you can only cinch them down so much, cuz the material won’t budge. My tongue actually came apart after 50 miles. The tongue itself came unstitched from the wrap on the inside. The heel was fine, toe box was great. Realize it’s a race upper but I really want that lower half of the shoe on a more comfortable upper for long runs.
Yeah I agree, the upper is probably the biggest room for improvement on this shoe. Surely it will get a bit more dialed for the next version
Finally the comparison I’ve been waiting for. Thanks
Thanks for watching!
I had to sell my Speed Ultra's as the rocker was just far too aggressive for my liking and I found that it dug right up into the arch of my feet. Gutted as I love the midsole foam
Aww that's a bummer! The Agravic Speed definitely doesn't have as aggressive feeling of a rocker. It also doesn't feel quite as magic as the Speed Ultra, but close!
Agree about sizing, I would have gone down half size in the Ultra. I’ll let you know how they do for more than 60 miles when I put them on after the high country at Western States this weekend!
How did it go??
@@ConversationalPace i put them on at Robinson Flat and wore until the finish. Right out of the aid station I had to retie them twice to get it right, but never touched them again. I kicked a rock and stick that hurt like hell but but it would have with any shoe. And the small hot spots on my arch was possibly avoidable with sock changes, but wet feet all day from sweat, creeks and water dumps was abnormal to many other race day conditions. In the end my feet felt good, the cushion was great and they definitely kept my legs in great shape to run well the final 40 miles of Western States. I totally recommend for a less technical, runnable ultra.
It's so difficult to not get any hot spots at States. With all the ice and water you dump on yourself, and the creeks past Robinson, it's a combination for soggy feet. Congrats on the finish and great feedback on the shoes!
Thank you both for this great video. I’ll keep using my 2nd pair of the old Speed Ultra and I don’t run long enough races to get the $220 one. Hope you can review the VJ Maxx2 in the next few months!
VJ Maxx 2 is definitely in the queue!
Two comments about the Speeds, but first, thank you for reviewing them.
1.). It’s the budget version of the speed ultras. I’m the type of runner who can not afford $220 race only shoes. $160 is a lot more affordable, and ai still get a super solid shoe.
2.). Foam orientation: is just like Brett said, a crash pad, but like a rock climbers pad. Firmer foam to absorb the strike and press out against a larger surface area of the softer foam.
Thanks again, keep up the solid work!
Thanks for chiming in! Definitely a budget Speed Ultra and one of the best value shoes in the game!
Thanks for the feedback! The Speed for $160 is a great deal
Edit, this is about the Speed Ultra. Sizing: I followed online review rec and went a half size down size 11 (all my running shoes are 11.5, except foe my Kjerag which also recommended a half size down). They fit length wise, room in toe box wise, but the lacing lockdown is tricky. The laces are elastic and have the serrated/ribs/notches, but thus far I can't get them how I want, they just feel really tight on the last loop but I dont want to slide forward. Overall I feel like the laces dont have any give, so yeah adidas lacing continues to disappoint (prior experience only with sl20.2/.3 and a prior year supernova).
First impressions: Only 18 miles in them unfortunately, as I tweaked my back on the first run (not the shoes fault, but didn't help getting back home). Second run was better, but the next day my right foot was upset, but cant describe the feeling... Hoping to eventually break these in and race them for a fall 50k and then Black Canyon 100k in 2025. If I can't adjust to them ill have to consider another shoe or strengthen my feet to go long in the Kjerag.
Guess I didn't really give a first impression, will come back after I get a quality long run in it. Very first run did feel super shoe like, though firmer. Have used it three times in total, all with a decent road to trail commute. I did also use a different retailers 20% off one item to justify the purchase so yeah, no regrets yet. Hoping to get out of the shoe as much as I can.
Do you have the Speed or the Speed Ultra? Thanks
@@pedroppa8221 Speed Ultra, my bad.
Went for an 18 mile long run (no elevation gain/loss unfortunately) on about 2/3 roads and 1/3 hard packed trail with minimal roots etc. This took the shoe to 30+ miles and may be considered broken in now. I warmed up in the Zegama v1 and then my pace at the same effort increased switching into these much lighter, much less cleat like, much more responsive shoes. The miles flew by and I did a progression at the end getting down close to marathon paces despite the heat and humidity. Didn't have to adjust the lacing or anything and basically forgot about them. Love that I can run fast on all terrain and the easy and uptempo miles were totally fine, thinking ahead to 50mi/100k races in the fall/winter.
Really selling me on the Ultra. Was planning on Nike Trailfly for 50k in CO mtns but was concerned about tech sections. Loved how first Speed Ultra fit my foot but that shoe was lacking in midsole for ultra races. Just having a heart murmur thinking about spending that much money for two pair of trail shoes.
It's a big investment for sure. Hopefully you're able to try them on in person or from a shop with a good return policy 👍
Really appreciate this review!
Hope it was helpful!
Gorgeous looking shoe. So happy to hear you will start using them to hike also.
Thanks for watching! Yes, I figured the hike time can be valuable to some as well, as these shoes are getting so different, some just aren't going to be very comfortable to hike in!
Ultra Sizing:
No size down ;-)) perfect TTS for me. Identical size in the Prime X2 Strung as well.
I think you hit the reason on the nail: The shape of the heel, if you're older your heelbone stands out more, then they fit perfectly, no heel issues.
My heelbone stands out.
Upper:
I love the upper, 0 stretch is lovely, the tongue is stupid short though as you pointed out. The forefoot shape is awesome.
Tuning:
The midfoot section is too harsh, too hard, it is bouncy but it is a very harsh landing. (75kg)
I'll be drilling a few holes to provide the foam some expansion space and tune the stiffness down.
The shoe improves with the INOV8 insoles the fit goes from good to perfect, I assume this would improve the speed a lot.
Magical:
And yes this shoe might be magical, they magically crap up my legs as well, I've not gone over 15 in these.
Socks:
Rockay trail socks, the combo is awesome.
Speed:
Is that a fast hiking / hiking shoe? (especially with Finns concept of deeper lugs..)
Both Genesis are too narrow.
Awesome review again. Thx guys.
Thanks for your input! It's definitely to hear everyone's own experiences in these shoes and how wildly different they are!
@@ConversationalPace It's a wild shoe 🙂
I drilled holes in the sole today. The "ball feeling" under the arch was super annoying.
So i drilled about 10 holes in the shoe (gauge first wher the the rods are)
The i put in an innersole from Asics.
Boy this is a nice shoe now. Lost some bounce, but way more controllable, way more comfortable.
(I'm a cyclist, if a bike doesnt work we adapt it, why not with shoes..)
@finn I think it's hilarious how much you love the Duo 1.5's. I got them for like $30 on Runningwarehouse, as they were deeply discounted due to terrible customer reviews (heel cup cutting into the foot). I don't run much in 0 drop, but they have been my work shoe for the past several years!
😂 😂 😂
I have the agravic speed , it truly is pretty amazing shoe , the dual density foam make its it responsive and fast , I think I have used it more on roads then trails 😂 and I also had size issues which used lock lase fixed it , great review guys and also I saw the speed for 65$ already
Glad it's working for you! I've already seen it discounted as well. Could end up being one of the best value shoes of the year as well.
Yup, sick deal. I snagged a pair for $64
Great review.
I haven’t yet been able to try the ultras - unobtanium on the Adidas app despite much more opportunistic pricing in Europe at around $280… The speed is also expensive (app) at $210 but are already available on offers at $140…
I have a pair of Speed (150km so far) and yes, my usual size 44 is defintely long - the 2nd pair I’ve ordered is a size smaller - they arrive later this week. Shame I only learn of the agravic 3 now… maybe because of the larger size I still had (bloody) ankle problems on off-camber ground - fast downhills amplify that but a flat road brings no problems - But only my left foot! - I’m hoping the smaller size fixes that so I don’t have to resort to my scissors! The upper, though I like the ‘ankle-sock’ of the Zinal 2, seems more stable with the Speed and so my foot doesn’t slop around after 25km like it does in the Zinal
I wish the lugs were deeper, like a Zinal 2, in wet or muddy conditions they don’t offer a lot of grip but these are the only trail shoes you can go out and attack 5 miles on the road!! So I like them enough to try a better fitting second pair - I’d like to try the ultras but european prices and availability haven’t yet allowed that.
Interesting there is such a price difference between the US and in Europe for the shoes. The Zinal outsole is one of the best of all time and would have been fantastic on either of those shoes. Hope the smaller size helps the ankle collar issue!
@@ConversationalPace Just finished my 3rd run in the Euro 43 & 1/3 (!) size, instead of my usual 44. This time around I paid about 150 swiss francs - they are still 210 in the Adidas app - the non-carbon Speed. Obviously less roomy vs the 44 - but they hold the feet brilliantly well with a runner's knot - and no ankle issues - a first for me with any Terrex. That's only from 40km but 5h45mins and 3,120m of climbing - very stable and consistent on the down too. I'm happy with them, so will use them in a couple of (smaller!) UTMBs over the next month (Eiger + Kat100)... Thanks for your review !!
Great review. I purchased both before seeing this and bought my usual size and they have been great. Perhaps if you have a wide foot like mine you won’t need to size up?
Yeah my guess is that you wouldn't need to size up, as if you need to do that to get the width right, they'll likely be way too long and then it's probably just not the right shoe for you
@@ConversationalPace Meant to say size down!
The Agravics Speeds are eerily similar to the Pulsar Trail Pro 2s when I hold them side-by-side.
Oh that's a good comparison! Speeds feel a little more flexible, but you're right, the shapes are very similar
Do the midsoles of these 2 shoes felt similar too?
@@marcoc2706 PTP2 feels a bit softer, but less bouncy. The plate helps make it feel more propulsive though.
@@marcoc2706 But to be clear, the Adidas is overall a much better shoe.
@@RowOfMushyTiT Thanks for sharing the experience!
Great review! I have the Speed Ultra and was tempted to buy the Speed when I found them on sale now. Seems like I don't need to jump on those.
Regarding the sizing; I bought Speed Ultra in my usual Adidas-size (same size as in Boston 12 and Takumi Sen 9), and I think the fit is fine. I have about 1 finger width of space in front of my big toe in the Ultras. Is that too much in a trail shoe?
I don't think it's too much, but it really depends on who you ask. I prefer about that much space in my trail shoes, while Finn prefers about half that space
As I've seen some comments about arch hot spots and blisters in a few places with these (for some people), I'm a bit curious now...what is the shape of the insole at the arch? Meaning...is it completely "foot shaped", or does it curve OUT toward the medial side and thus ride on TOP of the edge of the midsole? I hope I'm making sense here... The only shoe I've ever experienced arch blisters in was the Hoka Clifton 6, where the medial midsole edge was rather pronounced, and the "foot shaped" insole didn't cover it. THNX!
I think I understand what you're saying, and interestingly, the insoles in the speed ultra are cut quite narrow and don't ride up along the side of the midsole. I found the arch feel comes largely from the strange shape of the midsole foam
@@ConversationalPace I just found a conversation on Reddit discussing this over in RunningShoeGeeks with pics that confirm what I was describing in the insole.
In the true rugged mountain terrain of the Sierra Nevada, the Hoka Tecton X and Altra Mont Blanc Carbon are vastly superior shoes, for me. For gentler rolling terrain, the Speed Ultra reigns supreme. They're damn near Adios Pro 3s for trail. IMHO, of course. As for the Speed Trail, it's a nice responsive and lightweight trainer that shouldn't be compared to the Speed Ultra. They feel and perform completely different, much like a Takumi Sen versus an Adios Pro 3.
Would you then say the Speed is better for shorter distances (5k, 10k, half)? I’d really like to find a Boston 12 for the trail!!
The Mont Blanc Carbon has been such a pleasant surprise for me! That price though just kills me!
With your point about the lugs being spaced differently, it reminds me of mud tyres on a truck. The more dispersed the lugs, the better they are at performing in mud. Possibly the Speed version is better for muddy conditions?
That's what I would have thought, but the Speed's lugs aren't very deep either, so in deep mud they'll still just slide.
I am having a hard time finding a plated trail shoe that doesn’t want to collapse my ankles…. I ran in the Speed Ultra for a 50k a month ago, but that was around the Zion area so pretty rolling non technical hills. Is the Speed much more stable? I am just about to give up on plated trail shoes. Not worth it IMHO. Thanks for the review!
The speed is a little more stable being lower to the ground and a smidge wider underfoot, but not much though. What other plated shoes have you tried?
@@ConversationalPace Vectiv Pro 2 (very unstable for me, especially in the Rocky Mountains of Utah), Tecton X (which was decent, but haven’t tried out the X2).
Hmm yeah sounds like you're probably better off without the carbon plate and in either something more flexible or lower to the ground (or both)
You had me when you compared the Speeds to Pearl Izumis (and old Kigers). It's probably just nostalgia at this point, but man, I miss the feeling of those shoes.
I still have a trail N1, N2, and N3. Not sure what I'll do with them, but maybe I'll do a throwback review on them sometime 😆
@@ConversationalPace Jesus Christ man, that's like a treasure. I would definitely love to listen to that. And I think I am not the only one, those shoes had a following at some point.
I have 238 miles in the Speed Ultras. I think calling the sizing a mistake is a mistake. I bomb down steep descents on most of my runs (training for Speedgoat) and my toes thank the Adidas designers. The key is lockdown. I did have arch and toe hotspot trouble at Desert Rats, but only had about 25 miles in the shoe at that point. Needed breaking in. Otherwise it was perfect for those surfaces. I tend to get lace bite on my right foot with Adidas racing tongues so I put in tongue pads. My Nike UFs are relegated to puttering around the house and walking the dog. I suspect that nurses would also really like the UFs. But the Agravic Speed Ultra has no competitors at this point IMO.
Personally, I would absolutely go down a half size for my next pair and I'm confident my toes would be just fine. This shoe has just had such a wildly different response from everyone with sizing and I suspect it's a combination of the shape of the rocker relative to the heel and heels are just going to sit back there differently
@@ConversationalPace solid point. I have wide feet and that likely explains the lack of clown-shoe effect.
I have the Ultra in my normals size and since then tried both half size down which would be the right size for me. Made it work in my size but they feel soo much nimbler and racier in the smaller size.
I would love a report on the Speed Ultra after a steep 1000m+ euro style mountain hike up. My calves blew out both times on 30k long runs involving these kinda hikes somewhere in the run. Anybody with a similar experience?
I had that issue the first ~40 miles in the Speed Ultra, but then my legs started to adjust. Either that or the shoes broke in a bit more. I definitely didn't do anything euro steep though!
Great review! Loving the Speed so far. The only thing I’m not crazy about is the outsole and feel Vibram would be a better choice over Continental. Put the outsole from the Kjerag on the Speed and 👌🏼
I wasn't able to tell a difference between continental outsole and Vibram, but I don't regularly run on that tough of terrain either. That Kjerag outsole is tough to beat though!
@@ConversationalPaceyeah I only noticed a difference on wet rock and roots
Thanks for the comparison. In your opinion, is there anything like the Saucony Endorphin Speed for the trails? The plastic rods you described in the Adidas Speed Ultra seemed similar somewhat to the Endorphin Speed’s plastic plate.
The plastic rods are probably about the only similar feeling bit, as the Speed Ultra is just shaped so differently than the Endorphin Speed. Honestly, off the top of my head, the shoe that might come closest to the Endorphin Speed is a Hoka Tecton X 2, as the dimensions are similar and the TX2 has a tiny bit of flex. It is firmer though by a bit
Ive run in the Hoka Tecton X2 and the Nike Ultrafly. I like the ultrafly for the width. Interesting that you think the speed Ultra is so much faster, presumably it is the rocker that makes it so. @@ConversationalPace
Yeah I think it's really all about the shape here. Nike has just of good materials, and I'm sure if it was shaped just like the Speed Ultra, it would be incredible too!
Have you tried the Agravic 3 yet?
Can anyone tell how they would fit in between these two?
I haven't had the chance to run in the Agravic 3, but fro those who I have talked to that have worn it, due to the more normal heel cup, it fits more true to size. For example, I'd wear my usual 10 in the Agravic 3 and a 9.5 in the Agravic Speed and Speed Ultra
I would much prefer you wait to review until you obtain the proper size. I get that you feel pressure to publish or perish, but a lot of review value is lost in sizing complaints and swimming in them for mileage. Oh well. I went 1/2 size down in both models and fit is perfect; a very narrow foot might work at a full size down. I’m delighted with both: the TST is fun and nimble on up to moderate trails, while the TSU’s extra structure adds stability for longer runs. I still want a *full* gusseted tongue, as then a simple gaiter would keep out all gravel
If we had the option to swap sizes on a reasonable timeframe for this review, we would have absolutely done so, but it was tough getting both of these shoes in our regular sizes anyways, so we just had to make do with what we had. Definitely hear you though, it would have been more valuable to have that half size down
As a back of the pack guy I doubt these are for me but thanks for the review....
If your racing is a larger mixture of hiking and running, the Agravic Speed might still be worth looking into 👍
The video I was waiting for, like to it even before watching
Thanks for watching!
To answer your final question about who is going to buy the speed: I’m primarily a road runner, I’m extremely happy with the Speed to use on long moderate trail runs, usually once a week…nothing crazy, 20-25km. The Ultra could do the same job (or even a better one), but I prefer a non plated option for those runs. The fit and the consistency/feeling of the foam under my feet is pretty similar to other Adidas road shoes in my rotation….in fact the fit and the upper is probably better than the Boston’s or the Pro 3. I know my use case is pretty limited!
Thanks for your feedback! That definitely makes a lot of sense
Just got my Speed Ultra juries still out decided to ignore your advice about no good for wide feet blister after 6km 🙄 surprised how good they were down some technical trail & they certainly shift on smooth trails! Surprised nobody’s mentioned how shit the heel is feels worse than the Mont Blanc felt like my feet were trying to escape all run !
I found that the more I wore them and figured out how to lace them up for my foot, the heel hold got better. Really kicking your heels into the back of the shoe before tying them up helped me get a more secure lock back there
@@ConversationalPace Thanks for the tip will be patient with them 👍
Is the cushioning from the Terrex Speed any close to the On Cloud Ultra 2? What one would recommend for a 60mile run?
They're similar thickness, but the speed is much softer feeling than the cloud ultra 2
Another brilliant review gents! One question for those of us strapped for cash, what road to trail shoe would you recommend to both train with and for race days?
What length race would you be training for?
@@ConversationalPace typically 10-20km
This Agravic Speed definitely checks those boxes, but being so new, it might be hard to find on sale. In terms of some great road to trail shoes that you can likely still find last years models on sale for, the Hoka Challenger 6 if you want higher cushion. The Nike Pegasus Trail is a great all around option as well.
Gentlemen thank you again for the honest review.
Thanks for watching!
Would you recommend these for Grindstone 50K? Looking for a race day shoe, however am on slower end with more hiking on climbs. Currently training in Speedgoat 5. Thanks!
Coming from the Speedgoat 5, the Agravic Speed will feel super light and fast, which could be nice for Grindstone! As long as you get the right size, the lockdown on the Agravic Speed can be good enough for any technical bits of trail out there. The continental outsole is great for grip too
Hi guys !
You mentioned the Agravic 3, any plans to try them ?
I have been using these shoes since 100 km and very nicely surprised : feeling very light and fast but protective responsive at the same time. Protects the feet but not too soft. Very nice surprise for me. Wonder if I should try the Speed for their dual foams that are apparently a great combination ?
Thanks
We're definitely interested in testing out the Agravic 3! It sounds like after testing the Speed, I would almost prefer the Agravic 3 on a daily training basis due to the burlier outsole and more traditional heel cup. The Speed is a bit lighter and more nimble of a shoe, which makes it much more approachable for faster days.
Dear frieds, thanks and congrats for your reviews, top!!! I saw your reference to Kjerag, so, main differences and similarities with normal kjerag? Which one is more confortable underfoot and which one protects best in stone terrain, those small and sharp stones? Thanks!!
I was talking about the Kjerag vs Speed (not the Ultra)
They're similar weight, with the Speed having more room in the forefoot and more cushion. The Kjerag feels more nimble and agile over technical terrain. You can feel rocks with both shoes, but there's enough underfoot where it would take a bit to bruise the foot. I was so surprised at the underfoot protection of the Kjerag. It'll really come down to whether you want that firmer, more minimal feel of the Kjerag, or more relaxed and higher cushion feel of the Speed. Hope this helps!
about those sizing issues ... are you sure that if of a shoe a certain size "runs big" that all sizes "run big"?
We had this issue with (I think) the rabbit dream chaser, where my 10 felt true to size, and Finn's 12 felt a little big, so it's tough to say for sure. We've talked to a lot of people and read a ton of other reviews/comments about the sizing, and these ones to seem to consistently run big across the board.
What type of foot shape are these ideal for? I have narrow/high-arch feet. Usually only Nike/Salomon works for me.
You'll probably get a little bit of bunching with the upper as that happened to me, but didn't have any abrasion issues. It's a roomier toe box for sure, but a good lockdown can still be had on a narrower foot. The arch of the Speed Ultra is pretty apparent, so having a higher arch should line up nicely with the shape of the shoe 👍
@@ConversationalPace That's great info, thanks! Bunching is OK if there is a tongue, if it was a bootie-style shoe then it would suck. I was mainly worried about having a baggy midfoot arch area. Also helps if the shoe has a banana shape.
Currently using the brooks catamount 3’s for training and racing since it has a good balance of kinda being able to do it all. For someone who would kinda want one shoe to train and race in would the agravic speed work for that too you think?
Yes definitely, the Agravic Speed would fall right into that category!
Have your thoughts on these shoes changed since interviewing David Roche?
I still don't think it's a 100 mile shoe for me. Perhaps if I spent a considerable amount more time training in it, but it just feels too fast for my 100 mile kind of paces.
That's fair. So, I guess it kinda falls into that broad super shoe limitation of needing to stay within its pace boundaries to feel good.
Speed a budget kjerag?
Definitely has a lot of similaritites! I would say that the Kjerag is still better on technical terrain being a little narrower and having even better lockdown. Great comparison though!
Would you consider the Agravic Speed ultras stable/grippy enough to wear for the speedgoat 50k? For context, did all of my racing including mountainous races up to 50miles and 11k of vert in Kjerags and then ran my first 50k this year (north fork 50k, around 3k not technical vert) in the agravic speed ultras. I’m between running speedgoat 50k in the agravic speed ultras but also considering ordering a new pair of kjerags or maybe even s lab genesis for speedgoat. Thoughts? I’m worried the Agravics are too tippy/not grippy enough for a techs course like speedgoat and that the Kjerags would be better. It Would be nice to have all that foam though!
PS: Brett I’m the guy that asked you as P2P aid station last year if you had any random baller juice. Love the channel and the reviews,always enjoyed and appreciated!
Both the Kjerag and Genesis are going to be more stable than the Speed Ultra on a course like Speedgoat. I'd recommend getting out on similar terrain in the Speed Ultra to see if it's too tippy for you. With how confident I feel in that shoe, I'd be comfortable at speedgoat in it, but that's definitely going to come down to the runner. Hope you find some random baller juice at Speedgoat!
Kjerag upper, this midsole and outsole would be 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥unstoppable
IMO the best race and training shoe ever.
i like adidas' plastic-y mesh uppers (takumi sen as well for example) for lots of reasons but i agree with you on matryx . however, i think both the pulsar 2 and the updated s/lab ultra 3 have superior matryx blends. breathability on both of those shoes is better than the kjerag, and the matryx blends are more comfortable. so i'd say yes to matryx upper, and a quicklace system. Edit : actually, either a quicklace or traditional lacing system would be fine. i think the lacing system on the kjerag leaves somethign to be desired, whereas adidas has it pretty dialed in.
I'm here for the Salomon upper on the Speed ultra frankenshoe!
"Ribbed for your pleasure" LOL.
😂 😂 😂
Hello guys thanks for the review, speaking of sizing it's more like adidas (and other brand) are f*cking ret*ards about that, i go the old adidas ultra speed and 43 1/3 or 9.5 is to small it would be better for me to have 44, i got adidas boston at the same size and it's relly fine i got adizero 7 in 44 and it's to long...and it's even worse when you change of brand (i could go 43 aka 9 for some and 44.5 aka 10.5 for other)...
So maybe when you are speaking about size it's better to add lenght of your feet, like mine are 27cm / 10.63 inches and i use size 44 / 10 and to long/small/perfect. I would be easier to us to relate. More over sometimes brand told to add one size for trail running shooes.
The "Ultra" has more names than a Spanish New World explorer...
🤣 🤣 🤣
My god guys 46 minutes to tell about 2 shoes let’s go here
😂 😂 we could easily spend an hour talking about each shoe! We'll take however much time we need to answer all the hard hitting questions 👍
@@ConversationalPace I hear that no hate. I no a lot of use watch other channels bc they tell what you are telling us but in like 10 minutes
MATRIX STRIKE
Terrex is getting closer!