Thank you for sharing your perspective! I actually got my AF1 (a second hand pair which was practically never been used before) for less than 200 Singapore dollars, which is about US$147 about a year ago. I loved the shoe because it was my first ever racing shoe that I bought (specifically for my half-marathon during that time). I enjoy running in them whenever I do fast. However, I do empathise with you when it comes to stability. It's super unstable and probably the worse shoes I've owned for walking or just standing still. And when I'm in a very slow pace I struggle to make the best out of the AF1s. One year later and I've bought four other shoes for various sort of runs, and I'm beginning to realise that AF1 just aren't that great for someone like me who's still very much new when it comes to the running world. Granted, sentimentally I still love my AF1 and will be using it for my upcoming marathon this December. But once the shoes eventually run out of mileage, I won't get another pair of AFs and I'll gladly try out racing shoes from other brands. Adidas Adizero Adios Pro 3 or the NB Fuelcell Supercomp Elite V3 are on my current watchlist.
Thanks for your thoughts. The AF1 are definitely not meant for walking or running slow. I feel like a baby deer just learning to walk with those wobbly ankles. What other shoes did you buy after the AF1? I can definitely recommend the Adios Pro 3 as a marathon shoe. I enjoy the ride of it much more than the AF, it's more stable and I can run faster in that shoe without feeling like I'm sinking into it too much. Light Strike Pro is also a really resilient foam. It lasts longer than a lot of the other super foams out there. It's a little bit firmer to start off with, but loosens up with some use and feels even better once you put a few miles into it. The outsole of that shoe is also holding up really well. Another recommendation for daily/tempo efforts is the Deviate Nitro 2 from Puma. That has been one of my other favorites of late.
I’m a 190lbs runner. I own a pair of the AF1. I have 200mi on them. I enjoyed them. But, to me they feel like an ex from college. She was new, she was fun, she was fast. But I don’t see myself going back unless there’s a whole revamp. I think I shared too much
Great comment! Love this analogy. Rolling with this, if the Alphafly was my ex, I think that everybody talked her up and I was expecting the world but she looked nothing like her profile picture the actual relationship was disappointing.
I feel similar about the Prime x strung. 300 dollar price point, got “on sale” for 210. I sink into it and while I feel energy return, it’s unstable and feels challenging to get to faster paces .
I 100% agree on the Strung. I got them for $150 on Black Friday. So a great deal. But it's basically just a long run shoe to me. Unstable and too bulky to really get it up to higher paces. Let me know if you want to collaborate on a video in the future. I just figured that I'd put the Alphafly one out there. Has the New Balance SC Elite V3 taken the place of the Alphafly as the best marathon shoe for you these days? I haven't picked that one up, since I'm not a fan of that type of upper and find that FuelCell foam is also too soft for me in a higher stack shoe.
I've been enjoying running in the Endorphin Speed 1's that you previously reviewed. I just picked up a new pair of the Axon 2's for 50 dollars.A great value.Comfortable,well made,great lockdown and they look as though they will last.Maybe you can do a review on them too,if you haven't already.Good luck in your 5k race coming up on Oct 7.A great cause.
Thanks Gary. I had the original Axon and compared them to the original Endorphin shift in a video on my channel. That will be a super durable shoe for $50. A good find. I need to stop buying shoes for a little while and actually wear out some of the ones that I have. Haha.
Thank you for a fun and interesting review. I am a casual fun runner and have AF1/2, VF2, ZF4, TN in my shoe rotation. I like all of these for practicing healthy running form as a casual runner. I think the point is your landing posture. If it draws natural forefoot landing, you will like Nike’s plated shoes. You do not need to be fast for healthy forefoot landing, and I think your measurements are not important.
Thanks for the comment. I'm striking the same in the Vaporfly and Alphafly, but getting very different results. I think that a runner's weight is a big factor with how a shoe performs for them. I tend to have issues with shoes with really soft foam like the NB RC Elite V2. I could never use that shoe for faster paces since I sink too much into the shoe. Lighter runners will compress that foam less and get more energy return from the shoe. I've done really well with the Nike Vaporfly (ticking off miles in the 6:00 minute range for 5k and 10k races and going as fast as 3:38 mile pace in a finishing sprint) but not the Alphafly (I've got that up to 4:53 pace in an all out sprint, but can only average in the 7:00 minute plus range for a continuous effort). I believe it's because I compress the air pods too much and it slows down my cadence. Studies have shown that each strike produces a force equal to 4 times your body weight. So for a 150 pound runner, that is 600 pounds or pressure per step. For me, at 230 pounds, that's 920 pounds. Over 1/3 more weight pushing down on the shoe. If someone takes 1000 strides per mile, that's 5,000 strides in a 5 mile run. For a 150 pound runner that's 1,500 tons of pressure. For a 230 pound runner that's 2,300 tons. Think of it like a suspension on a car versus a truck. A pick up truck needs bigger shocks capable of dealing with the extra weight of that vehicle. It a truck had the same suspension as a mini cooper, it would barely be able to move. I think the airpods lose some of their efficiency because of the extra load being placed on them. I need a firmer midfoot/fore foot in a shoe than what those airpods give me. But, I'm not an engineer. Haha.
@@runwithsean ok. but shoes can endure human weight more than we imagine. but you need proper technique to reduce the effective weight on the shoes by e.g. tilting your body forward. I am not a physicist but have learned by experience that tiling forward can reduce running efforts significantly. and the reason af1 has negative offset is due to the 40mm rule i think.
@@globe8949 Unfortunately, tilting forward doesn't make you weigh any less. It would change the angle that someone's weight is being delivered into the shoe but not reduce your weight. If someone has a more efficient stride, that will help them to run faster with less effort but it will always be harder for a heavier person to run fast for long distances than someone who is lighter. That's why all world class distance runners are so small and light. It's the same reason why small cars have better fuel economy than SUVs. Moving all of that weight takes more horsepower, a bigger engine, etc. Even if you took a fully electric SUV that is very efficient, it will have less range than a sedan with the same battery and motor, since it weighs more, it takes more effort to move. Different shoes have different heel to toe drops, some have a rocker geometry, some have plates, some don't, some have different foams in the heel and forefoot, some have the same foam throughout, some are softer, some are firmer. All of of those shoes will work differently for different people depending on their weight and their footstrike. Some shoes work better for heel strikers and some favor a midfoot strike. Having good form will help you to run more efficiently, but me weighing 115 pounds more than Kipchogue makes a huge difference. Of course he has better form than me and is a world class athlete. But strap a 115 weight vest on him and he'd barely be able to move, even with that great form. He'd also sink much deeper into his Alphaflys like I do. The Alphafly is 40 MM in the heel and 35 in the Forefoot. So it doesn't have a negative drop. But it feels like it does because the foam in the heel is so soft and the aripods and plate in the front are firmer. So when you stand in the shoe or walk in it, you sink back into the heel. It's definitely made only for running. But even if I had perfect form, that shoe would not work for me.
@@runwithseanhi, Sean. thank you for your story. if you think Kipchoge sinks more than you then probably you have a chance with af1. by negative offset of af1 i meant “effective” offset. i think nike cut only rear part when the 40mm rule was newly introduced when nike was nearly ready with af1 for 2020 olympic games.
@@globe8949 I was just saying that Kipchogue would sink much more in the AF and have much different results in that shoe if he was my weight. Although if he was my weight at 5'6'' he would not be running anywhere, except maybe to the hospital (for obesity related treatment). Haha. It absolutely amazes me that he can run as fast as he does for a marathon. At any weight, it's mind blowing.
Definitely not a shoe that you can walk in. Although if someone bought a $275 racing shoe and then walked around in it, that would be pretty dumb. That weird leaning back feeling does go away once you start running in the shoe. But it still feels unstable and unnatural to me.
Interesting. I can't really relate as I am 160 lbs (73kg) and 5'11 but I can easily believe all the things you pointed especially for people who need support on their shoes. I don't. The alphafly has become my racing shoe and the Tempo my training shoe. I qualified and ran Boston with the Alphafly bought during those regular sales for a fraction of the regular price but yeah it is a very technical shoe that is probably not for everyone. The asymetric rubber tip is actually an issue for me on the Alphafly and the Tempo as the ground friction is always on the side of the rubber. Other than that it is ultra responsive for me and unlike other shoes, I feel I can still run while recovering, ah the Tempo, maybe not the AF. I don't train with carbon shoes.
Thanks for your comment. Congrats on the BQ! I know that the Alphafly is a game changer for a lot of people. It can significantly reduce your level or perceived effort and help you get through a long race with that leg saving Zoom X foam. I have had success with other Nike shoes like the Vaporfly. I think I'm just going to stay away from any Nike offering with airpods. I'b be curious to see if any other 200 pound plus runners have had the same experience as me with the Alphafly. However, there are not too many 200 plus pound distance runners. Haha. A lot of distance running tends to make people much lighter than that, but I'm basically the size of an NFL wide receiver (with much less money in my bank account).
I agree that running slow isn't nice and quite unstable. But once I get up to speed I can just squish and bounce in them keeping my heart rate really low. Therefore I've run almost all my races in the last two years in them. (2:47 M, 1:14 HM, 0:34 10k, 0:16 5k)
Those are some really fast times! Congrats! Do you mind sharing your height, weight and age? I’m guessing that you are younger and lighter than me. Haha. I know that this shoes works for a lot of people. I’m just not one of them.
@@runwithsean I'm in my middle twenties. Same height as kipchoge, but 15kg heavier. I guess if I were lighter I would be flying. I have a couple pairs of alphaflies with one having >500km on it. After that mileage the air pods deflated and foam compressed so much, that the shoes tilts outwards and I can no longer run in them. But most of the bounce is still present. It reminds me of the instability in the Prime X, but even more severe.
@@TOXIN543Ah to be young and fast. Haha. I’m 41 now and started running just a few years ago. Glad that you had some great success in the Alphafly. What is your go to marathon shoe these days? Have you tried the Alphafly 2?
@@runwithsean From the carbon plated shoes I've tried all of metaspeed sky's, new balance elites, adios pros and the older models from nike, puma, saucony as well as the atreyu artist and mizuno rebellion pro. I haven't tried the alpfafly 2 or vaporfly 3. From all of them I only raced marathons in the alphafly 1, but I would consider the vaporfly 2, rebellion pro and sc elite v3 as a good alternative. The alphafly works for me, because I've been doing really long tempo runs to improve my form in the later stages of the marathon. As long as I avoid a heel strike the alphafly works perfectly.
@@TOXIN543 Some great insight. And I see that you share my shoe addiction. You have a murders row there of racing options. I love the Vaporfly 2 for shorter races but find it too unstable for me to take for a marathon. I'm going to skip the Vaporfly 3, since from the reviews I've seen I'm concerned about the upper fit and durability. I've still got a lot of miles left in my VF2 as well. I had the original Metaspeed Sky and ran a marathon and a half marathon in that shoe and did pretty well. I had the NB RC Elite V2 and found the FuelCell foam in that shoe too soft to run fast in. So I haven't gone for the V3. How did the Mizuno Rebellion Pro work/feel for you? That's one that I'm curious about. I've never run in a shoe from Mizuno.
indeed I feel the shoe is probably made for lighter runners somehow (with narrower feet), I'm 5"10 and 135lbs, vo2max 66, 1.55m strides, 3:34/km 5k race pace and my PRs are pretty much with the alphafly. I got 4 pairs lol. I liked the vaporfly as well but the alphafly feels just better for me -> more protective and bouncier so I run faster .. I tend to follow reviewers that have the same shape and shoe preference as me for that reason .. but even there, some are heel strikers, some are not, we all have own our "gait cycle", stride length, cadence, speed, etc. It's true that they are loud and not made for walking but this is the price I'm willing to pay for performance ;p Also I have A LOT of shoes and I feel I often need to adjust my foot strike .. imho, some are better for heel striking, some are better for high cadence, etc. For example, with the More V4 and SC trainer, I tend to heel strike for optimum energy return. But with something that has pods such as Alphafly and Tempo Next, it's quite a different sensation, I'm more toward midfoot .. Adidas Prime X is also quite a tall shoe that you need to tame (get used to). With something less protective with a lower stack, I tend to run slower with an higher cadence but with much shorter strides, lower to the ground.
A very thoughtful comment. I appreciate it. Glad that you’ve been able to do so well with this shoe. I guess I have to leave this one to the lighter runners.
They are probably the noisiest running shoe out there. And it's definitely a unique experience running in the Alphafly that is not for everyone. For the people it works for, it's an awesome shoe. But for me and many others, it just doesn't get it done. I remember being really surprised when I ran a half marathon in these how slow I was. I'm always thinking about my foot strike and how I'm landing in this shoe. You want to set it and forget it with a race shoe. Especially one that you'll be running over 3 hours in.
got about 80 miles in my AF1. couldnt really use them bc of arch blisters. but i put in a wider/thicker insole and that fixes that problem. it def makes me run faster, but the instability over a long distance will give me PTT issues.
I have this issue with Nike. They focus so much on world class athletes. Who on average are 120lb or less runners and have small feet. Nike is not good for anyone over size 8-9 shoe. Just my opinion. They do have the best looking shoes for sure.
For me I always have to go a half size up in Nikes and they are always on the narrow side. I don't have a wide foot. So I can make it work with most models, but when a shoe gets too narrow in the midfoot and heel it's tough if you overpronate. That's why I love the Vaporfly for shorter distances but could never take it for a marathon because of the lack of stability. Durability and grip are also two categories where a lot of their competitors have Nike beat. The Alphafly put the break on me when I'm trying to run fast. It works great for some people, but definitely not for me.
Agree with the OP re the weird fit and feeling of instability. But for me that goes away once I get into a run. I am 5'7" and less than 130 lb so may be more suited to these shoes. Overall I do agree that the Vaporfly which I also have are much more versatile all round.
Yep. This shoe is definitely made for running and not for walking. That weird feeling does go away once you start running in the shoe. It helps to get you into a consistent pace and improves efficiency. However, it still feels unnatural to me, even when I get into a pace, and it’s much harder for me to get up to speed and maintain it in the Alphafly compared to the Vaporfly. I’m thinking that it must be the airpods and how my weight affects them. The shoe just doesn’t work for me.
The clicking sound! I got a pair and returned them immediately due to that annoying clicking sound. Mine did that right out of the box. One thing I found about the Alphafly is that it sounds like a horse running down the road. You always know when an Alphafly runner is coming up behind you. Give me the PrimeX Strung all day over this.
It is definitely the loudest shoe that I have. I recommend wearing headphones to keep one’s sanity. Haha. I also prefer the Prime X Strung to this shoe. But neither really suits me well for running fast. I prefer a lower, lighter, more stable shoe. The clicking sound just started on this run. We’ll see if it continues but I don’t plan on putting a ton more miles on this shoe. Unfortunately, it will probably exist for me as a shoe just to measure others against.
Mine haven’t burst yet. But I’ve only got 70 miles in the shoe. I just don’t want to take it out and use it, since it feels so unnatural to me. And man is that shoe loud coming down the road.
We need a shoe that will combine the width of an alphafly with the speed of a vaporfly without airpods. I hope that the zoom fly 6 will be such a combination, although I am concerned about the too soft foam under the heel
Early pictures of the Zoom Fly 6 look like they are essentially combining the Alphafly 3 and Vaporfly 3 without the AirPods. I wonder if that shoe will have real Zoom X in it though and not the recycled Zoom X and carrier foam of the Zoom fly 5. That shoe is just too heavy to use for tempo efforts and it’s seriously lacking energy return compared to true Zoom X shoes. I’ve kind of given up on Nike at the moment. I’m enjoying shoes from ASICS, Adidas and Saucony a lot more. I have my 5k and 10k PB in the Vaporfly 2. But that shoe is too unstable for me and the Vaporfly 3 looked like it is too soft and still very narrow. So I didn’t pick that one up. Currently the fastest shoe that I have ever run in is the ASICS Metaspeed Edge Paris. It’s so light and fast. But also on the narrow side, so I don’t want to take it beyond 13.1. Trying to find my marathon shoe for Chicago later this year. Currently leaning towards the slower, but more stable and comfortable Pro 4 from Saucony. But I have the Superblast 2 coming soon. Hoping that might hit the sweet spot of stability, cushioning and propulsion. It’s too big of a shoe for a 5k PB, but may be perfect for a marathon. We’ll see. I’m also a big guy for a distance runner at 6’4’’ 230 pounds. So I need a shoe with some support for 26.2.
@@OWS777Yes to the Pro 4. No to the Cielo. The Hoka sounded like it was too soft and is also on the heavy side for a racing shoe. I am actually really liking the Pro 4. Ran under a 21 minute 5k in them recently. I think they do better at a little bit slower pace for me though. So they are a contender for my shoe for the Chicago marathon. I really want to see if the Superblast 2 can hold around a 7:15 pace for me on a long run. Really looking forward to trying that one soon.
Hate + Nike? Count me in! After my Pegasus 39 terrible experience, Nike is in my naughty list. And as you say, if a pair of shoes works for someone we're happy for them, but we are all different, someone's dream shoe is another's nightmare. A video with Andrew would be great, if you could please make him do one of the subjects he vowed to never touch in his "ALPHAFLY Killer" video, that would be amazing 🤣
@MidLifeRunner the people are calling for a collaboration. Instead of talking to “other me” you could try “taller me.” Nikes have been hit or miss for me. Some of their shoes are great and other not so much. They all also tend to run on the narrow side and they think that everyone has the thinnest midfoot and heel. I’m going to skip the Vaporfly 3 based on other reviews of it that I’ve seen. I actually just got the Zoom Fly 5 on a big discount. From what I’ve seen, that’s a polarizing shoe. About to go run in them for the first time right now. It looks much wider and stable than a lot of other Nikes. But it’s also a heavy shoe. We’ll see how it goes.
You're heel striking instead of forefoot striking from what i can tell. If you fix that you're probably going to feel differently about the shoe. I don't think it's your size or weight that doesn't work in the shoe i think it's your form if anything is not taking advantage of how the shoe was designed.
I don’t think it’s the heel strike that is the problem. Nick from the run testers ran a 2:29:00 marathon in the Alphafly and loves the shoe. He always talks about how he is a heel striker. He also has a much more slight build. I’m not sure what he weighs, but I’d guess around 125-150 pounds. I’ve seen some studies that say over 90% of runners will heel strike in a marathon. As much as 94% after mile 19 when they get tired. It’s true the elites can maintain a forefoot strike for the full distance. But I know that a lot of casual runners really enjoy Alphafly, even though they are heel strikers. It just feels really unnatural for me to run in. I love the Vaporfly, which uses the same zoom X foam and also has a carbon plate. Something about those airpods just doesn’t work for me.
It's nice that other running brands have really upped their game. I can think of a shoe that I like better than a Nike in every category of running shoe. To me recently Saucony, Adidas and Asics have been putting out some great shoes.
Thank you for sharing your perspective! I actually got my AF1 (a second hand pair which was practically never been used before) for less than 200 Singapore dollars, which is about US$147 about a year ago. I loved the shoe because it was my first ever racing shoe that I bought (specifically for my half-marathon during that time). I enjoy running in them whenever I do fast. However, I do empathise with you when it comes to stability. It's super unstable and probably the worse shoes I've owned for walking or just standing still. And when I'm in a very slow pace I struggle to make the best out of the AF1s.
One year later and I've bought four other shoes for various sort of runs, and I'm beginning to realise that AF1 just aren't that great for someone like me who's still very much new when it comes to the running world. Granted, sentimentally I still love my AF1 and will be using it for my upcoming marathon this December. But once the shoes eventually run out of mileage, I won't get another pair of AFs and I'll gladly try out racing shoes from other brands. Adidas Adizero Adios Pro 3 or the NB Fuelcell Supercomp Elite V3 are on my current watchlist.
Thanks for your thoughts. The AF1 are definitely not meant for walking or running slow. I feel like a baby deer just learning to walk with those wobbly ankles. What other shoes did you buy after the AF1? I can definitely recommend the Adios Pro 3 as a marathon shoe. I enjoy the ride of it much more than the AF, it's more stable and I can run faster in that shoe without feeling like I'm sinking into it too much. Light Strike Pro is also a really resilient foam. It lasts longer than a lot of the other super foams out there. It's a little bit firmer to start off with, but loosens up with some use and feels even better once you put a few miles into it. The outsole of that shoe is also holding up really well. Another recommendation for daily/tempo efforts is the Deviate Nitro 2 from Puma. That has been one of my other favorites of late.
RWS -
You are a credit to your family... Community Work!
👏🏾✊🏾🌹
Thanks for the kind words. It feels good to give back.
I’m a 190lbs runner. I own a pair of the AF1. I have 200mi on them. I enjoyed them. But, to me they feel like an ex from college. She was new, she was fun, she was fast. But I don’t see myself going back unless there’s a whole revamp. I think I shared too much
Great comment! Love this analogy. Rolling with this, if the Alphafly was my ex, I think that everybody talked her up and I was expecting the world but she looked nothing like her profile picture the actual relationship was disappointing.
I feel similar about the Prime x strung. 300 dollar price point, got “on sale” for 210. I sink into it and while I feel energy return, it’s unstable and feels challenging to get to faster paces .
I 100% agree on the Strung. I got them for $150 on Black Friday. So a great deal. But it's basically just a long run shoe to me. Unstable and too bulky to really get it up to higher paces. Let me know if you want to collaborate on a video in the future. I just figured that I'd put the Alphafly one out there. Has the New Balance SC Elite V3 taken the place of the Alphafly as the best marathon shoe for you these days? I haven't picked that one up, since I'm not a fan of that type of upper and find that FuelCell foam is also too soft for me in a higher stack shoe.
I've been enjoying running in the Endorphin Speed 1's that you previously reviewed.
I just picked up a new pair of the Axon 2's for 50 dollars.A great value.Comfortable,well made,great lockdown and they look as though they will last.Maybe you can do a review on them too,if you haven't already.Good luck in your 5k race coming up on Oct 7.A great cause.
Thanks Gary. I had the original Axon and compared them to the original Endorphin shift in a video on my channel. That will be a super durable shoe for $50. A good find. I need to stop buying shoes for a little while and actually wear out some of the ones that I have. Haha.
There we go!
rofl.
I'm with you in camp alphafly.
Nice review
Thanks. Let me know if there is anything that you'd like to see me review.
Thank you for a fun and interesting review. I am a casual fun runner and have AF1/2, VF2, ZF4, TN in my shoe rotation. I like all of these for practicing healthy running form as a casual runner. I think the point is your landing posture. If it draws natural forefoot landing, you will like Nike’s plated shoes. You do not need to be fast for healthy forefoot landing, and I think your measurements are not important.
Thanks for the comment. I'm striking the same in the Vaporfly and Alphafly, but getting very different results. I think that a runner's weight is a big factor with how a shoe performs for them. I tend to have issues with shoes with really soft foam like the NB RC Elite V2. I could never use that shoe for faster paces since I sink too much into the shoe. Lighter runners will compress that foam less and get more energy return from the shoe. I've done really well with the Nike Vaporfly (ticking off miles in the 6:00 minute range for 5k and 10k races and going as fast as 3:38 mile pace in a finishing sprint) but not the Alphafly (I've got that up to 4:53 pace in an all out sprint, but can only average in the 7:00 minute plus range for a continuous effort). I believe it's because I compress the air pods too much and it slows down my cadence. Studies have shown that each strike produces a force equal to 4 times your body weight. So for a 150 pound runner, that is 600 pounds or pressure per step. For me, at 230 pounds, that's 920 pounds. Over 1/3 more weight pushing down on the shoe. If someone takes 1000 strides per mile, that's 5,000 strides in a 5 mile run. For a 150 pound runner that's 1,500 tons of pressure. For a 230 pound runner that's 2,300 tons. Think of it like a suspension on a car versus a truck. A pick up truck needs bigger shocks capable of dealing with the extra weight of that vehicle. It a truck had the same suspension as a mini cooper, it would barely be able to move. I think the airpods lose some of their efficiency because of the extra load being placed on them. I need a firmer midfoot/fore foot in a shoe than what those airpods give me. But, I'm not an engineer. Haha.
@@runwithsean ok. but shoes can endure human weight more than we imagine. but you need proper technique to reduce the effective weight on the shoes by e.g. tilting your body forward. I am not a physicist but have learned by experience that tiling forward can reduce running efforts significantly. and the reason af1 has negative offset is due to the 40mm rule i think.
@@globe8949 Unfortunately, tilting forward doesn't make you weigh any less. It would change the angle that someone's weight is being delivered into the shoe but not reduce your weight. If someone has a more efficient stride, that will help them to run faster with less effort but it will always be harder for a heavier person to run fast for long distances than someone who is lighter. That's why all world class distance runners are so small and light. It's the same reason why small cars have better fuel economy than SUVs. Moving all of that weight takes more horsepower, a bigger engine, etc. Even if you took a fully electric SUV that is very efficient, it will have less range than a sedan with the same battery and motor, since it weighs more, it takes more effort to move.
Different shoes have different heel to toe drops, some have a rocker geometry, some have plates, some don't, some have different foams in the heel and forefoot, some have the same foam throughout, some are softer, some are firmer. All of of those shoes will work differently for different people depending on their weight and their footstrike. Some shoes work better for heel strikers and some favor a midfoot strike. Having good form will help you to run more efficiently, but me weighing 115 pounds more than Kipchogue makes a huge difference.
Of course he has better form than me and is a world class athlete. But strap a 115 weight vest on him and he'd barely be able to move, even with that great form. He'd also sink much deeper into his Alphaflys like I do. The Alphafly is 40 MM in the heel and 35 in the Forefoot. So it doesn't have a negative drop. But it feels like it does because the foam in the heel is so soft and the aripods and plate in the front are firmer. So when you stand in the shoe or walk in it, you sink back into the heel. It's definitely made only for running. But even if I had perfect form, that shoe would not work for me.
@@runwithseanhi, Sean. thank you for your story. if you think Kipchoge sinks more than you then probably you have a chance with af1. by negative offset of af1 i meant “effective” offset. i think nike cut only rear part when the 40mm rule was newly introduced when nike was nearly ready with af1 for 2020 olympic games.
@@globe8949 I was just saying that Kipchogue would sink much more in the AF and have much different results in that shoe if he was my weight. Although if he was my weight at 5'6'' he would not be running anywhere, except maybe to the hospital (for obesity related treatment). Haha. It absolutely amazes me that he can run as fast as he does for a marathon. At any weight, it's mind blowing.
I agree on what you said about the negative drop
Definitely not a shoe that you can walk in. Although if someone bought a $275 racing shoe and then walked around in it, that would be pretty dumb. That weird leaning back feeling does go away once you start running in the shoe. But it still feels unstable and unnatural to me.
Interesting. I can't really relate as I am 160 lbs (73kg) and 5'11 but I can easily believe all the things you pointed especially for people who need support on their shoes. I don't.
The alphafly has become my racing shoe and the Tempo my training shoe. I qualified and ran Boston with the Alphafly bought during those regular sales for a fraction of the regular price but yeah it is a very technical shoe that is probably not for everyone. The asymetric rubber tip is actually an issue for me on the Alphafly and the Tempo as the ground friction is always on the side of the rubber. Other than that it is ultra responsive for me and unlike other shoes, I feel I can still run while recovering, ah the Tempo, maybe not the AF. I don't train with carbon shoes.
Thanks for your comment. Congrats on the BQ! I know that the Alphafly is a game changer for a lot of people. It can significantly reduce your level or perceived effort and help you get through a long race with that leg saving Zoom X foam. I have had success with other Nike shoes like the Vaporfly. I think I'm just going to stay away from any Nike offering with airpods. I'b be curious to see if any other 200 pound plus runners have had the same experience as me with the Alphafly. However, there are not too many 200 plus pound distance runners. Haha. A lot of distance running tends to make people much lighter than that, but I'm basically the size of an NFL wide receiver (with much less money in my bank account).
@@runwithsean :-)
I agree that running slow isn't nice and quite unstable. But once I get up to speed I can just squish and bounce in them keeping my heart rate really low. Therefore
I've run almost all my races in the last two years in them. (2:47 M, 1:14 HM, 0:34 10k, 0:16 5k)
Those are some really fast times! Congrats! Do you mind sharing your height, weight and age? I’m guessing that you are younger and lighter than me. Haha. I know that this shoes works for a lot of people. I’m just not one of them.
@@runwithsean I'm in my middle twenties. Same height as kipchoge, but 15kg heavier. I guess if I were lighter I would be flying.
I have a couple pairs of alphaflies with one having >500km on it. After that mileage the air pods deflated and foam compressed so much, that the shoes tilts outwards and I can no longer run in them. But most of the bounce is still present. It reminds me of the instability in the Prime X, but even more severe.
@@TOXIN543Ah to be young and fast. Haha. I’m 41 now and started running just a few years ago. Glad that you had some great success in the Alphafly. What is your go to marathon shoe these days? Have you tried the Alphafly 2?
@@runwithsean From the carbon plated shoes I've tried all of metaspeed sky's, new balance elites, adios pros and the older models from nike, puma, saucony as well as the atreyu artist and mizuno rebellion pro. I haven't tried the alpfafly 2 or vaporfly 3. From all of them I only raced marathons in the alphafly 1, but I would consider the vaporfly 2, rebellion pro and sc elite v3 as a good alternative. The alphafly works for me, because I've been doing really long tempo runs to improve my form in the later stages of the marathon. As long as I avoid a heel strike the alphafly works perfectly.
@@TOXIN543 Some great insight. And I see that you share my shoe addiction. You have a murders row there of racing options. I love the Vaporfly 2 for shorter races but find it too unstable for me to take for a marathon. I'm going to skip the Vaporfly 3, since from the reviews I've seen I'm concerned about the upper fit and durability. I've still got a lot of miles left in my VF2 as well. I had the original Metaspeed Sky and ran a marathon and a half marathon in that shoe and did pretty well. I had the NB RC Elite V2 and found the FuelCell foam in that shoe too soft to run fast in. So I haven't gone for the V3.
How did the Mizuno Rebellion Pro work/feel for you? That's one that I'm curious about. I've never run in a shoe from Mizuno.
indeed I feel the shoe is probably made for lighter runners somehow (with narrower feet), I'm 5"10 and 135lbs, vo2max 66, 1.55m strides, 3:34/km 5k race pace and my PRs are pretty much with the alphafly. I got 4 pairs lol. I liked the vaporfly as well but the alphafly feels just better for me -> more protective and bouncier so I run faster .. I tend to follow reviewers that have the same shape and shoe preference as me for that reason .. but even there, some are heel strikers, some are not, we all have own our "gait cycle", stride length, cadence, speed, etc. It's true that they are loud and not made for walking but this is the price I'm willing to pay for performance ;p Also I have A LOT of shoes and I feel I often need to adjust my foot strike .. imho, some are better for heel striking, some are better for high cadence, etc. For example, with the More V4 and SC trainer, I tend to heel strike for optimum energy return. But with something that has pods such as Alphafly and Tempo Next, it's quite a different sensation, I'm more toward midfoot .. Adidas Prime X is also quite a tall shoe that you need to tame (get used to). With something less protective with a lower stack, I tend to run slower with an higher cadence but with much shorter strides, lower to the ground.
A very thoughtful comment. I appreciate it. Glad that you’ve been able to do so well with this shoe. I guess I have to leave this one to the lighter runners.
Agree, I believe tho it's the yr of new balance ..they have some sweet shoes coming out pacer , SC trainer v3 ,and more v5 And Also Altra
Saucouny has been putting out some really good shoes lately too. It's nice that there are so many strong options to choose from.
Stuffed up my plantar in just 1 run! And had a weird ticking noise the whole run! Sold them straight away
They are probably the noisiest running shoe out there. And it's definitely a unique experience running in the Alphafly that is not for everyone. For the people it works for, it's an awesome shoe. But for me and many others, it just doesn't get it done. I remember being really surprised when I ran a half marathon in these how slow I was. I'm always thinking about my foot strike and how I'm landing in this shoe. You want to set it and forget it with a race shoe. Especially one that you'll be running over 3 hours in.
got about 80 miles in my AF1. couldnt really use them bc of arch blisters. but i put in a wider/thicker insole and that fixes that problem. it def makes me run faster, but the instability over a long distance will give me PTT issues.
Agreed. My longest run in this shoe is 13.1. I don't think that I could take them up to a full marathon without getting some type of injury.
I have this issue with Nike. They focus so much on world class athletes. Who on average are 120lb or less runners and have small feet. Nike is not good for anyone over size 8-9 shoe. Just my opinion. They do have the best looking shoes for sure.
For me I always have to go a half size up in Nikes and they are always on the narrow side. I don't have a wide foot. So I can make it work with most models, but when a shoe gets too narrow in the midfoot and heel it's tough if you overpronate. That's why I love the Vaporfly for shorter distances but could never take it for a marathon because of the lack of stability. Durability and grip are also two categories where a lot of their competitors have Nike beat. The Alphafly put the break on me when I'm trying to run fast. It works great for some people, but definitely not for me.
Agree with the OP re the weird fit and feeling of instability. But for me that goes away once I get into a run. I am 5'7" and less than 130 lb so may be more suited to these shoes. Overall I do agree that the Vaporfly which I also have are much more versatile all round.
Yep. This shoe is definitely made for running and not for walking. That weird feeling does go away once you start running in the shoe. It helps to get you into a consistent pace and improves efficiency. However, it still feels unnatural to me, even when I get into a pace, and it’s much harder for me to get up to speed and maintain it in the Alphafly compared to the Vaporfly. I’m thinking that it must be the airpods and how my weight affects them. The shoe just doesn’t work for me.
The clicking sound! I got a pair and returned them immediately due to that annoying clicking sound. Mine did that right out of the box. One thing I found about the Alphafly is that it sounds like a horse running down the road. You always know when an Alphafly runner is coming up behind you. Give me the PrimeX Strung all day over this.
It is definitely the loudest shoe that I have. I recommend wearing headphones to keep one’s sanity. Haha. I also prefer the Prime X Strung to this shoe. But neither really suits me well for running fast. I prefer a lower, lighter, more stable shoe. The clicking sound just started on this run. We’ll see if it continues but I don’t plan on putting a ton more miles on this shoe. Unfortunately, it will probably exist for me as a shoe just to measure others against.
actually the clicking sound can easily be removed by spraying WD40 around the pods, since the clicking sound is just the sound of friction.
@@daniaaal Thanks for the tip. Interesting though that I have to treat one of my running shoes like a squeaky door hinge. Haha.
i find you dont get much bounce if you dont mid or forefoot strike on the alphafly. I love the alphafly especially the v1.
I’m glad that shoe works well for you. I know of lot of heel strikers that like it as well. It’s just not the right shoe for me.
Agree
One more issue is, similar to the Tempo NEXT% the air bubbles will burst eventually
Mine haven’t burst yet. But I’ve only got 70 miles in the shoe. I just don’t want to take it out and use it, since it feels so unnatural to me. And man is that shoe loud coming down the road.
We need a shoe that will combine the width of an alphafly with the speed of a vaporfly without airpods. I hope that the zoom fly 6 will be such a combination, although I am concerned about the too soft foam under the heel
Early pictures of the Zoom Fly 6 look like they are essentially combining the Alphafly 3 and Vaporfly 3 without the AirPods. I wonder if that shoe will have real Zoom X in it though and not the recycled Zoom X and carrier foam of the Zoom fly 5.
That shoe is just too heavy to use for tempo efforts and it’s seriously lacking energy return compared to true Zoom X shoes.
I’ve kind of given up on Nike at the moment. I’m enjoying shoes from ASICS, Adidas and Saucony a lot more.
I have my 5k and 10k PB in the Vaporfly 2. But that shoe is too unstable for me and the Vaporfly 3 looked like it is too soft and still very narrow. So I didn’t pick that one up.
Currently the fastest shoe that I have ever run in is the ASICS Metaspeed Edge Paris. It’s so light and fast. But also on the narrow side, so I don’t want to take it beyond 13.1. Trying to find my marathon shoe for Chicago later this year. Currently leaning towards the slower, but more stable and comfortable Pro 4 from Saucony. But I have the Superblast 2 coming soon. Hoping that might hit the sweet spot of stability, cushioning and propulsion. It’s too big of a shoe for a 5k PB, but may be perfect for a marathon. We’ll see. I’m also a big guy for a distance runner at 6’4’’ 230 pounds. So I need a shoe with some support for 26.2.
@@runwithsean Have you tried hoka cielo x1 or saucony endorphin pro 4? I heard it’s more stable than nike/asics shoes
@@OWS777Yes to the Pro 4. No to the Cielo. The Hoka sounded like it was too soft and is also on the heavy side for a racing shoe.
I am actually really liking the Pro 4. Ran under a 21 minute 5k in them recently. I think they do better at a little bit slower pace for me though. So they are a contender for my shoe for the Chicago marathon. I really want to see if the Superblast 2 can hold around a 7:15 pace for me on a long run. Really looking forward to trying that one soon.
Hate + Nike? Count me in!
After my Pegasus 39 terrible experience, Nike is in my naughty list. And as you say, if a pair of shoes works for someone we're happy for them, but we are all different, someone's dream shoe is another's nightmare.
A video with Andrew would be great, if you could please make him do one of the subjects he vowed to never touch in his "ALPHAFLY Killer" video, that would be amazing 🤣
@MidLifeRunner the people are calling for a collaboration. Instead of talking to “other me” you could try “taller me.” Nikes have been hit or miss for me. Some of their shoes are great and other not so much. They all also tend to run on the narrow side and they think that everyone has the thinnest midfoot and heel. I’m going to skip the Vaporfly 3 based on other reviews of it that I’ve seen. I actually just got the Zoom Fly 5 on a big discount. From what I’ve seen, that’s a polarizing shoe. About to go run in them for the first time right now. It looks much wider and stable than a lot of other Nikes. But it’s also a heavy shoe. We’ll see how it goes.
You're heel striking instead of forefoot striking from what i can tell. If you fix that you're probably going to feel differently about the shoe. I don't think it's your size or weight that doesn't work in the shoe i think it's your form if anything is not taking advantage of how the shoe was designed.
I don’t think it’s the heel strike that is the problem. Nick from the run testers ran a 2:29:00 marathon in the Alphafly and loves the shoe. He always talks about how he is a heel striker. He also has a much more slight build. I’m not sure what he weighs, but I’d guess around 125-150 pounds. I’ve seen some studies that say over 90% of runners will heel strike in a marathon. As much as 94% after mile 19 when they get tired.
It’s true the elites can maintain a forefoot strike for the full distance. But I know that a lot of casual runners really enjoy Alphafly, even though they are heel strikers. It just feels really unnatural for me to run in. I love the Vaporfly, which uses the same zoom X foam and also has a carbon plate. Something about those airpods just doesn’t work for me.
Parce que tu ne sais pas les porter t’as les pieds plats c’est tout !
No. I do not have flat feet and am entitled to not like a shoe. C’est tout!
AGREED 150%..ALPHAFLY SUCKS I PERSONALLY DONT AND WONT EVER BUY NIKE AT ALL...EVER I DONT SUPPORT SLAVE LABOR..KINGS OF SWEATSHOPS.
It's nice that other running brands have really upped their game. I can think of a shoe that I like better than a Nike in every category of running shoe. To me recently Saucony, Adidas and Asics have been putting out some great shoes.