The change has been strictly the visual design of the heel counter. The look and design of the heel counter has been changed for this edition. The wider than average toebox gives you ample room to spread out. This was an effective change as I noticed how my feet were landing on my stride. The was done in hopes to allow the forefoot to spread out in a natural way while you run. This mesh material lacks the rigid structure compared to many other stability shoes in which I have run.Īs a stability runner the structure provided by the upper helps hold your foot in place while you stride, and this is important.Īnother change they made to the upper the location of the laces. It also handles the weather and the elements comfortably.
By using an engineered mesh as the main material, Nike was able to make the shoe breathable and durable. They used their flyknit design which helps you lock your foot into the shoe. Nike made some updates to the upper to improve the shoe. I knew I wasn’t going to have to worry about staying on my feet in these in any conditions. This included grass, crushed limestone and cement for surfaces I ran on along with rain or shine for weather. The traction provided by the outsole handled every surface I on which I tested it. On the other side, the outsole provided a highlight for the sole unit. After a while, I felt my legs and feet tire because I was fighting the shoe. The Zoom Structures absorbed the impact of my feet hitting the ground nicely but failed to return any bounce. With new technologies, many shoes have become adept at absorbing the impact of your foot striking the ground and returning the energy through bounce on your toe off. The stiffness, however, was not alone in bothering me, the sole unit felt completely unresponsive. The whole shoe was stiff, but especially the sole. It almost felt as if the sole unit never truly broke in, as my feet had to adjust to the shoe on every run. It took 1.5 to 2 miles on each run before I began to feel comfortable. This feeling of unbalance became more evident the longer I ran. If the heel were lower to the ground, giving a more grounded feel and platform, it would help provide more support and stability. This was mostly due to the height of the heel. The Dynamic support of the sole unit which i felt more closer to the heel felt unbalanced. It took my feet 1.5 miles to truly feel comfortable in them. My first run out of the box was a relaxed 3.5 miles. The upper – recently updated on this model – felt plush with plenty of room for my foot to move. When I slipped them on for the first time I was surprised by how firm they felt. I was intrigued by the flyknit lacing system. The inside of the foot lacks a swoosh, which is more visually appealing. The heel became my favorite part of the design because of how it flashed while on a run. The navy blue mixes well with the orange-peel swoosh and the crimson flash heel. Upon opening the box, I was extremely impressed with the colorway and design of the shoe. Those models run anywhere from 110 to 130, while the Zoom Structure are right in the middle with a price tag of 120. The ride of the Zoom Structures is comparable in stability and cushion to an Asics 2000 or the aforementioned Brooks Ravenna. I found the cushioning and stability similar to that of a Saucony Guide rather than an Omni, or a Brooks Ravenna more than an Adrenaline. The Zoom Structures has many competitors in terms of price, ride and stability. While the Odyssey is build for performance stability, the Zoom Structure are build to be a daily trainer. The Nike Zoom Structure are one of two stability options Nike offers. So when given the chance to review a pair I decided it was time. Nike isn’t the first brand I associate with running.
In all my years, I have never ran in a pair of Nikes.
0 kommentar(er)
