TL;DR The Dynafish Danian is a fun, snappy hyperlight workout shoe ruined by poor plate design. It hurts performance and durability. The plate should NOT break in half with standard use from a lighter runner. 

I'm aware Dynafish is a new company and this was their first shoe (the Xiaonian is unbelievably good and very durable at 360km) but this is still unacceptable. I've contacted Dynafish to let them know of the issue. 

**Runner Stats:**

Weight: 65kg

Height: 180cm

5K: 19:30

Workouts done in the shoes: Intervals, tempo runs, 5k PB attempt

Other shoes ran in: Vaporfly 2, Vaporfly 4, Adios Pro 3, Novablast 5, Pegasus 41, Ultraboost 5X, Dynafish Xiaonian

**General Durability**

Aside from the plate (which I'll get to) the shoes were looking pretty promising. I know the foam will die eventually but that's expected for such a soft bouncy foam. 

The outsole is holding out great, there's large sections of exposed foam but it's holding up much better than my vaporflys at the same mileage. The CPU is incredibly durable as expected with literally no visible wear. 

**Plate Performance**

Performance wise the plate causes issues. It's highly stiff (Dynafish shows it as having a plate and bars that go lengthways to strengthen it further) and only spans 3/4 length, meaning you can't really heel strike.

The main issue is the height. It's right on top of the shoe which makes it harsh, especially when forefoot striking. I didn't really notice at first but the harshness gets uncomfortable at a certain point. I actually bruised the bottom of my foot after a tough interval session. 

**Snapped Plate**

In my last session the plate snapped during a 200m interval. I wasn't doing anything outside of normal use, I hear a crack from the right shoe and the plates gone. 

I've ran the exact same workout in 2 generations of Vaporfly and the Adios Pro 3 and I've never had any issues even with much higher mileage. Obviously I can't run in them anymore 

From what I know it's likely a combination of a super stiff, reinforced plate that is only 3/4 length right at the top of the shoe. The combination of a stiff plate and really squishy foam also likely contributed, like the issues adidas had with the AP4 going to new lightstrike pro. 

I'm aware that not everyone will have this issue but for a break to happen I'd assume there is an issue with their design. I've seen Dynafish are developing an 'unbreakable' carbon plate and that can't come soon enough.

It's extremely disappointing because it's a fun (if flawed) shoe that I enjoyed running in even if I didn't use it much. Hopefully their next carbon plated shoe doesn't repeat these mistakes. 

Shoe: Nike ACG Zegma Trail. US size 11

Runner Profile: 6', 175lbs. I typically run 6 miles x3 times per week at a jogging pace (8:00-10:00 minute miles). Occasionally I'll run a 1/2 marathon (typically a 1:45-ish time for road, 2:00 for trail).

Use Case / Reason for Buying: I bought this for trail running, backpacking, and potentially as an option for my next trail 1/2. My Hoka SpeedGoat 6s died early, and these had better step-in feel and toe room than the SpeedGoat 7 did, so I figured I'd give them a shot.

Fit Impressions: My Brannock device size is 10.5, but I have a high mid foot and prefer to have some toe splay, so all of my running shoes (except for the Neo Vista 2) are size 11. These fit perfectly. The toe box feels similar to Norda: Not too wide like Altra, but wider than Hoka or past Nike shoes. They have enough stretch to slip on easily, but also good lockdown so your foot won't slide forward when going downhill. While breathable enough, the upper is not a fancy MATRYX or anything like that, and does feel like it won't be quick drying like some more expensive trail shoes. Sometimes I find the "collar" fabric on shoes to be irritating, but these ones are pretty soft and minimal - I don't notice them at all.

Random Insole Note: These have a glued-in insole. I'm not sure why they did this for a trail shoe. This just makes it more difficult to knock dirt out of the shoe... and if you pull the insole off of the adhesive to remove it anyway, the resulting sticky surface will probably just end up collecting sand and dust. I'm not going to list this as a "negative" just yet, because I haven't gotten this dirty enough to matter, but it could be a pain if the ankle collar doesn't do its job perfectly.

Walking Impressions: The 4mm drop is immediately noticeable, and because of that these feel more like a Hoka Bondi than a Nike shoe. They have that ultra-thick-forefoot sensation, and a rocker that drops away quickly when walking. These would be pretty great daily casual shoes for people who just end up using them for that. I know this isn't a backpacking subreddit... but if hiking with a very heavy pack, these won't give you the firm stability that a boot or Norda 001 gives you (even though stability when running is good).

First Run Impressions: I took these for a short 4 mile test run through some easy single-track trails in the woods. Trail feel is very minimal (even less than the SpeedGoat 6, which was already minimal). The flip side of that is that comfort was great: the ZoomX is quite soft, but stability doesn't suffer at all. There is a tiny bit of energy return, more than the SpeedGoat but less than something like the AeroGlide 3. This first test didn't have tricky enough terrain to properly test out traction, but early impressions were good. Overall... not mind-blowing, but also no issues and very comfortable. They do feel like an upgrade over the SpeedGoat6.

TLDR on my 1st Impressions:

Positives:

• Fit is great: good ankle collar, wide-but-not-too-wide toe box, true to size
• Looks way better than a Hoka, but the ride is very similar to the SpeedGoat
• Soft (1st run was just 4 miles, but will be comfortable for longer)

Negatives:

• The upper doesn't seem like it will be quick drying
• Soft (very little ground feel at all)

It usually takes ~30 miles for me to form an opinion on a shoe, I have seen questions about this daily trainer pop up a few times on r/AskRunningShoeGeeks so figured I would post a full review.

Tl;dr of review: A perfectly adequate shoe for my specific use case, but not a shoe I "love" in a world of race-foam supertrainers

About Me

5'11 190lbs 33M, running ~40-60mpw base building before the Pfitz 18/70 plan for my fall marathon. Marathon PR of 3:49 though I have been focusing on shorter distances recently and my most recent race PR is a 45:30 10k. Hoping to go sub-3:40 for my next marathon. Easy pace is normally 9:20-10:00 and I have only run easy paces in this shoe save for a few strides.

Generally I am a midfoot striker however heel scuff when fatigue creeps in which impacts the durability of my shoes. I have a flat wider midfoot and narrow heels with a low volume instep, which can make finding shoes that fit me well a challenge.

Current shoe rotation: Supernova Rise 3 (shorter daily miles), Vomero Plus (longer daily miles), EVO SL (speed work), Superblast 3 (long runs/longer workouts), Adios Pro 4 (races)

Past shoes I loved: Superblast 1, Superblast 2, Triumph 21, Magic Speed 3, Saucony Hurricane 24

Past shoes I tried and did not like/did not fit: Megablast (wanted to love but the toebox was too narrow), Glycerin Max (bricks), RAD UFO (heel slip), Pegasus 40/41 (too narrow), anything Hoka (too narrow), Saucony Triumph 23 (bricks and felt like a 14mm heel drop)

About the shoe/Sizing

I purchased this shoe to have a more "boring" daily trainer with a <40mm stack to complement the fact that most of my miles are in the Vomero Plus/Superblast 3. I am a US10.5 consistently across all brand and usually normal width save for New Balance where I am a 2E. The Rise 3 fit great at my usual 10.5. The toebox is roomy though slightly tapered and the midfoot is on the narrower end but not enough to cause issues with my borderline-wide feet.

I opted for the white colorway as I usually gravitate towards white or neon colorways and really dig the clean look of the shoe.

I use this in my rotation for my shorter easy runs of the week which usually are 4-7 miles (the "General Aerobic" runs of the Pfitz base building plan).

Upper: 3/5

The shoe is very comfortable upon step-in with a midfoot that hugs the foot without being restrictive. The heel counter is comfortable however with its heel cup design I have had some minor issues with heel slippage. I do have narrower heels so this is a fairly common issue for me. Tightening the laces solved this on the run without lacebite however a runners' loop did not work. The main concern is breathability - RunRepeat gave this a 3/5 but we are going through a week of 70+ swampy temps in the American South and you can definitely notice the lack of ventilation after some time on feet. If this trend continues when temperatures climb into the low-80s it may have to be retired until fall. If breathability is not a concern I would consider this an overall solid upper for its price point.

Midsole/ride: 3/5

As expected, this shoe is pleasantly boring. It is very reminiscent of the NB 880 v14 which I enjoyed though with a slightly more modern bounce due to the PEBA Dreamstrike. With its wider platform + lack of rocker it is a shoe that encourages a midfoot strike, and as long as my form is maintained it disappears underfoot. One interesting thing I have noticed in reviewing Strava data is I usually run in this shoe a tad faster at the same heart rate than my Vomero Plus, which is counterintuitive but worth sharing. The narrower midfoot + wide base combined for a stable ride. The ride is also much stiffer than expected for a shoe of its stack height, likely due to the amount of rubber coverage. RunRepeat does call this out in their review.

Outsole/durability: 4/5

The outsole rubber is similar to the Adios Pro 4 to where it even had that ridiculous squeakiness when I first was trying it around the house; that has since gone away after a few runs but the grip is well above what I have experienced in other daily trainers. I have not encountered many wet conditions but I anticipate this would be a great shoe where grip is a concern. With the amount of rubber coverage I would also expect durability to be excellent and 34 miles in has virtually no wear.

Final thoughts/Overall: 3/5

This shoe fits well for my very specific use case of wanting a "boring", moderately-stacked daily trainer without high-end race foam to have some variety in my rotation. I purchased it for $112 with an Adidas discount which is a good value for its anticipated durability. It is not a shoe I would pay $140 retail for considering for $10 more you can get the Saucony Azura or the SB2 on discount. If you are looking for a similar use case I would recommend it over the Pegasus or 880 series that I have both tried in comparison (note have not tried the Pegasus 42 which I understand was a decent update). Overall, not a shoe I would stock up on or have a backup pair waiting, but will assess shoe deals when it approaches end of life and could see myself buying again on a good discount.

*Edited post to correct mobile formatting errors.

not for me but maybe someone likes these ...

Via runneralerts on instagram

I even been waiting on these. Can’t wait. May 21

These are women’s sizes. A quick google search says: drop down by 1 full US size to get the correct men’s equivalent (e.g., a women's US 8.5 is a men's US 7.5). Adidas uses the exact same platform and width for both genders. [1, 2, 3]

They have sizes 10.5-12 available as of this post.

This is a crazy deal- I already have them otherwise I’d buy.

https://www.sierra.com/item~p~9pvxt-01-11/?cid=Sierra:eComm:PerformanceMax:Google:Catchall_TestGroup:23677606546&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=23667553914&gbraid=0AAAAAqunGwXXQK8YyI_DNmUxyXTTp4gW2&gclid=Cj0KCQjwlLDQBhDjARIsAPlIefHZkDARCW9k_VHvoIDMFYA5zFwI8gNZIKsu92hkypjI2hx2s0-2psEaAoAvEALw_wcB

*Edit- there may be width differences between Men’s and Women’s. I can’t find anything definitive on the width. Worth the gamble IMO- Sierra is a real store and has a 40 day return policy

https://www.sneakerfreaker.com/performance/releases/adidas-evo-sl-great-wave-off-kanagawa-KH8448-price-buy-release-date

🥵

About me: M41, 6’1, 180 pounds. Marathon pace: 7:45/mile, easy pace 8:15-8:45/mile

Sizing is TTS, maybe a touch snug but not enough for me to size up.

I have used this shoe for the last month, now have over 35 miles on it with a long run of 11 miles, some easier runs and even a tempo run. Knowing the profile of the Skyward X, that might surprise some but this has genuinely become a more versatile shoe.

Starting with the upper, this feels very traditional Hoka. For my narrow feet, it’s very secure and comfortable. Heel collar is padded and there is some padding over the tongue to prevent lace bite. Decently breathable too-my 11 miler this morning was in some sticky humidity but my feet did not overheat. If Hoka’s fit doesn’t work for you, I don’t think this will but those who know what they’re getting with Hoka will feel right at home.

The ride and midsole here is vastly improved for me. Whereas v1 was far too clunky, the reduced weight and stack of v2 make this much easier to take out on a variety of runs. It can even do a slight bit of tempo now, but is just as happy plodding along at recovery pace. The sensation I’m getting is a pleasant, bouncy Peba feeling, with a very stable broad base and bottom EVA layer. There is more pop from the plate here and it helps keep paces ticking along even when you pull back, effort wise. The shoe seems to do a lot of work for you. Stable, bouncy, protective in a comfortable package is a great combo when you’re putting a lot of miles through your legs and indeed my legs feel fresh after every run in this. This shoe would be a great companion for anyone loading up miles for a marathon training block.

Outsole is standard Hoka fare. I’m seeing some cosmetic wear on the exposed rubber but seems to be holding up well. Overall, quite happy so far. I think the changes Hoka made to reduce stack by 2mm and weight make this a shoe that has a lot more use cases. Happy to answer questions.

Hello pals,

Just dropping my review of this IMHO amazing stability trainer from Hoka, which immensively helped me to recover from an IT band injury.

1. Context of the review

After 108 km of running in them, I believe I can give you a nice overlook of pros and cons of these amazing shoes.

I am not affiliated with the brand or sponsored by it

2. Context of the runner (me)

Amateur runner, 176 cm tall (5'9 for the non metrics), 71 kg ( 156 lb for the non metrics).

My feet are size 10.5 US, 44.5 EU. Narrow feet and narrow ankles. I am a mid foot striker.

I over pronate a bit, as a result of weak arch support. Normally I can use neutral shoes provided that I put orthotics insoles in my shoes.

I love to race 10 km and half marathons. My race pace is 4'30 min/km for the 10 km races and around 4'50-5'10 min/km for the half marathon.

3. Why did I buy these shoes?

As a new fun hobby I decided to try trail running... but running downhill got me an annoying injury to my IT band, which got inflamed and made it impossible for me to run more than 3 km on flat road (or treadmill even).

With the physio and the orthopedic doctor, we decided to switch to stability shoes to help offsetting my mild over pronation during recovery. After a bit of research, I decided to buy the Hoka Arahi 8.

4. What did I use these shoes for?

These shoes were intended for easy run and long recovery run. But then I tested them also for shorter and a bit faster workout.

Pace ranging from 5:10 min/km to 6:50 min/km, distances from 6 km to 16 km.

5. Short review (for longer see below)

Pros:

• great design with a first soft midsole that absorbs impacts and a second H-frame stiff midsole that provides stability

• very lightweight for a stability shoes

• beautiful rocker geometry that helps you flowing in long runs

• outsole with a ton of grip, even in difficult conditions

Cons:

• upper is warm and doesn't provide much transpiration

• impossible to push tempo runs

6. Overall judgement ( long review)

These shoes are phenomenal stability shoes: they are light (265 grams) - much lighter than the competitors, but very stable. I would say almost as stable as the last iterations of the Asics Kayanos or the Nike Structure which weigh around 300 grams for my size.

They have a generous rocker that puts your feet into a flow state. The bottom of the shoes is not super firm, but the stability is provided by this H-frame midsole of very hard EVA compression molded foam (or should I call it rubber at this point?).

As a result the shoes doesn't feel clunky or dead as many other stability shoes (except the Kayanos maybe) even if the foam is not "bouncy" or "springy". Thanks to the rocker geometry, the feet roll one step after the other and long runs happen very easily. The rocker is just amazing and it is able to pick up pace pretty well... Until you hit a wall because there is little to non energy return.

I tried to do some tempo runs with them, but faster than 4:50 min/km I felt like I was using all the energy in my feet and calfs to try to bend a brick. It's not what they are made for.

These shoes work well for all possible striking patterns and that for me it's a must because I tend to strike on the heels when I run slower than 6 min/km, while I strike well in the mid foot as I pick up the pace.

The outsole has an amazing grip, even in wet or muddy conditions, because it has "lugs" similarly to gravel shoes. The midsole is the classic EVA foam, which is thick enough to dampen most of shocks, but hey, it's not a Superblast 3! I would say it is average softness, similar to Hoka Bondi. It really absorbs shocks, but the energy return is very low... It acts a damper.

The H-frame is what makes the shoes stiff and stable. Not the midsole.

Stability is also boosted by a very plush and stiff heel cup. With these shoes I always feel safe that my ankle are protected against spraining.

The upper is durable and well put together... But it is warm and there is not so much transpiration. I live in north Europe, so that is almost a positive feature, but for milder weather, you might sweat a lot.

As a bonus, the upper is equipped with several light reflecting patches.

I wanted to preface this post with a few words to say that this is not a shoe review in its traditional sense. If you would like to see my review on the shoe, I invite you to read this review, which I wrote shortly after the mass launch last year. I have since then ran two pairs of Evo SL into the ground and covered nearly 2000 kilometers in the process between the 3 pairs I own. Looking at the stats just now, I covered over 50% of my running in the last 14 months in the Evo SL. In this post I will go into why, in my opinion, this shoe exists in the first place, why it has taken the market by storm, why it won me over and why I think adidas are about to ruin it with the Evo SL 2.

---

What is Evo SL and why does it exist?

To understand what adidas did here, firstly we need to go back in time 4-5 years. Back to the time when supershoes were becoming a real and accessible thing for us hobby joggers. Back when Nike was experimenting with using its ZoomX superfoam in trainers like the insanely popular Pegasus Turbo and then the incredibly chaotic Invincible 1. Those shoes paved the way for use of superfoams in daily trainers. There was however one problem - the instability. With the market growing at a rapid rate, flooded with customers who were beginner runners (myself included at the time), those wobbly, incredibly bouncy shoes did not necessarily sit right with the wider audience. They required strong legs and excellent form and if you had neither, you were really just waving your ankles goodbye.

For a year or two after that, the idea was still in the back of everyone’s mind, but the market went in a slightly different direction. The idea of supertrainer was born. Some of you more seasoned RSG’ers will remember the time when by far the most popular and praised shoe on this sub was none other than the Saucony Endorphin Speed. This was the golden standard back then. Superfoam with a plastic plate wedged in the middle to stabilise the platform. The idea was to allow runners to use superfoams, but with a stabilising element in form of a plate/rod inside so they don’t break their ankles. It certainly worked. People could not get enough of the Endorphin Speed and the Endorphin Speed 2.

In the background adidas and ASICS were cooking. These two were about to revolutionise the market of supertrainers. Adidas had the Lightstrike Pro foam, which I believe is the most loved running foam of all time. ASICS had the FF Turbo, which was a less obvious candidate for a trainer at the time. I can still remember the comments from a couple years ago. People did not understand why adidas doesn’t make a full Lightstrike Pro shoe without rods/plates in it. Just to give you an idea, here are some reddit comments from a few years ago:

>Why doesn’t Adidas make a full likestrike pro trainer like the invincible runs? Without rods

>They should release pro version of SL with all lighstrike pro

>I also don't know why Adidas is not releasing it. Just a Novablast 3 with Lightstrike Pro, or a similar shoe to Superblast (achievable with a little bit higher density Lightstrike Pro).

Some others from people who were a bit apprehensive about the idea:

>Just speculation but it might have something to do with the stability of the foam. Maybe it needs to rods to make it more durable

>My guess is that it has to do with the stability of the foam.

>I think that I wouldn't want a running shoe with Lightstrike pro without some kind of more rigid structure, I suppose that it wouldn't be very efficient and stable.

>It might be too much soft , them rods provide rigidity

And crème de la crèm (more on that later):

>Given the pricing of the Superblast, an equivalent with all Lightstrike Pro would certainly be ridiculously overpriced.

You can see a clear pattern there - people who wanted a full Lighstrike Pro trainer, and those who were afraid (and perhaps rightly so) that this shoe would be too unstable or too expensive.

---

Superblast Revolution

ASICS were the first to deliver what everyone kept asking for - a supertrainer with a race foam and no plate. They used their, at the time, top tier FF Turbo foam and glued a slim layer of a denser FF Blast+ foam to the bottom. People went crazy. Every shoetuber out there said that this is THE ultimate running shoe that everyone’s been asking for and that it could replace your entire rotation. The OG Superblast was selling out within minutes of retailers dropping stock. At full price - an unthinkable back then $200 in the US or £200 in the UK. Yes, £200 for what everyone kept calling a daily trainer. The mods here had to create megathreads for people to share where the Superblast were available to avoid the entire sub being flooded with “I found the Superblasts in stock you guys!” posts coming from all over the world. I managed to get my hands on a pair but honestly I did not get along with them. They were firmer than I expected, upper was too baggy for my feet, and the platform was MASSIVE. It felt like strapping a boat to my feet and as much as I tried, I could not get used to it. I was disappointed. This is not what everyone promised me it would be. The Superblast 2 rectified some of these things and I actually used it extensively, but two problems still remained - why is this thing so bloody wide in the heel and more importantly on earth does it cost £200?! Imagine explaining to your wife why these weird looking trainers are worth paying £200 for.

---

Evo SL makes an entrance

In the summer 2025 we started getting the first glimpses of what appeared to be EXACTLY what everyone has been asking for. And it was rumoured to retail at £130/$150? Have adidas lost their plot? The running world has gone mad. Full length Lightstrike Pro - the same beloved formula from the insanely popular Adios Pro 3. Stripped down lightweight upper. Reference weight of just 224g. All this for £130 when ASICS are charging £200 for their alternative? I kept thinking to myself - where is the catch? Turns out there was none.

Now let’s acknowledge one thing - the limited release in Autumn 2024 made adidas very unpopular. You had to enter a raffle to be given the opportunity to buy a pair. Supply issues were discussed. Many people thought adidas were just hyping the thing. Whatever caused this, it was not received well at all. Just release the damn thing already - I am pretty sure that is what was going on in everyone’s mind at the time. The Evo SL officially launched to wider public in March 2025. A whopping 5 months after the initial October 2024 launch.

I grabbed a pair as soon as I could and honestly I just started living in this thing. For a number of weeks I used them exclusively for everything. It was the first shoe that felt similar to my all time favourite which I mentioned earlier - the Endorphin Speed 2. A stripped down yet comfortable uptempo trainer that I could use for everything. But instead of that aggressive roll from Speed 2, we had a decent slab of bouncy and resilient foam under the forefoot, which is exactly what I look for in my running shoes. And guess what - the heel is not the size of an aircraft carrier! Finally I was not coming back from every run with mud on my calves like I was with the Superblast - ding, ding ding - jackpot!

From speaking to my friends at the running club and other people here, I am convinced that all the above reasons are why this shoe is the GOAT. People got exactly what they asked for and at a very good price.

---

The Criticism

Apart from the PR fiasco that was the limited launch, there is one more elephant in the room. Stability. While the shoe has grown incredibly popular, called almost unanimously the shoe of 2025 by every YouTuber and running journalist out there, it was not popular with some people.

All that is because of lack of stability. Do you remember the comments I quoted earlier? There was a reason why supertrainers of the past either had a plate in them or were made stupidly wide to make the platform stable. That was to appeal to the wider audience, including people who needed some mild stability in their shoes. Then in 2024/2025 when everyone is making their shoes wider and stable, comes adidas with their no-nonsense uptempo trainer, bouncy foam, no heel bevels, no plates. 

There were some complaints about the tongue, laces and grip, but some of that is down to personal fit and preference so I am going to skip that. I already talked about all this in my original review.

---

Evo SL of the House Adizero, the First of Its Name, King of Calves, Breaker of Weak Ankles

In adidas’ defence, they always marketed the Evo SL as part of their Adizero line, which was the performance line. It was meant to be a performance model. Unlike the SL2, which ended up in the Adizero line but in my opinion does not belong there. Where it has all gone wrong is shoetubers and influencers pushing the Evo SL as a do-it-all shoe for everyone. It might be the case for a lot of people, but certainly not for everyone. Those runners, especially beginners, who genuinely need stability in their running shoes tried to do exactly what they heard on YouTube - using these every day for every type of run. But guess what happens when a runner with weaker and less conditioned legs tries to run 20, 30, 40 or 60 miles a week in an unstable shoe. Well, they get ankle pains and injuries. I never considered myself as needing stability and even I ended up getting a different shoe for long runs, but I still did everything else in the Evo SL.

For those who lacked the strength - there are probably better choices in adidas’ line up such as the Supernova Rise or the SL 2. For those who are better conditioned to use this type of footwear - we absolutely loved it. 

Prior to getting the Evo SL, in my rotation I had a daily trainer, a tempo trainer, a workout trainer, a long run trainer and a race shoe. After getting the Evo SL, they were good enough to do the daily, tempo and workout miles. That’s 5 shoes down to 3. That is why it has been a gamechanger for myself and many other people.

Do you know the saying “Jack of all trades and master of none"? Well to me Evo SL was the jack of all trades and master of them all. That’s why I believe it’s a phenomenal offering from adidas.

---

Evo SL Evolution

In 2025 we received three more variants.

Firstly I will briefly touch on the Evo SL EXO. Adidas says “EXOSKELETON fit system provides support and precision with each stride”. Ok adidas, whatever that is supposed to mean. There is certainly more structure in the upper but I really do not understand why this version even exists. Perhaps an attempt to add stability via an upper upgrade? Who knows. I don’t know anyone who bought or ran in this thing.

Second update was the Evo SL ATR. A winterised version with some shallow lugs on the outsole to help with grip in winter/wet conditions, rubberised water resistant upper elements, a pull tab and gusseted tongue. Great idea if you ask me, but rather niche. Which is probably why it’s being discounted by 40% not long after launch.

And last but not least the Evo SL Woven. Now this in my opinion is the one that deserves the most attention from this trio. This is an Evo SL 1.5. It could have easily been marketed as the Evo SL 2 and no one would think adidas are being lazy. If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it, right? Fit has been improved, tongue is now gusseted and slightly beefed up in terms of padding and upper has a slightly nicer, less plasticky material. You can clearly see adidas are looking at customer feedback, including this subreddit. I currently run in this version and consider it superior to the OG Evo SL. Although there is one downside - they are less breathable. Acceptable trade off for a better fit if you ask me.

So you know by this point that I absolutely adore this shoe so let’s move on to the part where I say why I think adidas will likely ruin this.

---

Evo SL 2 - quo vadis adidas?

It is safe to say that we have all seen the leaks of Evo SL 2. It is clear that they changed it to align the design with their latest language used on Pro 5, Pro Evo 3 etc. It looks beefier, wider, there’s more rubber on the outsole.There are some rumours of a slightly different formulation of Lightstrike Pro being used.

I might have a slight PTSD from shoes like Speed 2, Rebel v3 etc. going exactly in that direction so please excuse my scepticism when I say - to me that reads: stability, stability, stability, heavy, tame, less exciting, cumbersome etc. etc.

I strongly believe that adidas have something special here and it makes me really nervous when rather than an evolution, like we got with the Evo SL Woven, it looks like we are about to get a revolution type of update. All in an attempt to appeal to customers, who I think were not in the target group for this model in the first place. Is it because they realised the Supernova Rise is not getting enough traction as this daily workhorse, despite them really pushing it a couple months ago?

I really hope I am wrong in all this. I guess we will find out at the Berlin launch in September.

Australia’s Jess Hull rocking these at the diamond league season opener. New vomero model?

Posted on world athletics approved shoes