Super Shoe Showdown: The Best Racers Head-to-Head

Photo: 101 Degrees West

New perk: Easily find new routes and hidden gems, upcoming running events, and more near you. Your weekly Local Running Newsletter has everything you need to lace up! >","name":"in-content-cta","type":"link"}}">Subscribe today.

Seven years after the debut of the first super shoe, the thick-stacked, carbon-plated racers are no longer new nor controversial, but they continue to amaze with their ability to enliven a run and produce fast times. While a few brands didn’t join the party until this year, many models on the market are two to four generations deep—and the new releases keep coming.

Every shoe in this category boasts some sort of ultralight, hyper-responsive foam with an embedded, curved carbon-fiber plate—but each delivers a surprisingly unique ride. Designers manipulate a myriad of elements—midsole thickness and composition, heel-toe drop, base width, rocker shape, plate stiffness and location, upper materials—each of which affects how the shoe interacts with your stride. And, since the resulting roll and explosive response of each shoe is tuned to optimize a specific stride pattern, it’s important that you find the super shoe that complements how you move.

Selecting the right shoe is a highly personal project that is best done by running in a variety of models at a range of paces. This showdown, and our personal picks, are intended to give you guidance on the general characteristics of each shoe and an idea of what shoes appeal to different strides and preferences. Be sure to read “Showdown Methodology,” “How We Tested Softness in the Outside Lab, and “Meet the Testers” to understand how we tested and what type of runner we each are. Recognize, however, that the elements of a super shoe combine and interact uniquely for each runner—more than any other running shoes—so even if we help you narrow your search, you’ll have to experiment to find the one that work best for you.

RELATED: We Ran in Adidas’s $500 Super Shoe Until It Gave Out. Here’s How Far We Got.

All gear in this guide was tested by multiple reviewers. If you buy through our links, we may earn an affiliate commission. This supports our mission to get more people active and outside. Learn more.

To help you narrow the search, we put dozens of miles on 16 new super shoes over the course of several months of training, including daily runs, longer outings, and a variety of speed workouts. Before completing our reviews, two testers also compared the shoes back-to-back, running roughly a half mile in each shoe at a progressive pace, taking notes on the ride, then changing into the next model for another loop. Throughout the testing, we paid attention to how each shoe felt on the run, which we preferred, and why. Our impressions differed, sometimes dramatically, as each of us has unique stride mechanics and shoe preferences.

In addition to our individual reactions to each shoe, we identified two characteristics that seem to have the greatest effect on each super shoe’s ride: the squishiness of the midsole and the shape of the toe rocker. Comparing shoe to shoe, we described how each shoe’s rocker felt, such as where it begins along the foot, its shape, and how it affects the stride. We then assigned each shoe a “soft score” to rank how much we felt the foam sink in before rebounding—1 for the least deflection or firmest and 10 for the most deflection or softest—and we took the average of the testers’ scores for each shoe.

In the new Outside Lab @ CU Denver, we measured the foam properties by compressing each super shoe midsole 11 times under the heel to more than half their thickness (25.4mm), recording the force required to press it down throughout the compression cycle. The curve of the last (11th) compression cycle was evaluated to determine the point at which the midsole foam would stop sinking and bounce back. We considered the slope of the curve and force during the normal running compression range—while the foam sinks in and bounces back during running stride—and the late-stage curve near its maximum effective point, when the foam begins to stop compressing and is forced to return. These measurements were combined to arrive at a lab soft score that reflects how firm the sole materials are under the same loading conditions.

Most of our lab scores correspond closely to the softness felt by our field testers, but some of the testers’ ratings differ by a few points. This could reflect the dynamic properties of super foams and their integration with carbon plates. If the testers’ perceived softness was higher than the lab score, the foam likely compresses easily at first but firms up faster and stronger than other foams. If the perceived softness was lower than the lab score, the foam might have a firmer step-in feel but compresses under greater force (such as occurs when running fast).

Testers also did not isolate heel and forefoot feel, so a shoe’s difference in heel-toe drop could alter its relative position. Different plate geometries of super shoes also likely affected our testers’ underfoot feel. In general, the lab score reflects the objective measurement of each foam’s properties, while the runners’ feel provides a subjective assessment of the shoe’s softness in context.

We hope these comparisons and observations help you find the best shoe for you—one that enhances your stride and creates magic.

>", "path": "https://run.outsideonline.com/gear/road-shoes/on-cloudboom-strike-ls/", "listing_type": "archive", "location": "list", "title": "Spray-on Shoes Are Real. Watch How On’s Cloudboom Strike LS Super Shoes are Made"}}" data-analytics-instanced="true" data-outbound-instanced="true">RELATED: Spray-on Shoes Are Real. Watch How On’s Cloudboom Strike LS Super Shoes are Made

A former national-class miler with a long, powerful stride who finds the thicker and softer the super shoe, the better

Give me a hard track workout or tempo run over an easy long run any day. I love everything about racing—the anxiety, pain, victory, and defeat. My competitive spirit started over 25 years ago when I became the sixth-ranked high school 3k runner in the U.S. my senior year. Since then, I’ve been addicted to competitive running at every distance, from one mile to the marathon on the roads and trail. Now at age 45, I compete on the national master’s racing circuit. I was once a fan of ultra-lightweight and firm low-profile racing shoes. In the new era of super shoes, however, if there’s a plate in there, the thicker and softer the better. About half my weekly mileage is run in a super shoe. They’ve resurrected that effortless feeling of floating across the ground at high speeds from my younger and faster days, not to mention allowing me to recover faster.

A trail runner at heart who lands on her heels on roads—but moves to midfoot and increases her cadence when pushing the pace—and prefers a softer ride over firmer, but prioritizes fit and overall comfort

I generally don’t track my mileage and most often head for trails and hills, but road running in super shoes has given my road running new life. I’ve been running for about 33 years, having started on the hard packed sand of Southern California. Running in super shoes reminds me of the combination of spring and cushioning you get running fast on perfectly packed sand at low tide. (I once ran a 6-minute mile, my fastest to date, on packed sand during a race in college at U.C. Santa Barbara.) I have a connective tissue disorder which gives me loose ligaments and frequent injuries, and fallen arches when I stand but that are pronounced when I’m off my feet. That combination makes me appreciate the stability afforded by carbon plates. I sort of view super shoes as a revolutionary form of stability shoes, and I dig it.

An aging marathoner with a rolling stride who likes a somewhat firmer, stable platform underfoot in order to connect with the road

My idea of a perfect run is 10 miles at a comfortable cruise, and has been since high school cross country in the late ’70s. I ran a marathon at age 16, and the puzzle of getting that distance right has fascinated me for most of my adult life. Once a 2:46 marathoner (pre-super shoes) regularly doing 50+ mile weeks, a series of injuries and my age (60) have reduced my volume by about half and slowed my easy training pace to around nine-minute miles—but I still enjoy an uptempo workout or two each week. Given my need for more stability these days (and always having a preference for minimalist models), I’m not a fan of shoes with serious squish, including many of the first-gen super shoes. However, the improved stability and smoother roll in many of this year’s models are winning me over to the super shoe magic.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 8.1 ozStack Heights: 39.5–33 mm / 6.5 mm dropLab Soft Score: 4Perceived Soft Score: 6

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts late, just past the ball of the foot. Allows a stable stance before dropping off steeply under the toes.

At a Glance: Combining a wide stance, a moderately firm, responsive midsole, and a sharp, fast toe-off, this shoe produces a smooth, stable, and fast ride for those who like a more supported feel underfoot (unless your feet are so narrow that the fit feels sloppy).

What’s New

Jonathan: I loved the slightly firmer platform of this racer. It has plenty of cushion on landing, strong support through a stable stance phase—particularly under the ball of the foot—and rolls me quickly off my toes. I didn’t feel like I had to brace myself from excess squish and bounce in this shoe, making it comfortable and confidence-inspiring at any pace or level of fatigue. When I picked up the pace and got forward over my toes, it felt like the foam was gathering under the plate and adding a boost to each push-off.

Lisa: This shoe felt the tippiest of the bunch to me. I felt high off the ground, and a little unstable in it. The fit is a bit roomier in the toebox than some of the others in this roundup (Nike, Asics) which I think added some to the unstable feeling for me and my narrow feet. That said, I also felt like I was bouncing around, and doing so quickly. Ultimately, I enjoyed the ride. And as a fan of thoughtful design details, I love the little heel tab that folds down over the heel collar once you’ve used it to step into the shoe.

Cory: I really enjoyed this shoe, but in a very different way than most of the other super shoes. It’s not particularly bouncy. On the contrary, I was surprised by how firm it felt on the first few runs. Its biggest asset was how smoothly it transitioned from footstrike to toe-off. The steep toe spring (upward curve under the toe) provided a ramp that seemed to sling me forward with ease.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 8.1 oz (men’s); 5.8 oz (women’s)Stack Heights: 36–36 mm / 0 mm dropLab Soft Score: 4Perceived Soft Score: 7

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Plate curves early but thick forefoot foam doesn’t fall away until later, then rolls quickly and flexes off toe

At a Glance: Designed for runners seeking the natural feel of a zero-drop sole and a slightly flexible forefoot, this super shoe offers a soft, lively ride if your stride stays quick and forward-balanced

What’s New

Cory: I’ve had trouble in the past with Altra’s zero-drop design. Their shoes tend to be too flexible and minimal for my running style and footstrike preferences. I prefer a stiff platform with a steep rocker to push off of. However, this specific model, much like its predecessor, has emerged as my favorite among Altras. It deviates from the traditional zero-drop, minimalist feel for me. Thanks to its soft foam, subtle toe rocker, and moderately flexible plate, I’ve been able to adopt a more forward-leaning stance—a feat I typically struggle with in most Altra models. This shoe serves as an outstanding introduction to zero-drop running shoes.

Lisa: I’m not exactly sure what it is with me and my body, but I have a hard time in zero-drop shoes. It feels like my heel searches for the ground, expecting the shoe to make contact, but since the shoe reaches the ground later in zero-drop shoes than it does in those with an offset, my gait is off and I tend to feel a strain in my calf. The positive effect, however, is that my cadence increases to avoid this sensation and I overstride less, which makes me run faster. All that said, the Vanish Carbon 2 was comfortable on my feet upon first step-in. The cushioning/plate combo feels balanced, the toe box was noticeably squared off, and the rocker is pronounced. The whole effect, for me, was a quicker turnover and a smooth roll. It’s just not natural to my personal stride.

Jonathan: I’m generally a fan of Altra shoes: I love the foot-shaped toe room, and I stride smoothly and comfortably in the zero-drop profile even though I usually run with a light heel strike. The first version of the Vanish Carbon was a favorite and felt the most natural to me among all the super shoes, with its slightly flexible plate and moderate foam stack. I’m not, however, as much a fan of this update—at least for slower paces. With any heel strike at all, the foam squishes so much it almost feels like my heel is lower than my toes and I have to roll up and over the thick forefoot. However, when I get more forward balanced, the foam under the ball compresses and the rocker kicks in for a fast, forward roll. Runners who stay on their toes and push off powerfully should appreciate the new version, but I find the softer foam and stiffer plate less versatile and accommodating. I might wear these for a shorter race but not for the marathon where my stride will inevitably deteriorate by the end.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 6.5 oz (unisex)Stack Heights: 39.5–34.5 mm / 5 mm dropLab Soft Score: 5Perceived Soft Score: 6

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts late and falls away steeply for a quick forward roll that encourages short strides

At a Glance: Ample, responsive foam beneath the forefoot and a late-stage rocker plate make this shoe excel for runners with quick strides who generate strong propulsion and push-off power.

What’s New

Cory: The previous Metaspeed Edge, designed for high-cadence runners, simply didn’t suit me. It felt firm and rigid, and failed to provide any significant forward propulsion. However, the changes ASICS made have completely transformed my experience. In fact, I now prefer the Edge over the Sky, which is designed for longer-striding runners and which I liked much more in the first version. The 3.5 millimeters of additional foam and updated midsole compound give the Edge+ a distinctly more cushioned and responsive ride, improving its performance at faster paces. In my workouts, especially when targeting 3K pace or faster, I experienced a significant forward propulsion as I exerted power through my toes. The steep, late-stage rocker promotes a strong toe-off.

Jonathan: When running at slower paces, I felt rather flat-footed in this shoe. The rocker didn’t kick in until well after my weight had rolled onto the ball of my foot, then dropped off sharply into a steep roll off the toe. It felt better when I took short, quick-rolling, forward-balancing strides, which it’s designed for. Even then, however, I found it hard to get the foam, plate, and geometry to align in the right timing for a propulsive boost. Perhaps because I don’t push off powerfully enough, I could hardly detect the effect of the plate, and the shoe failed to feel very super for my stride.

Lisa: During one workout, I did back-to-back sets of two 400s on the track, first in this shoe and then in the Asics Metaspeed Edge Paris to compare the ride of what, from their exteriors, look like almost identical models. Compared to the Metaspeed Sky Paris, the Edge felt more stable despite its narrower profile. I’m chalking that up to the fact that this shoe is intended to work with quick, short strides, like mine when I’m trying to run fast, and does indeed suit me better than the Sky because of that. I found the Edge a touch wobbly in the heel, but more stable in the forefoot. The cushioning under the forefoot is noticeable—bulbous, almost—but that feeling all but disappears when pushing the pace (perhaps upon foam engagement with toe-off.) The ride of the Edge is a tad firmer than the Sky, but both have plenty of soft, responsive cushioning.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 6.5 oz (unisex)Stack Heights: 39.5–34.5 mm / 5 mm dropLab Soft Score: 5Perceived Soft Score: 7

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts just before the ball with a long, smooth roll that accelerates as it approaches the toe

At a Glance: With thick, responsive foam beneath the forefoot and an early-stage, extended rocker plate, this shoe is designed to improve vertical propulsion and extend stride length

What’s New

Jonathan: I appreciated the narrow heel, which reduced landing levers, and the wide forefoot with a pronounced flare under the big toe, making the fit comfortable and the ride both stable and agile. The foam cushions without sinking in too far, and the rocker comes at just the right spot and angle for my foot and stride. The shoe rolls forward when my foot wants to roll, and the plate feels like it gathers and directs the foam’s compression for a well-timed rebound. The shoe felt natural at slower paces and transitioned well to faster speeds, accelerating off the toe when I got more forward-balanced. The MetaSpeed Sky Paris made my shortlist of shoes for the marathon.

Cory: I didn’t notice a substantial improvement from the previous version of this shoe. If you like the Sky+, you’ll most likely like the Sky Paris. Apart from a slightly softer underfoot feel, it had a largely similar ride, which isn’t necessarily a drawback since I really enjoyed the Sky+. It still remains one of my top five super shoes; however, I would give the Edge Paris the title of the best Asics super shoe.

Lisa: Compared with the Edge, the cushioning in the heel of the Sky felt thinner and more firm underfoot, and I tend to prefer more cush on top of the carbon plate than less (perhaps one reason the Edge seems to work better for me). The Sky has a wider base underneath the forefoot as well, but I didn’t really notice that when doing 400s at effort back to back with the Edge. The Sky is intended for runners whose stride increases in length instead of turnover when speeding up, and since my regular stride is already so long, my “fast” stride gets shorter and quicker. Both this and the Edge are ridiculously light on the feet, but I found the noticeable cushioning directly under the forefoot feels a little odd.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 7.8 oz (unisex)Stack Heights: 40–32 mm / 8 mm dropLab Soft Score: 1Perceived Soft Score: 3

Full Comparative Softness Chart

Rocker: Starts mid-ball with a smooth, even roll through toe-off

At a Glance: A firmer underfoot feel provides a stable, responsive ride in this shoe that emphasizes support and bounce over cushioning and delivers a carbon-plated boost without requiring changes in stride mechanics

What’s New

Lisa: This shoe felt like the narrowest of the bunch, which to me, makes it fast and nimble, albeit a little tippy. Its sleek profile is joined by downright bouncy foam and a well-sandwiched plate. I don’t feel the plate but I know it’s working for me. I like the feeling of the upper and think this will be a good choice for short summer road races—especially with the insanely open, airy mesh. I know this word can be overused in describing shoes, but the combination of plate and cush in the Hyperion Elite 4 screams “responsive,” to me. Like, the more force you land with, the more the cush and plate seem to engage and propel. That’s a good feeling. I wore this shoe in a rainy 5K with tight turns and felt quick, but also needed to stay focused in order to not wobble.

Jonathan: The Hyperion Elite emphasizes bounce over squish, which is great for runners (like me) who value ground feel and responsiveness over cushioning. That said, the ride is not at all harsh—the foam sinks in slightly (more when going faster and applying more force) but you feel the foam rebounding from the moment you put weight on it. For my stride, the shoe has a smooth transition from heel to toe: the rocker falls at the right place and I roll naturally off the toe, feeling a light boost on push-off. It feels the least like a super shoe of all the models tested, in a good way—it’s not a stride-lengthening trampoline nor does it force a quick turnover up on your toes. But it’s still deceptively fast. I’d wear this in a marathon, confident that it would support and optimize my stride whether dancing during early miles or slogging the final ones.

Cory: Frankly, I’ve struggled with the Brooks Hyperion Elite ever since the first version. It felt stiff and unforgiving, far from what I prefer and expect from a top-tier super shoe. However, after some feedback from Boston marathon champion Des Liden, Brooks softened the midsole, leading to a notable improvement in the underfoot experience. While there is no doubt the Hyperion Elite 4 is a much better shoe than its predecessors, it still sits at the bottom of my list of super shoes. The midsole just doesn’t have the bounciness of others. That, combined with what felt like a tall and narrow profile that makes the shoe feel tipsy and led to me rolling my ankle during a race warmup.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 8.1 oz (unisex)Stack Heights: 39–34 mm / 5 mm dropLab Soft Score: 4Perceived Soft Score: 6

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts early with a long, gradual roll through toe-off

At-a-Glance: A forgiving super shoe crafted with a semi-flexible plate and a wide platform of soft, springy PEBA foam, suitable for a range of runners looking for a stable shoe for longer races and uptempo training

What’s New

Cory: While Diadora may not enjoy the same level of name recognition as some other brands, its current models hold their own in terms of quality and performance. The PEBA cushioning of the Gara Carbon was on point—soft (just like I like it), bouncy, and a ton of fun. At marathon pace and slower, these felt like a dream—smooth and rhythmic. Yet, as I started to really put down the hammer under marathon pace, the semi-flexible plate and modest toe rocker didn’t complement my powerful toe-off as much as shoes with a stiffer lever. Nonetheless, these will remain in my rotation as an uptempo shoe.

Lisa: Even though this shoe felt firmer to me than some of the others, I enjoy it. The Gara Carbon fits, and looks, like a “regular” (non-super) shoe. The ride is stable and not awkward, as some others can be. This seems like a good first super shoe for a range of runners. I felt the energy savings of the plate and cushion, but it wasn’t overly springy. I felt like I could control this shoe more than some of the others that have more cushioning and more aggressive plates.

Jonathan: The foam in the Gara Carbon is squishier than I usually like, but it works in this shoe: the widely-flared geometry, early rocker, and plate’s location in the midsole keep the ride rolling forward—not sinking excessively or wobbling sideways—and the plate’s curve releases the rebound at the right place and right time for my stride. The upper has a bit more padding and structure than other supers hoes, but is still light and airy, particularly around the high-volume toe. The Gara Carbon’s ride feels best when taking long, slower strides, making the shoe seem best suited to longer, slower-paced races like the marathon.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 7.8 oz (unisex)Stack Heights: 40–32 mm / 8 mm dropLab Soft Score: 9Perceived Soft Score: 8

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts very early, high arch falls away dramatically

At a Glance: Designed for the marathon, the Hoka Cielo X 1 features a responsive two-layer PEBA midsole with a winged carbon fiber plate and severe rocker geometry that fosters a bouncy ride and works best for heel-to-midfoot landings and at moderately-fast paces

What’s New

Cory: From the first step, these shoes are bouncy as hell—easily one of the most energetic super shoes I’ve tried. In terms of bounce, it stands shoulder to shoulder with the original Alphafly. They feature a pretty dramatic heel-to-toe rockered profile that lends itself to a midfoot landing. Although I found it perfect for moderate zone two and three paces, I noticed the shoe didn’t respond as effectively when I needed to accelerate past that and push off on my toes. It felt unnatural, like I was working against the rocker. In my opinion, these are the top super shoes for midfoot and rearfoot runners, especially those running at paces between 8-minute and 6-minute miles.

Lisa: Holy cushioning, Batman. This is a lot of shoe. But at 7.8 ounces, it’s feather-light. I’m occasionally annoyed by this shoe because it’s super-soft heel cup and lack of pull loop make it a pain to get on my feet, and then the slick, flat (super-light) laces are hard to cinch up over the top of my narrow feet. Once I’m “in,” though, I enjoy the full-on “bounce, bounce, bounce” ride that comes with some stability, thanks to the plate. I can see this shoe working well for half-marathon to marathon distances for a range of runners looking for a soft, but stable ride that will make them faster.

Jonathan: Biomechanists have told me that the more finely tuned a shoe is, the narrower the range of paces it will accomodate. The Cielo X 1, which Hoka says is designed to provide the pinnacle experience of their speed line, seems to prove that point. For one of my runs, I did 6 x 400m progressing from 8-minute pace down to 7-minute pace. The shoe felt “off,” like it was fighting me, until about 7:30 pace when I settled into the rhythm and posture the ultra-bouncy foam and steep rocker demanded—and the shoe suddenly felt comfortable, propulsive, and fast! But the ride was clumsy again during the cooldown at nine-minute miles. (Note that Cory found the shoe’s limits on the faster side of its sweet spot). They call it a marathon shoe, but I wouldn’t use them for anything longer than 10K at my current pace range.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 8.3 oz (unisex)Stack Heights: 40–35 mm / 5 mm dropLab Soft Score: 8Perceived Soft Score: 8

Rocker: Starts mid-ball with a smooth, natural roll that accelerates to a steep toe-off

At a Glance: With a softer layer of bouncy PEBA foam above the carbon plate and a firmer layer below, plus a smooth, mid-stage rocker profile, the Rocket X 2 delivers a stable and accommodating ride with an energetic super shoe bounce

What’s New

Cory: The original Rocket X left much to be desired—it was stiff and unforgiving, more like a slightly thicker racing flat. Now updated with a thick stack of bouncy PEBA midsole, the Rocket X 2 earns the right to be called a super shoe. Underfoot I found the maximum legal stack of foam soft and cushioned, yet the shoe maintains an energetic ride. Unfortunately, as a raceday shoe I couldn’t get past the hefty weight of 8.3 ounces, the second heaviest of all the super shoes. If Hoka could reduce its weight by two ounces, it would undoubtedly be a top contender for the best super shoe. Until then, I’ll reserve it for workouts and long runs.

Jonathan: The Rocket X 2 feels lower than its max-legal stack height, perhaps because its bottom layer of foam is tuned slightly firmer. So while it feels decadently soft underfoot, the squish stays under control, and the wide base and high sidewalls stabilize the ride. The shoe delivers an exciting roll and boosted push-off that seems to work for a wide range of paces and strides. Only when I dropped to a slow easy-run pace did the tall foam start to wallow. The upper, while extremely breathable, is also comfortable and secure. Given the stable and comfortable ride and fit, I’ve used this as an up-tempo trainer that prepares me well for the mechanics of other carbon-plated racers.

Lisa: Compared to the Cielo X1, the Rocket X2 feels nimbler and maybe even faster. Perhaps due to a firmer layer of foam and less drop (5mm) than the Cielo X1, I felt like I had a quicker turnover in this shoe. Compared to all the shoes in this roundup, I like the streamlined fit and the sleek feel and look of upper of the Rocket X2 best. Note: The Rocket X2 has a higher heel collar than some other shoes, which requires a taller sock than a no-show to prevent rubbing.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 6.6 oz (women’s), 8.4 oz (men’s)Stack Heights: 40–36 mm / 4 mm dropLab Soft Score: 7Perceived Soft Score: 8

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts early then curves gradually with lots of foam under ball and toes during long, smooth roll

At a Glance: The redesigned New Balance FuelCell SC Elite V4 combines a slimmer, lighter carbon fiber plate embedded in a new PEBA midsole with a wide, sculpted profile to deliver unparalleled cushioning. With a stable footplant and solid energy return, it’s best for long races and training at moderate paces

What’s New

Cory: Out of all the super shoes tested, I thought the New Balance Fuel Cell SC Elite V4 had the best update. Almost every aspect of the shoe saw an improvement: fit, comfort, cushioning, and performance. Underfoot, the updated FuelCell PEBA-based midsole felt simultaneously softer and more responsive, producing one of the smoothest, most fluid rides I’ve tested. It’s a shoe you don’t have to think about, working naturally with every stride. From easy running to marathon pace, the massive cushioning made me feel less beat up from the pounding.

Lisa: This shoe felt like a supertrainer—in a good way! It combines massive foam, plate, and rocker in a way that doesn’t make me feel like I need to be trying to run mach speed (for me) to engage any of it. I love the soft, slightly stretchy, and very breathable upper, and found the shoe to be comfortable overall and versatile for a range of running. But when running downhill, I noticed a bit of a strange, slappy, sensation. Maybe my heel-striking ways are amplified when slamming down on the back end of the plate.

Jonathan: I appreciated the updated SC Elite v4’s smooth ride. While the shoe still strongly emphasizes cush over pop, it doesn’t feel as squishy and sloppy as previous versions, due to a quicker-responding foam, wide, sculpted midsole, and deep central cavity in the midsole that centers the foot. I took these for a 90-minute run right out of the box, and felt supported the whole time except for some lateral slip in the roomy upper. The shoe doesn’t feel as fast as others in the test to me, but the plate/foam combo keeps the ride snappier than non-plated trainers with similar cushioning (that I can’t run comfortably in) making this a shoe I continue to reach for when going long.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 6.2 oz (women’s), 7.7 oz (men’s)Stack Heights: 40–32 mm / 8 mm dropLab Soft Score: 10Perceived Soft Score: 9

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts mid-ball with a gradual initial curve over Air Zoom pods then a more aggressive roll off the toe

At a Glance: Blending the energizing bounce of responsive foam and springy compressed-air pods with a now continuous base, the Alphafly 3 delivers a powerful trampoline-like ride ideal for long-striding, forward-balanced runners in the half marathon and marathon

What’s New

Cory: To me, the Alphafly 3 epitomizes the pinnacle of super shoes. With significant enhancements in weight, responsiveness, and overall performance compared to the Alphafly 2, a near-total redesign has reintroduced the trampoline-like bounce that I loved in the original. If you found the second version a bit clunky you’ll want to check these out as it combines the stability of version two with the bounce of the original. If I had to choose just one shoe for every race distance, the Alphafly 3 would undoubtedly be it.

Lisa: I get excited when it’s time to pull on this shoe. I think part of it is that I love the looks of it—the all-white, see-through mesh upper with the swoosh dipping into the midsole. It’s a tad tough to pull on due to the integrated tongue/upper combo but pull tabs at the heel help. Once I’m in, I love the feel of the cushioning underfoot. This is a forgiving super shoe, in my opinion. It’s both a soft, comfortable ride and it helps me run a little faster without added effort. I’ll be reaching for these often in the coming months.

Jonathan: I loved the front half of this shoe—wide, stable, cushioned but highly responsive, with a brilliant rocker. It starts gradually, loading up the compressed energy of the foam and Air Zoom units under the weight of my forefoot stance, then drops off abruptly so the rebound launches me forward for the most effective trampoline effect I’ve experienced. The heel, however, is a marshmallow that swallows my momentum whenever I touch down on it. I found myself adapting to a bounding, forward-balanced stride, and, surprisingly, ran the second-fastest loop in my back-to-back test without feeling like I was pushing. I couldn’t keep it up for a marathon, however, unless I spent considerable time training with this stride, which I’m leery of doing given that other super shoes complement my current movement paths.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 5.8 oz (women’s); 7.0 oz (men’s)Stack Heights: 40–32 mm / 8 mm dropLab Soft Score: 6Perceived Soft Score: 9

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Plate falls away early, leaving lots of foam under ball, then a long roll to a late push-off

At a Glance: With additional soft, hyper-responsive ZoomX foam underfoot, the Vaporfly retains its renowned high-energy ride, making it an ideal race choice for powerful, long-striding runners seeking a lightweight, cushioned ride with an extra boost of energy.

What’s New

Cory: This was the shoe that started it all—the OG super shoe. The ZoomX foam is still one of the most responsive midsoles, and the Vaporfly 3 doesn’t skimp on it. Despite a much softer and more cushioned ride than previous versions, the Vaporfly 3 is still one of the only super shoes I entrust to race in. It’s lightweight, responsive, and propels me forward better than most super shoes. My one gripe is with the fit. My normal size felt a little long, and the scratchy upper didn’t conform to my foot shape as well as its predecessors.

Lisa: Although it has the same stack height as the Alphafly 3, the Vaporfly feels noticeably lower to the ground and slighter overall. It’s the lightest-feeling super shoe of the lot, which does a lot for a racer’s mental game. The asymmetrical laces and strategically placed cushioning around the heel collar—not too much but just enough—made my feet feel secure and ready to fly. My body, on the other hand, seems to prefer the more-abundant cushioning of the Aphafly. In this shoe, I notice a sort of bulbous cushioning under the forefoot. I feel like it’s meant to help speedsters propel off their toes.

Jonathan: I’ve wanted to enjoy the Vaporfly since the first edition, given that it originated and defined the super shoe genre. Somehow the mechanics have never aligned with my stride: I always feel like I’m sinking and fighting the shoe, not being propelled to a faster pace. While this version feels welcomingly more stable given its width and redesigned geometry, I still feel wobbly, swallowed by the thick foam, and forced to take unnaturally long, slow strides to get any sense of the late rebound. If your stride is different, and you liked earlier versions of the Vaporfly, you’ll probably like this one too; if you didn’t, don’t expect a big change.

Note: Since we completed this showdown, On has released a new super shoe that is significantly cushier and bouncier (we give it an 8 for a perceived soft score). You can read our full review of the On Cloudboom Strike here.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 6.6 oz (women’s); 7.6 oz (men’s)Stack Heights: 37–28 mm / 9 mm dropLab Soft Score: 3Perceived Soft Score: 3

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts late with a moderately sharp curve that rolls foot quickly to firm toe-off

At a Glance: A firmer-feeling, high-drop shoe with a late, quick-rolling rocker, the Cloudboom Echo 3 delivers a stable, responsive ride for those who prefer more ground connection and a solid toe-off

What’s New

Lisa: While this shoe fits my narrow feet well and I love the thin, effective lacing and feel of the slightly padded tongue against the top of my foot, it feels harder underfoot than others—one of the firmest of the lot. I enjoy it, however, when I prefer to connect with the ground instead of float away from it, as I can feel in some fatter, more cushioned super shoes. The Cloudboom Echo 3 has a sleek silhouette like the Brooks Hyperion Elite 4, but is less soft under the heel and therefore feels less tippy. This shoe seems well-suited for runners who like a firm ride and solid toe-off.

Cory: As someone who prefers an ultra-soft super shoe, I struggled with the firm underfoot feeling of the Cloudboom Echo 3. Instead of absorbing each footstrike and popping back up, the midsole slapped the ground harshly, returning very little of the energy I put into it. No matter how hard I pushed, the midsole did not compress and spring back; instead, it felt solid and unforgiving.

Jonathan: On’s Cloudboom Echo 2 was my favorite of the last generation of super shoes for its stable feel and strong ground connection. With just the right roll and bounce for me, I wore it for several races. Other super shoes, however, have improved their ability to harness softer, bouncier foams and, in comparison, I now find the Echo 3 a bit lacking in energy. Plus, the geometry has been altered and it doesn’t fall quite right for my stride. It’s still a nicely stable ride with an aggressive, somewhat late-stage rocker that provides a quick roll and allows powerful push-offs, but it feels tuned for someone faster than me.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 9.3 oz (unisex)Stack Heights: 40–32 mm / 8 mm dropLab Soft Score: 8Perceived Soft Score: 6

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts just forward of ball, allowing quick stance before rolling into a long, smooth curve through the extended toe

At a Glance: With a thick layer of a new, soft, hyper-responsive, nitrogen-infused foam under both the decoupled heel and forefoot, and a full-length, rigid, aggressively curved, carbon-fiber plate that extends beyond the toes, the Puma Fast-R Nitro Elite 2 guarantees cushioned landings and enables smooth, powerful toe-offs with an extended lever that works for a variety of runners and paces

What’s New

Lisa: This shoe fits my narrow foot better than any other in the bunch, and it’s easy to get on and off thanks to the smart, simple pull loops at the heel and on the tongue. As soon as I step into this thing and lace up, I feel the toe spring, plate shape, and cushioning combo ready to propel me forward. The spring is fun and not intrusive to my heel strike and gait, rather, it seems to suit me and I find this shoe pretty dang fun to run in. I love a decoupled shoe and appreciate the natural foot rotation this one affords.

Jonathan: Despite the very soft foam underfoot, I enjoyed every run in this shoe. The squish bounced back quickly and effectively and never felt wobbly or wallowing. I credit this to the decoupled heel and long, scooped plate. The heel helps with stability by letting me pronate on landing without torquing the whole shoe, making my forefoot stance and push-off neutral and solid. The plate seems to contain the foam’s compression and direct the rebound forward at the end of a long, powerful stride. These shoes felt magical at tempo pace or faster but only adequate when going slower, so I’d reserve them for the half marathon or shorter races, where they are one of my top picks.

Cory: I think this shoe may get overlooked due to its funky appearance. Looks aside, it’s fast, really fast—which is surprising given its hefty 9.3-ounce weight. Still, I found it to be one of the best short-distance (5K/10K) super shoes I tested. The midsole features a decoupled geometry that allows the forefoot and rearfoot to move independently, creating what feels like a softer rearfoot combined with a firm, snappy toe-off. A stiff, curved carbon fiber plate connects the two and acts like a springboard as you push off the toes. The harder I pushed, the more I felt the plate propel me forward.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 6.5o z (women’s); 7.2 oz (men’s)Stack Heights: 39.5–31.5 mm / 8 mm dropLab Soft Score: 6Perceived Soft Score: 3

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts late and falls away sharply

At a Glance: This moderately firm, high-rebounding shoe incorporates a late-stage rocker that tapers sharply, encouraging a stable mid-to-rearfoot landing that seamlessly transitions to a smooth, explosive toe-off and thrives at fast paces

What’s New

Jonathan: The later-stage rocker on this shoe gave the shoe two gears for me. At a slower pace I transitioned smoothly from heel-kiss to a stable forefoot plant-and-roll on a nicely cushioned, slightly bouncy—but not very propulsive—platform. When I picked up the pace and got my weight over the balls of my feet, the shoe delivered explosive toe-offs that rivaled any shoe in the test. Enjoying that propulsion, I ran the fastest loop of the day in them during my back-to-back test. I also found the upper particularly secure, comfortable, and highly breathable. This is my first pick for a 5K.

Cory: This shoe felt rigid and prescriptive, almost as if it dictates how it should be run and doesn’t adapt to any other approach. As a mid-to-forefoot striker, I found that only when I intentionally adjusted my stride to land more under my heel did the shoe’s sharp late-stage rocker geometry start to work in harmony with my running style. The more I returned to my natural gait pattern, the more abrasive the shoe felt. I’d land midstance and then struggle to smoothly transition into its late, pronounced toe spring. That, in combination with a rather firm underfoot feel, placed it near the bottom of my super shoe ranking.

Lisa: This shoe feels well-balanced underfoot, like the cushioning and plate work together for a smooth roll for my heel-striking stride. Compared to Jonathan’s efficient mid- to forefoot stride, my loping style gets along great with this shoe. The rolling effect seems tuned to a heel- or maybe midfoot-striker but I can see this working well as a distance racer for anyone who lands farther back on their heels as they fatigue (the majority of runners). The heel hold isn’t as secure for me as it is on other shoes, but I have very narrow heels and low-volume feet in general.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 6.5 oz (women’s); 7.5 oz (men’s)Stack Heights: 39.5–31.5 mm / 8 mm dropLab Soft Score: 5Perceived Soft Score: 6

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts a bit early, rolls forward quickly, then curve levels off under toes, enabling a strong push-off

At a Glance: With re-engineered geometry and dual-density midsole firmness, the Endorphin Pro 4 provides a heightened sense of stability while preserving plush rearfoot cushioning, smooth heel-to-toe roll, and a lively, energetic ride

What’s New

Cory: My feelings on the new Endorphin Pro 4 were mixed. On one hand, Saucony made significant improvements to the upper. Not only did it enhance the appearance and fit, but it also proved to be much more durable compared to the Endorphin Pro 3. On the other hand, I found that the new dual-density midsole felt firmer and lacked the bounciness of its predecessor. No matter how hard I pushed it, I didn’t get the snappy trampoline sensation I felt with the Pro 3. The shoe offered a smoother running experience, leaning toward a relaxed and easygoing feel rather than a lively and energetic one—more on the cruisy side, if you will. Perfect for clocking off those midrange paces with ease, but lacking the energy return at high paces. My advice is that if you love the Pro 3, stock up before it’s discontinued.

Jonathan: Unlike Cory, I was pleasantly surprised by the new midsole on the Pro 4, which, to me, hits a sweet spot balancing cushioning, stability, and responsiveness while avoiding the squishy trampoline effect of earlier versions. This shoe handled my light heel strike as well as any, cushioning while not wallowing and transitioning smoothly onto the platform and through the rockered toe. I appreciated that while the rocker rolls forward quickly, it seems to level off some under the toe, enabling me to reach back and push off strongly. Combining comfort, stability and performance, this shoe would be on my shortlist for a marathon or a half.

Lisa: This one felt somewhat hard to me, meaning, I felt like the plate was closer to my foot than I did in other shoes where I feel more cushioning between the plate and my foot. The upper proved comfortable, and I like the midfoot wrap-feeling for support. In this shoe, I ran a 15-minute warm-up, then a series of five 4-minute efforts—which to me, means running hard until I need to back off because I gag—on concrete pedestrian paths with one minute rest, then a slow 12-minute cooldown. The shoe was comfortable at easy paces, but the toespring made it feel like it was ready to crank like a racehorse in a starting gate. My feet were a bit achy at the end of the workout and I was happy to get into my flip flops afterward, but I think the shoe served me well during my efforts.

Men’s Women’s

Weight: 8.2oz (unisex)Stack Heights: 39.5–37.5 mm / 2 mm dropLab Soft Score: 5Perceived Soft Score: 4

Full Comparative Soft Score Chart

Rocker: Starts early with a rounded, gradual roll, then falls away steeply through the toe, promoting a quick roll

At a Glance: With added stack height underfoot, the Velociti Elite 2 boasts a well-fitting upper and firmer midsole that will satisfy a diverse range of runners, offering a stable platform and a smooth-rolling, aggressive rocker that encourages a quick turnover and shines at fast paces

What’s New

Lisa: The foam, geometry, and plate shape of Velociti Elite 2 just spells out s-m-o-o-t-h, in my opinion. This shoe was deceptive in that it feels low-to-the-ground and agile, almost like a “regular” shoe but has a whopping 39.5mm stack height under the heel. The thick cushioning is nicely soft but springy, forgiving but responsive. It feels really good underfoot to me. That, combined with what feels like a gentle rocker and the outsole’s slightly rounded shape, seems to help me run smoothly and stay light on my feet. Like the first version of the Velociti Elite, it’s a darkhorse that emerges among my favorites, or at least gets an honorable mention.

Cory: This shoe teeters on the edge of greatness but falls just short, in my opinion. Positives first: Under Armour has perfected the fit. The shoe’s Warp 2.0 upper snugly envelops and supports your foot, making it one of the best-fitting shoes I’ve ever tested. Its downfall? The cushioning, or rather, the lack thereof. This was one of the firmest super shoes I tested. I found it responsive, but not cushioned. Its saving grace is an aggressively scooped firm plate that propulsively slings you forward the more power you can get through your toes. However, I unapologetically dig an uber soft, ultra bouncy foam. If Under Armour could tone down the durometer of the midsole, making it more cushioned it would easily earn a spot on my shortlist for racing shoes.

Jonathan: I loved the fast-rolling, forward-propelling toe offs of this shoe while doing 400m and 800m repeats. I also appreciated the firmer, responsive foam and the wide base, particularly flared under the big toe, which delivered a stable, confident stance. The upper also shines, feeling like a second skin securing the whole foot without binding anywhere. At faster paces, the Velociti Elite 2 competes for the top spot on my list. The elements don’t come together quite as well at my marathon pace, however, as the rocker seems to dump me off early and force a faster turn-over and shorter stride than I want. I’ll keep it close at hand for uptempo training and short races.

When you buy something using the retail links in our stories, we may earn a small commission. We do not accept money for editorial gear reviews. Read more about our policy.