People are more skilled than me if they are wearing this on a technical trail. I would totally use this for western states if I was in though. It’s a great trail shoe for me on a quick trail. Are you going to review the tomir 2.0? I think that’s a great shoe for most runners.
I have these shoes and have worn them in two races. I took part in a Backyard Ultra event, where I completed 6 loops, totaling 42 kilometers. Then, I participated in an ultramarathon and ran 51 kilometers. My legs felt great throughout these races, and I believe these shoes are perfect for longer races, like all-day or night running. They're well-cushioned and lightweight, which makes running on trails a bit faster. However, I did face a minor issue with the grip and lockdown, especially on technical, wet downhill sections of a mossy forest trail. To resolve this, I had to use a runner's knot. Despite this small issue, I would still recommend these shoes, and I plan to use them in my upcoming trail races.
I've raced the Chicago Marathon in the Adios Pro 3 (AP3) and a local mountain trail 50k (at 7,000 ft with +6100 total vert) in the Agravic Speed Ultra (ASU). The AP3 ran true to size for me, but I had to go down a half size in the ASU to get the right fit. Going down a half size alleviated a slight arch issue I had in my normal size. It also has a break-in period and requires adapting to its large rocker. Overall, I've found the ASU to be the closest "supershoe" of any trail shoe I've run including the Tecton X. From my experience, the propulsiveness is much more noticeable than the Tecton and handles technical trails just as well. However, I would not recommend the shoe for most trail runners especially if you're not used to running in technical terrain. It depends on what you value in a trail shoe across ultra distances: comfort or speed. There are more comfortable trail shoes (like the Norda 001), but I think the ASU is the fastest.
I love mine. It feels pretty regular/good on uphills, but it shines on the downhills, I feel like it really bounces me along incredibly well when I really go down fast. I think the fact that you have a primarily forefoot strike makes it less “super” for you on downhill.
The one thing you don’t want to compromise on with a trail shoe is stability. I’m very surprised you said it was too stable, I would hope it was very stable with over 40mm of stack
Its my favourite trail shoe for racing under 21km but only after having done 100km in it and now it keeps getting better and better. For anything longer that I need to save my legs on I use the Asics Trabuco Max 2 - these are so comfortable
Awesome review Kofuzi. Always appreciate the approach and holistic overview. It didn't make your recommendation but the brother to the Ultra (Agravic Speed) may be the best all rounder. Hopefully, it could make it's way into your rotation. 😉
Very detailed review as always. Expected a lot from this shoe considering the price. But I guess hoka still owns the trail. For technical trails with little pavements and roads, I think Mafate Speed 4 doesnt get enough credit. I will be trying the tecton x2 which I bought for $112 so it might change but from the trail shoes I tried so far(Torrent 2, Speedgoat 4&5, More v3 Trail, Salomon Ultra X3), Mafate Speed 4 is the best. Looking forward for the next review 😁
By far the best Trail Running Shoe for not too technical trails up to 70 km. Don‘t have any problems except for longer distances, when changing running styles due to exhaustion is inevitable, I would change to a more stable shoe.
I've had some arch issues in recent Adidas shoes myself, with some rubbing at the 2hr mark. But luckily it was only for the first longrun, after that it didn't bother me. I think this shoe is a bit overkill for me, since I mostly run on relatively technical trails and am nowhere near fast. But if I was doing a couple of weeks in the alps, that stack looks very welcoming. I really enjoyed seeing you race the Tiger Claw, hope to see more trail races from you in the future.
Didn't you have any heel slip in this shoe? I have the agravic speed (not ultra) which has the same upper and its very difficult to get a good lockdown. Impossible to run with thin socks and without a very tight runners knot.
Kofuzi, you really need to test the Terrex Agravic Speed. It is really the best fast trail shoe that i have ever run in and i think it will be a different running experience for you too!
I own only 3 trail shoes: On Cloudventure, Speedgoat 5 Mid GTX, and the Innov8 Roclite 345 GTX. That's probably two too many given how infrequently I use them. So I don't have enough experience for anyone to care what I think. But even with my limited experience I agree that firmer can be better for the trail.
Fantastic Shoe - very stable much more so than the saucony edge (which i like a lot) I love this shoe😍 I found i could open up quite nicely - below marathon pace without realising on my easy run. I wouldnt be doing 1 Km repeats on flat gravel. And credit were credit is due Tom Evans won Westrn States in this. And all the Adidas athletes are racing in this model - especially for Mont Blanc
Hi Mike! I know this is a review of the Speed Ultra and not the Agravic Speed but how do you feel the Agravic Speed would fare on a course like Tunnel Marathon vs road carbon plated shoes?
Gutted I had to sell mine. The rocker was far too aggressive and pushed right up into my arch so after 95 miles I could take no more and thankfully sold them on. Waiting for the Tecton X3
Mike, have you reviewed adidas Terrex AX3 Gore-TEX trail running shoes? Have some on order as a blind buy but wondered what your expert thoughts were on them? Thanks.
I have the same problem with the arch so I swapped the insole (a bit hard to take of) with the insole of another shoe (inov8 g270) and it solved the issue ;) I have the same issue & solution with the Prime X Strung
I saw trail runners already using this shoes. Definitely for more experienced & elite runners . For normal runners they would struggle running with it in more technical terrains & dense jungle.
How was the toe and kick protection? I ran a 50k in Speedgoat 5, loved the foam but the toe protection is non existent. I noticed this in training and it was so dissapointing in the race. Salomons always seem to have great toe and kick protection.
I think it really depends on the terrain. if it's gnarly, go for something wild like the Salomon S Lab Pulsar 3 Trail. I also like the Peregrine for a short trail race
also try the Nnormal Kjerag, Hoka Zinal, and The North Face Summit Vectiv Sky. But it really depends on the type of trails the 5k are on. Some road racing shoes will be able to handle non-hilly buffed trails well.
I'd go with the Craft Pure Trail. You sit inside the heel cup a bit more. The upper on the Agravic Speed Ultra is very lightweight but doesn't provide a lot of support
and to think, I've been telling people that I don't like running trail races or reviewing trail shoes because I don't find the community to be welcoming
I have both, very different, the ultrafly is super soft. I would not use the ultrafly for a short race, too soft. I think both shoes are a bit "extreme" and for the trails, I think you are probably better with something more conventional. Both shoes are a bit too wide and too tall for technical trails. For races, if you want something really light in technical trails, I use the slab pulsar. For more runnable trails, I see a lot of people racing in road shoes like adios pro 3 but personally I use the Endorphin Edge. Both the pulsar and the edge are not conventional, the first is quite narrow and the second is a bit tricky to handle in technical trails with all the bounce downhill.
what about sizing, how it feels length wise, toes space, heel cup etc,,, thanks because to better understand you, first would be nice to know where it all start. like the best would be to see where your big toes showed up and if your heel was firm in place or little up and down even tied up. Also, sizing, when you compare speed goat, were sizes the same or for the same size number the length was different ? size up or size down... for a review thats the info that is more crucial thanks again for your consideration.
The sizing gave me a blister under my arch. I went with my usual running shoe size. Perhaps a smaller size would have resolved the arch blister, but it would have made it less suitable for ultra distance racing in terms of room for foot swelling.
@@kofuzi thanks for the feedback. i have a 13 at home newly purchased and i am waiting on a 12.5 to validate which size ill would keep. they are strangely long for my size and the heel have slight slippage. so by downsizing will answer that. thanks again.
I'm a 4000 mpy non-elite mountain trail runner. That said, the Speed Ultra was NOT worth the wait. It's a solid fireroad cruiser, and that's about it. For true technical mountain terrain, the Hoka Texton X-2 is vastly superior.
First one was really need a top tier supershoe (I actually use it for intervals mostly). I heard the second was also no a big improvement from what I've heard. Would this be a big improvement? Would this go up in your supershoe tier list category?
Pretty annoying that there isn't a lot of the Speed review. While i search for reviews, most are for Speed Ultra. I blame Adidas for this naming debacle.
On my right arch too actually - just saw you had the same issue. My foot and shoe were quite a crime scene at the end of my run (around 2 hrs) and the blister is still healing around 2 months later
You have a terrible strike Kofuzi. You are not getting the best out of the shoe. Land midfoot and allow the geometry to propel you to the forefoot and you will notice soo much energy return from the shoe.
