I've got this shoe recently (black friday sales help) and done a 10k tempo on my local trails (sydney/australia). I can say this is an outstanding shoe. It likes the speed and certain terrain. I'd say this shoe would fit 80% of the terrain of local races, which is more than enough. My current contenders to this shoe - Altra Mont Blanc and Inov8 G300. Ultrafly has advantages over both of those.
Ya, if you have the terrain for this shoe it is absolutely outstanding and the right choice. Good to know you have that in Sydney. I enjoy the technical stuff but I do wish I had. a little bit more terrain for this shoe here in Taipei.
I got the ultrafly on half price here in the UK. It is good for trails in the summer and perfect for road running in our winter. Impossible to clean, not great if you come accross mud. I have a very wide foot. I can do a half marathon in this with no issues. Its not wide enough for me to go any further, but i haven't found anything else with a carbon plate that i can run 5km in without getting blisters.
I enjoyed this shoe, but I just don't have the type of trail here to really use it much and I don't need it for road running. I'm glad they work for you. Definitely a wider forefoot on this one (not just for a Nike).
This shoe can be comfortable well if the trail condition makes flat & stable moreover wider path much betterly smoothly installing . Any bad hard techical narrow can be used not likely I realize .
Buffed out Western States like non-technical trial or fire roads...this shoe is great. if you don;t have the majority of your trail running conditions as that... don't bother.
Trail and Sky running and fast packing has sooooo much variability in terrain and distance. The shoes are wildly divergent and wrapping your head around different lugs, midsole, and upper designs is significant part of understanding the technical aspect of the sport. It’s a bit like mountain biking disciplines and off-road tires for serious 4x4. But because shoes and in general the trail running gear are so cheap relative to cycling and off-roading in motor sports there is just a ton of opportunity to throw out designs and see what sticks. I believe that a shoe can be optimized for the latter part of Western States and things like the Javelina Jundred. But that would likely be a completely different shoe than what would be optimized for Transvulcania from Diagonal des Fous from Marathon des Sables from Tour de Giants from UTMB from Sierre-Zinal. As a result most brands other than NNormal are offering at 1-3 flagship all-around race shoes plus flagship specialist items like a flagship VK shoe or a mud specialty shoe or an ultralight, fast Sierre-Zinal shoe. I had heard on Western States that a standard strategy is to start with a general distance trail shoe to get over the first big climb and snow. They people switch to a road super shoe like a Vaporfly in a drop bag for the later part of the race which is smooth double-track and Jeep fire roads. This thing is interesting but I wonder if it is better than the standard strategy of switching shoes is better for the non-sponsored athlete. Especially since there is a substantial weight penalty.
The variability of trial running and all the various aspects of it make it overall fascinating. Your cycling analogy makes sense too. I have a background racing XC mountain bikes but the whole trail or downhill bike stuff was a bit foreign to me. My interest wasn’t there but also the cost of entry was prohibitive. Also… with Western States, you don’t always get the snow in the first pass… so strategies can change. I watched a podcasts with the Speedland guys (DB’s sponsor announcement on Freetrail) where Kevin and Dave talk about coming at trail running shoes just like you would design equipment for any sport. It’s a subtle difference but a massive one. Back when I was doing a lot of product design in snowboarding and skateboarding we often if didn’t draw any distinctions between boards and footwear (boots and liners) as it was all one system ultimately. Again… this is why all of this is so interesting and why I started this channel… to talk about this all. I do love the level of detail and thought in many of your comments. Makes this a conversation… which I appreciate.
Not true. There are plenty in the ultra community who appreciate this shoe. It’s not without it’s faults but it has something to it. The road community on the other hand… all seem to dislike it.
I'm very happy with these shoes. If you're on your feet for 12 plus hours.. You will appreciate all the technologies on board this shoe. Everyone's experience is different so there's really no side to choose other than your own.
You are spot on. This IS a shoe designed for "all day comfort", meaning 20-30+ hours on your feet in a true ultra. Still, it won't suit all ultra courses. A 100 mile course with lots of technical climbing still won't suit this shoe for most. An open rolling course, with shorter technical sections here and there, like Western States...does. This shoe is a masterclass in purpose built design... specifically for the use case Nike designed it for. I just wish I have more terrain that suited it well. I do enjoy running in it quite a bit.
@@SagasuRunning : "This shoe is a masterclass in purpose built design... specifically for the use case Nike designed it for." Poetic Justice... couldn't of agreed more. Thank You Sagasu.
That is the primary use case for this shoe, long periods on your feet. 20+ hours or more. Again, the shoe is expertly designed for it's purpose (Western States) and does it so well...the issue is very few of us have those needs or conditions.
Nice review! But TECHNICALLY, Vaporweave was also in the older version of the Nike XC Spikes before the Dragonfly XC ones that are the most up to date version. Of course you probably never used them and they aren't that popular so it makes sense why you might have not heard of them!
I know the spike, but didn’t know it used vaporweave. The material makes sense for XC racing as well. I would love to see it make a comeback on road shoes, ideally the Streakfly 2 or something like that. It’s really a great material, just not for the trails.
It is the only Nike trail shoe that intrigues me. It even looks good. Hello Terra Kiger? But, the price is ridiculous, and its use case is very limited. The only comparable shoe I have is the Saucony Endorphin Edge, and it seems to beat this one in almost every department. Especially the price. Great review though!
Nike’s trail line has improved a lot… and I have a soft spot for the Kiger (I have a pair of Kiger 9s, but doubt I’ll review them due to overall interest in them)… but they need some further improvement. The Ultrafly and Zegama get big updates, as does the Peg Trail… but the poor Wildhorse and Kiger are just left behind. As for the Ultrafly… it’s a great shoe for what it is intended for… Nike nailed it and the styling as well. Totally agree (as most do on the styling at least).
Nice review! The plate is much, much shorter. It doesn't go all the way up to the metatarsals. You can see it in the RunRepeat's review with the cut-in-half shoe :P
Actually, there are a few channels that have cut this shoe in half, straight down the middle, which only shows the plate in that center section and doesn't include the forks on the medial or lateral side of the shoe. They are there, trust me. I'm working from official Nike exploded views of the shoe and flyplate. You can even feel the medial/lateral forks with your thumb when compressing the foam. Thank you for the kind words.
@@SagasuRunning Thanks for the answer. I have seen those images, I remember one in the RW channel, although in that X-Ray image, the plate goes all the way up to the metas, but with that shape, should be visible in the cut in half shoe. I agree that 100% it's forked, but I'm not sure it goes so long. Maybe I'll X-Ray mines! haha
@@vicius23 I worked from the cutaways, exploded view, parts and X-rays that Nike had in their booth UTMB Chamonix booth last year. Aligned things and there is what I got. It matches my feel test and if you look at the outsole you can see a darker area where the plate forks in the forefoot.
I looked at the ultrafly at some point. But ever since I ran in the saucony endorphin trail, it’s been hard to look at other long distance trail shoe. The weight and comfort is hard to beat.
@@SagasuRunning The Rift in 2024 hasn't changed, just new colourways. That shoe is disappointing as the lockdown is poor, forefoot is sliding around too much, and the laces don't extend far enough down the foot so there is no way to fix it.
@@RowOfMushyTiT Ya, I watched a few reviews on it. It was overlap very negative on the entire shoe…. Great midsole and outsole… horrible upper. If there the case, I’ll skip it until they rethink the upper.
@@SagasuRunning I guess you know the Conversational Pace channel. They did a review on it with the same conclusion. Which means I trust them from now on.
@@RowOfMushyTiT I’m a big fan of the channel as well as what Brett and Finn do elsewhere. Their reviews are top notch for sure. Listening the Brett talk about the UF made me want to try one of the older prototypes with the Nike outsole on it. I really wonder what they would have felt like compared to the production release.
Planking to run a “steep” marathon in few months (first 32k on normal roads with 2000m elevations and last 10k on rocky terrain with 1000m elevation) I guess these shoes are a no go because too stiff for all that elevations? Correct?
@user-tn1vh6ns6g honestly… these shoes could be a very valid option for that. It sounds within their range, those types of long gradual grades are what this shoe is designed for, ideally on dirt but road will be ok. They won’t be as fast as a Vaporfly on the road section but they will be much faster in the rocky 10k. What did people run the race wearing last year?
The ultrafly is well suited for many terrain here in Australia, especially the fire trail. When going tehcnical downhill, i just dont find it nimble enough. I chuckled when i first saw UK reviewers on this shoe and said it was rubbish. No doubt it has several flaws but not their terrain or weather. For me the price is quite steep as many options say inov8, salomon, asics...etc has more platable positioing. Also a white shoe in trail, looks good at the start but definitely wont start like that forever. In my opinion, Nikes reusuing current material is not well suited for trails. Their superfoam is very poor compared to say lightstrike. I believe Adidas has a more interesting offering with their latest Adidas Terrex Agravic Speed Ultra (what a nomenclature). The continental, rods and lightstrike pro complement trail better. But all super trail shoe with carbon plate are going to be design for races like western state, easier to break record.
Good to know “California carpet” can also be called “Australian carpet”. You are the second person in Australia to say this. Again, if you have the terrain, the Ultrafly is quite fun to run in and well optimized for it. I think Nike did a good job on this first trail super shoe…. It is a very Nike solution using their DNA for sure. I also agree that I think there are more interesting super shoe solutions out there for the trial. The Adidas you mentioned is one I’m quite interested in now. I am leery of the rods durability… but LSP is a structural foam and should do well, plus the pattern for the rods in the shoe makes alot of sense given where you need the rods and where you don’t. It’s a shoe I will try to find and cover when it comes out. I’ve not once seen an Adidas trail shoe here in Taiwan… and we have an official Adidas presence here. I’ll keep a lookout for it for sure.
@chutayoshi4223 I actually found the grip in wet very good. The issue is the 2mm lugs and mud. If the ground/rock is damp, all is well. If there is any mud, then you need to be careful.
The energy rods 1.0 by light years, even the 1.0 system that was only midfoot to forefoot with a carbon or TPU plate in the heel. The LEP system is more a gimmick to try to control Boost foam torsionally, not much more than that. The above is specifically for road us. Adidas has gone a slightly different direction with the rods in the Terrex Agravic Speed Ultra…
Thank you very much for replying to my comment sir One last question is ultraboost light(at 90dollar) good for 5k to 10k daily trainer than adidas boston 12 or takumi sen 9 ???
@@yaduvardhan4932 No, not at all. The Ultraboost Light isn't really even a running shoe. It's a fitness shoe you CAN run in but I'd never recommend it for any serious running. The Boston 12 is a faster all round shoe. The Adizero SL is their daily trainer. The Takumi Sen 9 is their 5/10k racer. All very different.
Hahaha. I can,m confirm, both points, here in Taiwan… exact same thing… sans racing. 🙌🏻 The Vibram outsole is the only thing that gives this shoe any grip on rocky/technical anything… even then you are often pushing the boundaries of the material.
