The Nike Pegasus has always inspired a high degree of loyalty in runners, and if you are a devotee the Pegasus Plus 2 is a great addition to the line, offering a more enjoyable and versatile ride than the Nike Pegasus 42.

It’s the best Pegasus you can get right now and a strong pick for any runner who prefers a high-drop shoe. I certainly enjoyed my miles in the Pegasus Plus 2, but I do think there are more exciting and impressive daily trainers available for less.

These include the Asics Novablast 6 and Puma Deviate Pure Nitro, two of the best running shoes I’ve tested this year, which offer a great combo of comfort and energy return at a lower price than the Pegasus Plus 2.

Nike Pegasus Plus 2 review: Price and availability

The Nike Pegasus Plus 2 launched in August 2026 and costs $170 in the U.S. and £155 in the U.K., making it $25/£25 more expensive than the Nike Pegasus 42, and $50/£35 cheaper than the Nike Pegasus Premium.

It’s competitively priced for a cushioned daily trainer, though there are some excellent options available for less, like the Asics Novablast 6.

Nike Pegasus Plus 2 review: Design and fit

The Nike Pegasus Plus 2 is currently available in four colors, including the white and yellow shoe I tested. I find Nike’s shoes to be very consistent in sizing, and I had a good fit in my usual running shoe size.

Like all Pegasus shoes, the Pegasus Plus 2 has a 10mm drop from heel to toe, which is a little higher than the industry average these days, I’d say.

It’s a well-cushioned shoe, with 38mm of foam at the heel and 28mm at the forefoot. It’s not as maxed out as some rivals, though it certainly feels cushioned enough on the run for me.

The Pegasus Plus 2 weighs 9.3oz in my US men’s size 10, which makes it lighter than the other Pegasus models.

Upper

The Pegasus Plus 2 has a mesh upper with a thick layer of padding around the collar of the shoe.

It’s quite a thick upper and not the most breathable in hot conditions, but I found it comfortable on long runs, and it held my foot securely at faster paces.

Midsole

The biggest change to the Pegasus Plus 2 compared with the Nike Pegasus Plus is that Nike added an Air Zoom pod to the forefoot of the midsole, which is otherwise made from the brand’s ZoomX foam.

Nike uses different versions of ZoomX across the shoes that have it in their midsoles, and in the Pegasus Plus 2, it is a slightly firmer, more resilient material than in racing shoes like the Alphafly 3.

It’s still soft and springy, though, and the Air Zoom pod adds firmness in the forefoot to boost energy return as you come off your toes.

Outsole

The Pegasus Plus 2 uses Nike’s waffle tread rubber for its outsole, and while there is a fair bit of exposed foam in the midfoot, the heel and forefoot are well covered.

It might not prove as durable as the outsole on the Pegasus 42, which is thicker and covers more of the bottom of the shoe, but I’ve not seen any wear and tear after 40 miles, which has included several runs on light trails.

Nike Pegasus Plus 2 review: Running performance

I tested the Nike Pegasus Plus 2 over several weeks of marathon training, using it for a mix of runs including several easy efforts, a progression run, and a 10-mile long run.

I’ve also tested all past models of the Pegasus Plus and Pegasus Turbo line, along with the past eight versions of the standard Pegasus and the Pegasus Premium. That’s a lot of Pegasuses (Pegasi?), and the Pegasus Plus 2 is the one that’s made the best impression on me since the original Pegasus Turbo.

It’s softer, lighter, and bouncier than the Pegasus Plus and the Pegasus 42, and a little smoother in transitioning from heel to toe.

I still found it quite a slappy shoe in how the forefoot comes down, which is often the case with 10mm drop shoes, but the softer foam helps it to roll through, and then the firmer Air Zoom pods add a little punch to your toe-off when running at faster speeds.

It’s not a particularly quick shoe though, and if you’ve come looking for a super-trainer or an all-rounder that’s great for intervals as well as easy runs, I don’t think you’ll find it here — the Nike Zoom Fly 6 is the shoe that does that for me in the Swoosh’s line-up.

The Pegasus Plus is instead a lively cushioned daily trainer that works best for easy and long runs. In that sense, it really lives up to its name — it does the same job as the Pegasus 42, but has a more enjoyable ride feel and a little extra pop at pace.

Should you buy the Nike Pegasus Plus 2?

If you’re a big Pegasus fan, then I think the Pegasus Plus 2 is worth getting as the best version of the shoe right now, even if it costs you a bit more than the Pegasus 42.

Similarly, if you prefer a 10mm drop shoe, I think it’s a good cushioned option for daily training and more fun to use than rivals like the Brooks Ghost 18.

However, if you’re happy to shop around a bit more, I do think there are better options, whether you want a speedy all-rounder or a cushioned daily trainer.

The Asics Novablast 6 springs to mind as an excellent cushioned option that costs less than the Pegasus Plus 2, while the Puma Deviate Pure Nitro is cheaper, lighter, and more versatile than the Nike, making it better for workouts.

If you want a speedier shoe for daily training, the Adidas Adizero Evo SL is one of my all-time favorites, and the Kiprun Kipstorm Tempo is a max-stack, lightweight super-trainer that can handle any kind of run well.

While the Pegasus Plus 2 is a welcome evolution of the Pegasus line and better than the competent but uninspiring Pegasus 42 and the heavy, overpriced Pegasus Premium, it still suffers a bit in comparison to top options from other brands.

The Adidas Pro Evo line has been controversial from the moment the original shoe launched with a $500 price and suggestions it would only last one race.

Those negatives are enough to put off most amateur runners, but the bigger problem I had with the Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 2 when I tested it was that it didn’t feel all that special to me.

It was light and fast, but didn’t feel a step up on the best carbon plate running shoes that cost half as much and lasted twice as many miles or more.

The Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 is something truly special, and so the same negatives — high price, low durability — don’t feel quite so important to me.

It’s not a shoe that will suit everyone, either with regards to price or its wildly springy and unstable ride, but the Pro Evo 3 is lighter than any other racer I’ve tried, and makes running fast feel near effortless at times.

Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 review: price and availability

The Adidas Pro Evo 3 sticks to the same price as past versions of the shoe; it’s $500 in the U.S. and £450 in the U.K., making it the most expensive carbon plate racer on the market.

It’s also hard to get hold of, with the limited stock Adidas sporadically makes available generally getting snapped up in seconds. In the UK, you can enter a draw for when the shoe next goes on sale on 5 October, and more stock is expected in the U.S. at some point this Fall.

Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 review: design and fit

The Adidas Pro Evo 3 has only been available in the white and black color it launched in so far, though some Adidas athletes did use a model with a red splash on the forefoot at the Berlin Marathon.

I’m generally in between two sizes and went for the larger one with the Pro Evo 3 to get the best fit — I find with Adidas racing shoes they can come up a bit small, so even going half a size up is worth considering.

The Pro Evo 3 made headlines for being the first sub-3.5oz/100g carbon plate super-shoe at launch and it is absurdly light. It’s 3.7oz/106g in my US men’s size 10, which is around 1.4oz lighter than any other racer I’ve tested in my size, and half the weight of many.

This featherweight design is not down to a lack of cushioning in the midsole either — the Pro Evo 3 stands 39mm tall at the heel and 36mm at the forefoot for a 3mm drop.

Upper

When I spoke to the team behind the design of the Pro Evo 3, they told me the upper on the shoe is inspired by materials used in kitesurfing.

It’s very light and flexible, and there’s minimal cushioning and reinforcement on the upper around the back of the shoe, as you’d expect with low weight being a priority.

On my runs in the Pro Evo 3, the upper has held my foot securely, though, even when pushing to all-out paces, and so far I’ve not seen any worrying wear on this part of the shoe.

Midsole

The Adidas Pro Evo 2 was one of the lightest shoes ever made, and yet with the Pro Evo 3 Adidas found a way to make the new Lightstrike Pro Evo foam in its midsole almost 50% lighter than the stuff in the Pro Evo 2.

It’s an extremely soft and springy foam too, and you feel the softness even more because the Pro Evo 3 doesn’t use a full carbon plate. It instead has a carbon rim that runs around the outside of the midsole, which is called ENERGYRIM.

This adds the stiffness required to maximize the propulsive feel of the midsole while also being lighter than a full plate or the carbon rods Adidas used on past models of its racing shoes.

The soft midsole foam is already showing signs of wear on my shoes, with some small chunks coming out around the forefoot, but it still feels just as bouncy as it did when new.

Outsole

The outsole on the Pro Evo 2 was a bit of a disaster, offering little to no grip in wet conditions, and Adidas has taken steps to improve this on the Pro Evo 3 without increasing the weight on the bottom of the shoe.

There are rubber patches covering the forefoot and heel of the shoe, both of which are just 0.5mm thick, and I have found that the Continental rubber used on the forefoot grips well on wet and dry roads in my runs.

Once again, there are worrying signs of wear on this part of the shoe after 30 miles of running. The back patch on one of my shoes has started to flake away and the tread pattern on the forefoot has worn thin in some places.

Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 review: running performance

The Adidas Pro Evo 3 has already proven itself to be very effective when on the feet of elite athletes. Sabastian Sawe ran the first official sub-2-hour marathon in the shoe at the London Marathon in April, Yomif Kejelcha broke the half marathon world record while wearing it in Buenos Aires in August, and all six podium spots at the recent Berlin Marathon were taken up by men and women wearing the Pro Evo 3.

It’s not hard to see why it’s been so successful when you run in the shoe. I’ve done three runs in the Pro Evo 3, including a 20-miler on the road and a long track session running 24x400m reps at my various race paces, and it’s felt exceptionally good on all of them.

I’ve tested pretty much every major carbon shoe ever made too, so I don’t lack for comparisons, and the Pro Evo 3 does feel genuinely special. It’s not just extremely light and bouncy, but also pushes you through each stride so smoothly that hitting and holding fast paces feels like a breeze at times.

What I noticed in both the track session and 20-mile long run, where I did the second half in 59:30, is that my heart rate was lower than normal at faster speeds, and that I recovered more quickly in between reps on the track.

I’ve done similar 20-milers in many different carbon shoes over the past five years as part of my marathon training, and it’s never felt as good as it did in the Pro Evo 3.

There are drawbacks to the design, though. I would definitely say the soft, unstable feel of the Pro Evo 3 will not suit every runner. I’m not sure it would be supportive enough for me as a 2:25 marathoner, especially in the later stages of the race.

If feels like a pinnacle racer built to deliver the fastest times in history, so us mere mortals might only get the best out of the Pro Evo 3 for shorter events than the marathon, and even then you’ll have to be happy running in an unstable shoe that might only be at its best for 100 miles or so.

Should you buy the Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3?

There’s a case for saying that anyone who has to buy the Adidas Pro Evo 3 probably shouldn’t. Unless you’re a pro runner getting handed the shoe for free to use at one key event, it’s not a great investment.

It’s wobbly and lacks durability, and my top alternatives like the Puma Fast-R Nitro Elite 3, Asics Metaspeed Ray and Asics Metaspeed Sky Tokyo are also brilliantly fast and efficient racing shoes that cost a lot less than the Pro Evo 3.

However, as an innovative, elite racing shoe, the Pro Evo 3 does deliver on its promise of being the best yet, in my opinion, and that will be enough for many runners to want to give it a go.

There have been points over the past couple of years where I’ve wondered exactly what brands can do to keep improving their super-shoes, given the quality of what’s already out there. The Pro Evo 3 proves there’s still scope to produce something special.

Once you try a full foldable treadmill, it’s very hard to go back. The trouble is that most of the best treadmills that do fold fully flat are small and under-specced compared to larger machines.

Not so the Urevo CyberMega Smart Treadmill, which matches the max speed and incline settings of much larger machines and has a similarly powerful motor, in a fully foldable design that’s easy to store and doesn’t take up too much space.

I’ve tested the machine for several weeks, running on it regularly as part of my marathon training, and it’s impressed me with its performance. It runs smoothly even on long runs at fast speeds, and while it’s not as large and robust as a gym-ready machine, it did everything I needed it to.

The partner app is a little underwhelming, and there’s no AMOLED display to follow workouts, but you can easily connect the CyberMega to other apps for guided workouts or virtual training.

For $1000, the Urevo CyberMega is pretty good value, too, given its spec sheet and performance. If you’re a keen runner who needs a fast, reliable machine for home training and aren’t too bothered about guided workouts, it’s worth looking at it.

Urevo CyberMega Smart Treadmill review: Price and availability

The Urevo CyberMega Smart Treadmill launched in August 2026 and costs $1,000 in the U.S. and £999 in the U.K., which is good value compared to other machines with similarly high speed, incline and motor specs from brands like NordicTrack and Bowflex.

Urevo CyberMega Smart Treadmill review: Design

The Urevo CyberMega Smart Treadmill comes fully assembled in its box, and setting it up simply involves getting it out of the packaging and unfolding it. I managed to do this by myself, but it would certainly be easier with two people, as it’s tricky to manoeuvre the machine out of the packaging.

You can fold and unfold the console on the machine without a tool, and it locks into place once it’s raised. It feels pretty sturdy, and you have to press two large buttons simultaneously to fold it down, but I still felt a bit wary about putting significant weight on the console or handrails while the treadmill was running.

The CyberMega isn't as light and compact as some treadmills I’ve tested, like the DeerRun A1 Pro, but it offers a higher max speed and incline, and it’s impressively small and easy to store for such a capable machine.

Once folded flat, you can lift and move the CyberMega using the wheels under the front. It’s a lot easier to move than bigger machines I’ve tested, like the Bowflex Treadmill 10, and I managed to transfer it between my house and garage by myself.

The console has a central dial used to change speed and incline, as well as a touch panel with shortcuts for certain speed and incline settings. The dial changes the speed in 0.5km/h increments on my machine — for more precise speed changes, you have to use the partner app.

It doesn't have buttons on the handrails to adjust speed and incline, but there are sensors you can use to measure your heart rate.

On top of the console is a foldable LCD that also doubles as a tablet or phone holder. This just shows your stats during the run, rather than being a full AMOLED display you can use to set up your runs and follow scenic routes or instructor-led workouts.

For those features, you need to link to the Urevo app, which you can do via Bluetooth. You can also link to other apps easily with the treadmill — I mostly had it linked to Zwift for virtual runs during my sessions.

Urevo CyberMega Smart Treadmill review: Performance

I’m currently training for the Frankfurt Marathon and running around 70-80 miles a week, and I moved several of those runs each week to the CyberMega while testing the treadmill, with the longest runs I’ve done on the machine being around 10 miles.

I was concerned that despite having impressive specs, it wouldn’t actually feel robust enough to use at faster speeds and higher inclines, but it actually felt quite sturdy during my training even when holding speeds over 10mph for 30-40 minutes.

It’s not the fastest when changing speed or incline, but it doesn’t wobble about too much when you increase the latter while running, and the belt ran smoothly and fairly quietly at high speeds.

I checked that the speed of the belt was calibrated correctly by measuring the full length of the belt and marking it with tape to count the revolutions, and it was spot on.

It’s not the biggest running belt, though. It feels quite narrow, and you have to keep your focus to stay in the center of the belt, and while it was long enough for me (I’m 6ft tall), I do have quite a short stride length, so if you’re a taller person with a loping gait, it might feel cramped.

The benefit of the smaller belt is how compact the machine is as a whole, and it’s much easier to move and store than the Bowflex Treadmill 10 I tested before it, and it takes up much less space in a room as well.

Urevo CyberMega Smart Treadmill review: App

The Urevo app is free and can link to the treadmill to guide you through workouts and scenic routes, including the full courses for the Boston and Berlin Marathons (you can do 5K, 10K, or half marathon runs along these routes if the full 26.2 miles seems a bit much).

You can also use the app to adjust settings on the treadmill mid-run, including smaller increments for the speed than are available on the machine’s console.

If you use a tablet or phone on the built-in stand/LCD screen on the machine, you can move the stats to display around your device. I found my phone and tablet rattled around a bit on the stand during long runs, and I had to prod them back to the center occasionally.

I also found that it took a few tries to establish the app’s connection to the treadmill, and the variety of workouts available isn't as impressive as apps that require a subscription, like Peloton or Echelon apps.

During my testing, I rarely used the app as a result — I preferred to link the machine to Zwift and run in its virtual worlds, which is easily done using the treadmill’s Bluetooth.

Should you buy the Urevo CyberMega Smart Treadmill?

The Urevo CyberMega is a compact treadmill that can match the demands of even experienced runners, and it’s the kind of machine I’d pick myself thanks to its high top speed, space-saving design, and ability to link to partner apps.

It’s not as strong an option if your priorities are features like guided workouts and in-run entertainment, which are better done by treadmills with large AMOLED displays and better apps that can show instructor-led workouts, like the Echelon Stride-6s-10.

I have only tested the machine for a few weeks so far too, so I can’t comment on its durability yet. It ran well throughout my testing, but the smaller, foldable design doesn’t have the hardy feel of a large, gym-ready machine like the Peloton Tread or Bowflex Treadmill 10.

For regular personal use, however, the fully foldable Urevo CyberMega is a lot more convenient, and I can’t fault its performance. I wouldn’t go back to a larger machine myself, and if you’re a committed runner looking for an affordable, foldable machine that can keep up with your training, it’s a great option.

The 52nd BMW Berlin Marathon will feature more than 56,000 runners from 160 countries pounding the streets of the German capital today. The 26.2-mile course is famously flat and fast, making it one of the world's best stages for elite marathoners and recreational runners alike —Tigst Assefa may even break her own women-only world record.

Read on and we'll show you how to watch Berlin Marathon 2026 live streams from anywhere with a VPN — and potentially for FREE.

The biggest storyline is the return of Assefa, who won the Berlin Marathon in 2022 before returning a year later to set a women's marathon world record of 2:11:53. That mixed record has since been broken, by Ruth Chepngetich, but Assefa remains in excellent form after setting a new women's-only world record of 2:15:41 at the London Marathon earlier this year.

Today, the Ethiopian has Chepngetich's 2:09:53 in her sights as she eyes a third Berlin victory but will face tough competition from defending champion Rosemary Wanjiru, as well as European champion Alisa Vainio.

The men's field is no less replete with talent, with 2021 Berlin champion Guye Adola in fine form after winning the Rotterdam Marathon earlier this year in 2:03:54. He'll be run close by Tanzania's Gabriel Geay, whose personal best is 2:03:00 and Ethiopia's 2020 London Marathon winner Shura Kitata, who set a 2:03:59 PB in Seville earlier this year.

The weather should be more comfortable this year than last year's notoriously hot race, with temperatures around 13C at the start potentially rising to 22C later in the day. The official time limit is 6 hours and 15 minutes from when runners cross the start line, with a specific cutoff requiring them to reach the 33km mark by 3:40 p.m.

Find out all the details on how to tune in and watch a Berlin Marathon 2026 live stream below wherever you are around the world, including free streams.

Watch Berlin Marathon 2026 live stream for FREE

Fans in Germany are in luck! RTL is streaming the Berlin Marathon for FREE.

The 2026 Berlin Marathon will also be shown for FREE on the Olympic Channel in the following countries: Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Moldova, Norway, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, UAE, Yemen, Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan.

If you're from any of these countries but currently abroad during Berlin Marathon weekend, you’ll be blocked from watching your usual streams.

That said, you can avoid paying for another streaming service and unblock Berlin Marathon live free streams using a VPN, which will help you stream like you would if you were back home. NordVPN is among the best out there:

Using a VPN is incredibly simple:

1. Install the VPN of your choice. As we've said, NordVPN is a strong option.

2. Choose the location you wish to connect to in the VPN app. For instance if you're away from Germany but want to watch your usual service, you'd select a Germany-based server from the list.

3. Sit back and enjoy the action. Head to RTL or another website and watch the 2026 Berlin Marathon live stream.

How to watch Berlin Marathon live streams in the U.S.

Viewers in the U.S. can watch the 2026 Berlin Marathon via FloTrack. A subscription costs $29.99/month or $150/year.

If you already use the service but aren't in the U.S. right now, you can live stream the Berlin Marathon by using a good VPN.

How to watch Berlin Marathon live streams in Canada

In Canada you’ll need a FloTrack subscription in order to watch the Berlin Marathon 2026.

If you're away from home and struggling to tap into your subscriptions, you could use a VPN to help you access a Berlin Marathon stream from anywhere. We recommend NordVPN.

How to watch Berlin Marathon live streams in the U.K.

It's FloTrack in the U.K., too.

A subscription costs the same as in the U.S., and is billed in dollars.

If you’re currently traveling in the U.K. from abroad, don’t worry, as you can use NordVPN to access your usual streaming services from back home.

How to watch Berlin Marathon live streams in Australia

For those in Australia, FloTrack is also the place to watch the Berlin Marathon. In Oz, this will set you back AU$29.99/month or AU$149.99/year.

Outside of Australia right now? You can simply use a VPN, such as NordVPN, to watch the race as if you were back in Oz.

More from Tom's Guide

• How to watch UK TV abroad: BBC iPlayer, ITVX, Channel 4 and more
• The best streaming VPN
• I’m a 62-year-old marathon runner — here’s the exact strength workout I use

We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example:1. Accessing a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service).2. Protecting your online security and strengthening your online privacy when abroad.We do not support or condone the illegal or malicious use of VPN services. Consuming pirated content that is paid-for is neither endorsed nor approved by Future Publishing.

Mizuno has always been one of the more innovative brands when it comes to carbon plate running shoes, with mixed results.

The Mizuno Wave Rebellion Pro line had crazy cutouts and an incredibly high midfoot stack height and was a bit too wild for my liking, but the Mizuno Hyperwarp Pure is an excellent lightweight racer I’ve loved for 5K and 10K events in particular.

While the Pure is light, the new Mizuno Hyperwarp 96 takes things to another level with a design that tips the scales at just 96g/3.4oz, making it the lightest carbon plate racing shoe yet.

It comes in a gram lighter than the Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 on listed stats, and given the success of the world-record-breaking Pro Evo 3, runners will be itching to get their feet into the Hyperwarp 96 too — I know I am.

Here’s what you need to know about the Mizuno Hyperwarp 96.

The Hyperwarp 96 goes on sale in December and it will be very expensive

Mizuno has announced the Hyperwarp 96 today ahead of the Berlin Marathon, but it won’t be available to consumers until the end of the year.

The price is yet to be fully confirmed, but is set to be about £400 in the U.K., which I’d expect to translate to a U.S. price of around $450 based on the prices of other Mizuno shoes.

That would make it less expensive than the Adidas Pro Evo 3, which is $500/£450, but more expensive than every other carbon plate super-shoe.

It has a spray-on, laceless upper

The most striking aspect of the Hyperwarp 96’s design is the spray-on upper, which looks a lot like the LightSpray uppers On uses on some of its shoes, like the On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS.

This 3D-engineered upper is very light and designed to be denser at the bottom.

I like the LightSpay uppers on On’s shoes, but they can be tricky to deal with if you have wide feet or high arches, and you can’t adjust the fit if it’s not perfect out of the box.

The midsole is made from an all-new foam

A new foam called Mizuno Enerzy XP+ is used for the midsole of the Hyperwarp 96. It’s an extremely light material, and Mizuno shaved off every area not critical to performance to reduce weight as much as possible.

Unlike the Hyperwarp Pure, which achieves its low weight partly by having a lower stack height than most super-shoes, the Hyperwarp 96 has as much cushioning as rival racers.

It stands 39mm tall at the heel and 36mm at the forefoot for a 3mm drop, which is exactly the same specs as the Adidas Pro Evo 3.

It has a full-length carbon plate

The Hyperwarp 96 has a full-length carbon plate with a section cut out under the heel to reduce the weight.

This isn’t a novelty with super-shoes in general, but other super-light options have used other systems to add stability and propulsion without the weight of a full-length plate.

The Pro Evo 3 uses a carbon rim rather than a full plate, while the Asics Metaspeed Ray has a teardrop-shaped plate that only sits under the forefoot.

This means Mizuno might have an easy way to make the shoe even lighter if it wishes, by opting for a half plate or some other design, if it can do so without impacting performance.

Maybe this time next year we’ll see the Mizuno Hyperwarp 86?

More from Tom's Guide

• How long do running shoes actually last? I asked an expert who makes them, and they gave me a great tip for recognizing when your shoes are done
• What makes the new Nike Alphafly 4 special? I spoke to the VP of Nike Running Footwear to find out, and the answer surprised me
• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money

The 2026 World Athletics Road Running Championships will take place in Copenhagen, on September 19 and 20. Six world titles up for grabs across the road mile, 5K and half marathon. Kenya dominated the inaugural 2023 event with five golds, three silvers, and 12 bronze medals.

Read on and we'll show you how to watch World Athletics Road Running Championships 2026 live streams from anywhere with a VPN — and potentially for FREE.

There’s plenty of star power in the field, led by Norway’s Jakob Ingebrigtsen, who will compete in the 5K just one week after winning the same distance at the World Athletics Ultimate Championship in Budapest.

The event will also feature 2025 world 10,000m champion Jimmy Gressier of France, while American record holder Yared Nuguse headlines the road mile after posting a career-best 3:51.90. Nuguse also owns the fastest road mile by an entrant this year, with fellow American Vincent Ciattei second on the list.

There will be plenty to watch in the other events, too. Uganda’s Olympic champion Joshua Cheptegei headlines the men’s half marathon alongside Kenya’s Nicholas Kipkorir, while Kenya’s Agnes Ngetich leads the women’s half marathon field after winning the individual cross-country world title earlier this year.

In the women’s 5K, Caroline Nyaga and Caroline Makandi Gitonga are among the leading contenders, and American Addison Wiley arrives with the fastest road mile of the 2026 season.

Find out all the details on how to tune in and watch a World Athletics Road Running Championships 2026 live stream below wherever you are around the world, including free streams.

Watch World Athletics Road Running Championships 2026 live streams for FREE

Fans across Europe are in luck, with Eurovision Sport showing both days of the World Athletics Road Running Championships 2026 completely free of charge.

The free coverage includes viewers in countries such as Denmark, France, Czechia, and Switzerland, giving fans an easy way to watch all the action without needing a paid subscription.

In the UK, coverage on the second day is split between Eurovision Sport and BBC iPlayer, with both platforms offering their coverage for free.

Meanwhile, viewers in Canada can watch the championships for free on CBC Gem, which will also provide live coverage of the event.

In Australia and elsewhere worldwide where no broadcaster has picked up the event, fans can turn to the official World Athletics+ streaming platform, which will also show the 2026 World Athletics Road Running Championships for free.

Away from home right now? Unlock your free stream with NordVPN — find out more below.

Using a VPN is incredibly simple:

1. Install the VPN of your choice. As we've said, NordVPN is a strong option.

2. Choose the location you wish to connect to in the VPN app. For instance if you're away from the U.K. but want to watch your usual service, you'd select a U.K.-based server from the list.

3. Sit back and enjoy the action. Head to BBC iPlayer or another website and watch the 2026 World Athletics Road Running Championships live streams.

How to watch World Athletics Road Running Championships 2026 live streams in the U.S.

Viewers in the U.S. can watch the 2026 World Athletics Road Running Championships on Peacock, which can be accessed for as little as $1 through a 30-day trial of Walmart+.

Alternatively, a Peacock sub for live sport is available for $12.99/month.

If you already use the service but aren't in the U.S. right now, you can live stream the event by using a good VPN.

How to watch World Athletics Road Running Championships 2026 live streams in Canada

In Canada, fans can watch the 2026 World Athletics Road Running Championships live for free on CBC Gem, CBC’s free streaming service.

If you're away from home and struggling to tap into your subscriptions, you could use a VPN to help you access a World Athletics Road Running Championships stream from anywhere. We recommend NordVPN.

How to watch World Athletics Road Running Championships 2026 live streams in the U.K.

In the UK, fans can watch the first day's coverage for free on Eurovision Sport, while coverage on the second day is split between Eurovision Sport and BBC iPlayer, with both platforms offering free streaming.

BBC iPlayer is available on a number of devices, including streaming sticks, smartphones, laptops, gaming consoles, and smart TVs.

If you're currently traveling overseas, don't worry, as you can use NordVPN to watch the 2026 World Athletics Road Running Championships from abroad.

How to watch World Athletics Road Running Championships 2026 live streams in Australia

For those in Australia – and elsewhere where no broadcaster has picked up the event – the official World Athletics+ streaming platform is the place to watch the 2026 World Athletics Road Running Championships live, completely FREE.

Outside of Australia right now? You can simply use a VPN, such as NordVPN, to watch the race as if you were back in Oz.

World Athletics Road Running Championships start times and schedule 2026

(All times BST / ET)

Saturday, September 19

9:10 a.m. / 4:10 a.m. — Women’s Mile
9:30 a.m. / 4:30 a.m. — Men’s Mile
1:10 p.m. / 8:10 a.m. — Women’s 5km
1:40 p.m. / 8:40 a.m. — Men’s 5km

Sunday, September 20

8:10 a.m. / 3:10 a.m. — Women’s Half Marathon
8:45 a.m. / 3:45 a.m. — Men’s Half Marathon

More from Tom's Guide

• How to watch UK TV abroad: BBC iPlayer, ITVX, Channel 4 and more
• The best streaming VPN
• I’m a 62-year-old marathon runner — here’s the exact strength workout I use

We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example:1. Accessing a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service).2. Protecting your online security and strengthening your online privacy when abroad.We do not support or condone the illegal or malicious use of VPN services. Consuming pirated content that is paid-for is neither endorsed nor approved by Future Publishing.

The Nike Alphafly has been one of the best carbon-plate running shoes you can buy since the original launched in 2020, and the Alphafly 3 set both men’s and women’s marathon world records.

In the time since the Alphafly 3 came out in early 2024, however, a slew of outstanding rival super-shoes from other brands have come out, with the most notable being the Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3.

The Pro Evo 3 was used by Sabastian Sawe to run the first sub-2-hour marathon in an official race in April at the London Marathon — seven years after Eliud Kipchoge did it at a special event in a prototype of the original Alphafly.

There’s some pressure on the Nike Alphafly 4 then, which launches today and needs to be both better than its illustrious predecessors and the best racers from other brands.

To find out how Nike went about updating its flagship marathon racing shoe, I spoke to Bret Schoolmeester, Vice President overseeing Nike Running Footwear, and to my surprise, one of the major focuses in the development of the shoe was stability.

What were the aims going into creating the Alphafly 4?

Nike leaned on both its extensive roster of elite athletes and its research teams to create its aims for the Alphafly 4.

“The benefit we have in our racing line is we have the voice of our athletes telling us ‘hey, here's some things we want’, and we also have our lab team being pretty consistent that there's an evergreen benefit that we always need to keep pursuing, and that's how do we improve runners’ running economy; how efficiently they can run in the shoe,” says Schoolmeester.

“There’s things we know we're never going to stop pursuing, like weight reduction and energy return, and then one thing we did uniquely focus on with the Alphafly 4 is stability.”

Improving stability is tricky in a modern racing shoe, most of which uses tall stacks of soft foams, but it can be important in the latter stages of long events in particular.

“Late in a race, your biomechanics break down,” says Schoolmeester. “The better you're supported, the more you're going to be able to hold that critical velocity all the way through the race.

“That was a really big one for us, because it came from our kind of everyday athletes, but it's also trickled up into the elites.”

Trickled up is not a phrase I often hear when covering super-shoes — usually the benefits aimed at elite athletes trickle down to amateurs — but Nike is keen to position the Alphafly 4 as a racer for all levels.

“What we're really proud of with the Alphafly overall is that while it's the franchise that helped break the two-hour marathon for the first time when Eliud did it, it's also the most widely adopted marathon racing shoe. From the front of the pack all the way to the back, we see Alphaflys on everybody's feet.”

What are the key updates to the Alphafly 4?

The Alphafly 4 has been updated from the upper to the outsole to help make it 5% lighter and more energetic than the Alphafly 3, and the key updates to the shoe are found in the midsole.

“There’s a new foam — ZoomX LT is a new way for us to process ZoomX, so we can get that 17% weight reduction while still improving energy return by 8%,” says Schoolmeester.

Nike also changed the design of the Air Zoom pods in the forefoot of the shoe, switching from a thermoformed bag to radiofrequency welding, to reduce weight by 30%.

“Then the plate,” says Schoolmeester. “The plate has always had this really scooped geometry to help with propulsion. We switched up the geometry to make sure it was also adding to stability, maximising the deflection of the foam and the airbags.”

Along with the new ZoomX LT foam, the Alphafly 4 also uses standard ZoomX in its midsole, a setup that Schoolmeester suggests boost both performance and stability.

“That’s one of the things we worked through in the development process,” says Schoolmeester. “Should we go with both foams? Should we switch the configuration?

“What we found was that using ZoomX on the bottom midsole part, which still offers incredible energy return and weight, helped stabilize the system, whereas with the top part we put a heavier premium on lightweight and energy return.

“It maximized both of those different components, and that wound up being the best performing system.”

Why is stability important in a marathon racing shoe?

I’ve tested a lot of pinnacle racing shoes and rarely is stability given such prominence as it is with the launch of the Alphafly 4, but it's an important feature that shouldn’t be overlooked.

“Energy return: no-brainer. Lightweight: no-brainer. But stability in a racing shoe; people don't consider it as necessarily being really important,” says Schoolmeester.

“But watch any marathoner — even the world's best — their mechanics don't always look exactly the same towards the end of the race, and especially for us mere mortals, you're going to need some extra support.”

That extra support can directly lead to you running faster, which is ultimately what these super-shoes are all about.

“If you're fighting the shoe at all, or fighting to stay stable, that's energy that's not being put into going straight forward as fast as you can,” Schoolmeester.

“We intentionally fatigue athletes and run tests to make sure that the benefits are holding up even when fatigued, because feeling good mile one through five, any marathoner will tell you, is not the hard part.

“Feeling good at 30km, 35km (18 miles, 21 miles) and holding everything together all the way through to the finish line. That's the real magic.”

The Nike Alphafly 4 costs $275/£254 and will be available as a limited release from 17 September, with broader availability from 29 October.

More from Tom's Guide

• How long do running shoes actually last? I asked an expert who makes them, and they gave me a great tip for recognizing when your shoes are done
• Rheon running shorts are being used by top road, track and trail runners — I spoke to an expert to find out more about the tech
• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money

I love a good rocker on a running shoe, and the On Cloudsurfer line’s signature feature has always been its CloudTec Phase cushioning, where holes in the midsole collapse into eachother like dominoes to roll you from heel to toe as you run.

The On Cloudsurfer 2 is a lightweight daily trainer, while the On Cloudsurfer Max is a more cushioned but firmer shoe. The new On Cloudsurfer 3 splits the difference between these shoes, and based on my early testing, I think it could be the best Cloudsurfer yet.

I’ve been able to do a couple of runs in the On Cloudsurfer 3 ahead of its launch, and it’s impressed me on both. The shoe uses a new foam in the midsole called Surreal and delivers a soft, smooth ride that helps the miles tick by enjoyably.

Here’s what you need to know about On’s latest running shoe, including my early likes and dislikes.

On Cloudsurfer 3: Price and availability

The On Cloudsurfer 3 launched on 15 September 2026, and my first like about the shoe is that it hasn’t risen in price compared with the Cloudsurfer 2. It costs $160 in the U.S. and £150 in the U.K., making it one of the cheaper cushioned shoes in On’s line-up.

Like #1: It’s more cushioned than past models

The Cloudsurfer 3 feels like a softer shoe with more cushioning underfoot than past models, especially under the forefoot.

On say that the new Surreal superfoam deepens compression by 15.5% compared with the Helion foam used on the Cloudsurfer 2, and I could feel the extra depth in the midsole on my runs and how much the new shoe absorbed the impact of running.

I found that the Cloudsurfer 2 could sometimes "bottom out" and feel a bit flat by the end of runs, but I haven’t had that feeling from the Cloudsurfer 3 at all so far.

The Cloudsurfer Max was marketed as an incredibly soft shoe when it came out, but I actually found it pretty firm — the Cloudsurfer 3 delivers on its promise of softness.

Like #2: The ride is impressively smooth at a variety of paces

Soft shoes are great, but not if you end up stuck in that soft foam and feeling like you have to push through it to keep running, which does occasionally happen with max-cushioned shoes in my experience.

This is where the CloudTec Phase rocker comes into play with the Cloudsurfer 3, because it helps move you through the midsole onto your toes smoothly, so you don’t lose momentum while enjoying the impact-absorbing benefits of the cushioning.

I used the On Cloudsurfer 3 for a progression run, moving from an easy to a steady pace, and was able to clip along at sub-6min/mile pace comfortably in the shoe, despite the fact that it’s not all that light.

Like #3: There’s more spring off the toes

The main criticism I’ve had with past Cloudsurfer shoes is that the Helion foam in the midsole isn’t all that springy. The shoes have a smooth ride and a lightweight feel, but don’t deliver much energy return off the toes.

The Surreal foam in the Cloudsurfer 3’s midsole is a definite improvement on that front. I noticed a lot more bounce from the shoe, especially at faster paces.

That extra energy from the forefoot is also clear during longer runs in the shoe, when the previous models would start to feel a bit flat.

Like #4: The outsole grip is better

I did a short run wearing the On Cloudsurfer 2 on one foot and the On Cloudsurfer 3 on the other, and along with differences in the ride feel, I also noted that the outsole on the new shoe gripped a little better on damp sidewalks.

While I didn’t have any real problems with the grip of the Cloudsurfer 2 when I tested it out, any improvement in this area is always welcome in a cushioned daily trainer you’re going to use in all conditions.

Dislike #1: It’s heavier than the Cloudsurfer 3

The new Surreal foam used in the Cloudsurfer 3 is lighter than the Helion material used in past models, according to On, but the overall weight of the shoe has gone up considerably.

My US men’s size 9.5 weighs 10.8oz compared to 9.4oz for the Cloudsurfer 2 in the same size, likely because the shoe has more outsole coverage and more cushioning in the midsole, as well as a wider base.

This isn’t a big problem for me, because the Cloudsurfer 3 doesn’t feel heavy or cumbersome on the run thanks to its rockered ride, but it’s quite a noticeable change from the Cloudsurfer 2, and big fans of the older shoe might not take to the larger design.

Dislike #2: It’s not as versatile as some daily trainers

While I enjoyed using the Cloudsurfer 3 at easy, steady paces, it’s not a shoe I think will handle speed sessions all that well. That’s not really its job to be fair — it’s a cushioned shoe for comfortable cruising — but there are some terrific daily trainers that do offer more versatility.

The Asics Novablast 6 immediately springs to mind as a max-cushioned shoe that’s lighter and a bit livelier at fast paces than the Cloudsurfer 3, while the Puma Deviate Pure Nitro is an incredibly light daily trainer that I found comfortable for long, easy runs and that can also handle speedwork well.

I think the Cloudsurfer 3 is competitive with other cushioned shoes in its category, like the Saucony Triumph 24 and Hoka Clifton Pro, but those looking for more of an all-rounder will be better served by a shoe like the Novablast 6.

More from Tom's Guide

• How long do running shoes actually last? I asked an expert who makes them, and they gave me a great tip for recognizing when your shoes are done
• Rheon running shorts are being used by top road, track and trail runners — I spoke to an expert to find out more about the tech
• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money

I will always have a soft spot for the Saucony Triumph line because it was the shoe I used most when I first started running myself around 11 years ago.

However, the past few versions of the Triumph haven’t really hit the spot, lacking the energetic and fun feel of the best running shoes.

A significant update was needed, and that’s what has happened with the Saucony Triumph 24, which uses a new midsole foam called IncrediLUX that creates a much livelier ride than I experienced with the Triumph 22 and 23.

It’s still not as soft and springy as the Nike Vomero Plus or as smoothly-rockered as the Hoka Clifton Pro, but the Triumph 24 is a great cushioned option for daily training, and its balanced, traditional ride will suit a wide variety of runners well.

Saucony Triumph 24 review: Price and availability

The Saucony Triumph 24 launched in June 2026 and costs $170 in the U.S. and £170 in the U.K., which is a $10 price rise over the Triumph 23. Its price is in line with other cushioned favorites, though, like the Asics Gel-Nimbus 28, Hoka Clifton Pro and Nike Vomero Plus.

Saucony Triumph 24 review: Design and fit

The Saucony Triumph 24 is currently available in 10 colors in the men’s shoe and 14 in the women’s. Along with the standard shoe, there’s a wide model and a GTX version with a waterproof upper.

I found that the Triumph 24 fit me well in my normal running shoe size, the same size I’ve used for every version of the shoe I’ve tested.

The Triumph 24 weighs 9.6oz in my US men’s size 10, which is a 0.3oz drop in weight on the Triumph 23 despite the fact that the new shoe has a 6mm higher stack height of 43mm at the heel and 33mm at the forefoot. It sticks to the same 10mm drop.

Upper

The Triumph 24 has a mesh upper with padding on the tongue and collar, and an internal heel counter to add more structure at the back of the shoe.

It’s a pretty standard cushioned shoe upper all round, and I found it comfortable on all my runs, though not the most breathable, particularly under the thick tongue.

Midsole

The big update to the Triumph 24 is in the midsole, which is now made from a supercritical aliphatic TPU foam called IncrediLUX, instead of the PEBA-based PWRRUN PB foam used in the Triumph 22 and Triumph 23.

This new foam is lighter and softer than PWRRUN PB and delivers more energy return as well. It also feels less dense underfoot than PWRRUN PB and improves the ride of the Triumph 24 greatly compared with its predecessor.

Outsole

The Triumph 24 uses Saucony’s XT-900 carbon rubber to cover the forefoot and heel of the shoe, leaving the midfoot exposed.

I had no problems with grip during my testing, and the thick rubber covers the main impact areas on the bottom of the shoe, so it should be durable.

Saucony Triumph 24 review: Running performance

I used the Saucony Triumph 24 for a few weeks during my marathon training, racking up a lot of easy runs in the shoe along with a progression run and a 15-mile long run. I’ve tested the past 10 models of the Triumph, and I think the Triumph 24 is the best yet.

That’s all down to the IncrediLUX midsole, which delivers a great balance of comfort, control and energy return. It’s not as soft and springy as some shoes, but the Triumph 24 cushions landings nicely at the heel, then puts a bit of pep in your step as you roll through to the forefoot.

Although it’s pretty light for a cushioned shoe, it’s not ideal for speedwork — I’d use the Triumph 24 in a running shoe rotation with faster options for workouts. That’s not unusual for a cushioned shoe like this, though, which is primarily built for easy, steady training runs.

I was using the Triumph 24 during relatively high-mileage weeks as I ramped up my marathon training and often turned to it for recovery runs the day after a workout; it’s great for those recovery runs, providing enough comfort for tired legs while still ticking over nicely.

Should you buy the Saucony Triumph 24?

If you’re in the market for a comfortable daily trainer, the Triumph 24 ranks among my top options, especially if you prefer a more traditional, straightforward ride.

Rivals include the Nike Vomero Plus, which has a wilder, bouncier feel that I love on easy runs, and the Hoka Clifton Pro, which is more rockered than the Triumph and very smooth, rolling you from heel to toe.

I’d also consider the Asics Novablast 6 as a lighter, cheaper and more versatile daily trainer that’s also highly cushioned if you’re looking for one shoe to handle all your runs, because the Triumph 24 is a bit sluggish for speed sessions.

If you need more support on the run but like the sound of the Triumph, the Saucony Hurricane 26 is the equivalent stability shoe in the brand’s line-up, and it also uses IncredLUX foam.

Overall, it’s great to see the Triumph return to form, and it manages to bring in a modern-feeling superfoam to its midsole without straying too far from the ride feel that made it so popular in the first place.

The 45th edition of the Great North Run is set to be the biggest ever, with 63,000 runners taking on the famous 13.1-mile course from Newcastle to South Shields. One of the world's biggest half marathons, it will also draw more than 200,000 spectators to line the route, plus Newcastle United captain and England star Dan Burn serving as the official starter.

Read on and we'll show you how to watch Great North Run 2026 live streams from anywhere with a VPN — and potentially for FREE.

Alex Mutiso will be looking to defend his men's title, but the Kenyan faces some serious competition from USA duo Casey Clinger and Zouhair Talbi, 2025 European marathon champion Iliass Aouani, Tokyo Marathon 2025 silver medallist Deresa Geleta and Olympic silver medallist Abdi Nageeye. Mutiso's 57:59 personal best makes him the man to beat, and he may even have his eye on the the Great North Run course record of 58:56, which has stood since 2011.

In the women's race, Sheila Chepkirui returns to defend her title, but she'll have to get past fellow Kenyan Brigid Kosgei, the women's course record holder, and Viola Lagat. Eilish McColgan will also be one to watch. In the wheelchair races, reigning champions Sean Frame and Mel Woods are back, while nine-time winner David Weir and 2024 champion JohnBoy Smith will also be chasing victory.

Find out all the details on how to tune in and watch a Great North Run 2026 live stream below wherever you are around the world, including free streams.

Watch Great North Run 2026 live stream for FREE

Fans in the U.K. are in luck! BBC iPlayer is streaming the Great North Run free in the United Kingdom. It's also available via the BBC One TV channel.

You can also watch thousands of finish line moments in South Shields by heading to the @GreatRunTV YouTube channel.

However, if you’ve found yourself outside of the U.K. the weekend of the Great North Run, you’ll be blocked from watching BBC iPlayer.

That said, you can avoid paying for another streaming service and unblock BBC iPlayer using a VPN, which will help you stream like you would if you were back home. NordVPN is among the best out there:

Using a VPN is incredibly simple:

1. Install the VPN of your choice. As we've said, NordVPN is a strong option.

2. Choose the location you wish to connect to in the VPN app. For instance if you're away from the U.K. but want to watch your usual service, you'd select a U.K.-based server from the list.

3. Sit back and enjoy the action. Head to BBC iPlayer or another website and watch the 2026 Great North Run live stream.

How to watch Great North Run live streams in the U.S.

Viewers in the U.S. can watch the 2026 Great North Run via FloTrack. A subscription costs $29.99/month or $150/year.

If you already use the service but aren't in the U.S. right now, you can live stream the Great North Run by using a good VPN.

How to watch Great North Run live streams in Canada

In Canada you’ll need a FloTrack subscription in order to watch the Great North Run 2026.

If you're away from home and struggling to tap into your subscriptions, you could use a VPN to help you access a Great North Run stream from anywhere. We recommend NordVPN.

How to watch Great North Run live streams in the U.K.

The 2026 Great North Run will be shown on BBC One in the U.K. with coverage starting at 10 a.m. BST.

That means you can also watch Great North Run live streams for free on BBC iPlayer, which is available on a number of devices including streaming sticks, smartphones, laptops, gaming consoles, and smart TVs.

If you're currently traveling overseas, don't worry, as you can use NordVPN to watch the BBC iPlayer from abroad.

How to watch Great North Run live streams in Australia

For those in Australia, FloTrack is also the place to watch the Great North Run. In Aus, this will set you back $29.99/month or $149.99/year.

Outside of Australia right now? You can simply use a VPN, such as NordVPN, to watch the race as if you were back in Oz.

Great North Run start times and schedule 2026

(All times BST / ET)

10:20 a.m. / 5:20 a.m. — Elite wheelchair
10:25 a.m. / 5:25 a.m. — Elite women
10:27 a.m. / 5.27 a.m. — Visually impaired participants
10:50 a.m. / 5:50 a.m. — Elite men and masses start

More from Tom's Guide

• How to watch UK TV abroad: BBC iPlayer, ITVX, Channel 4 and more
• The best streaming VPN
• I’m a 62-year-old marathon runner — here’s the exact strength workout I use

We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example:1. Accessing a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service).2. Protecting your online security and strengthening your online privacy when abroad.We do not support or condone the illegal or malicious use of VPN services. Consuming pirated content that is paid-for is neither endorsed nor approved by Future Publishing.

As someone who reviews all kinds of running and fitness products, durability is both the easiest and hardest thing to test. All I have to do is keep using something to see if it’s long-lasting, but the rapid turnover of running products means there’s always something new to test.

That’s especially true with the best running shoes, watches and headphones, which are updated yearly, but I do get more of a chance to test running apparel over the long-term, and there are some items that have really stood out for their durability in my time as a runner.

I’ve used all of the products below regularly for several years, which means they’ve withstood hundreds of miles of running and frequent washing. Thousands of miles, in some cases. So while they're expensive up front, there's no doubt I've gotten great value from them in the long run. No pun intended.

You can extend the life of your products with good care — I always wash my running gear on a cold, fairly short cycle — but largely, durability depends on the quality of the goods, and I happily guarantee these five products stand up to the long-term run test.

Saysky Pace 2 in 1 Shorts 5”

I have a few pairs of these shorts that I’ve used weekly for several years and they’re just as comfortable as ever and show almost no signs of wear and tear.

They’re my go-to shorts for easy and long runs thanks to the supportive inner layer, which has a couple of handy drop-in pockets that can take a phone, keys and a couple of gels.

The upfront cost is pretty high, but as one of Saysky’s most popular products the 2 in 1 shorts are often featured in the brand’s sales, and they’re certainly built to last.

Soar All Weather Jacket

A healthy percentage of my longest-lasting running apparel is made by British brand Soar, and durability is certainly demanded given the high prices you do pay for Soar’s stuff.

The All Weather Jacket I have is the original version, and it has been updated since, but I have little doubt it remains just as durable as the one I’ve used myself for several winters' worth of running. My jacket still feels soft and comfortable, and aside from some fraying around the cuffs, it’s held up perfectly to regular use in inclement weather.

It’s windproof, water-resistant enough to fend off rain without being as hot and sweaty as a full waterproof, and has a close fit that allows for freedom of movement. The last point is important, because it means I can wear the jacket for fast runs in the winter, whereas many jackets feel too bulky.

There are certainly great running jackets available for less, but the All Weather Jacket lives up to its name in being warm enough for snow but breathable enough for mild, wet days, and it’s still my go-to after years of use.

Stance Run Crew Socks

I’ve been a big fan of Stance’s running socks since I first slipped a pair on many years ago, and I’ve amassed a sizable collection of the Run Crew socks in particular, with some that have lasted me more than five years.

While they’re not quite as soft and flexible as they were when new, these long-lasting socks are still comfortable after years of regular runs and washes, and none have developed holes or frayed at all.

Darn Tough is another running sock brand that has impressed me with their durability, and this is an apparel area where I’ve definitely found it’s worth paying a little more upfront to get a longer lasting product.

Tracksmith Van Cortland Tee

Tracksmith is another premium running brand that I found does offset the high initial price of its products with better-than-average durability, and the Van Cortland Tee has been a staple of my training wardrobe for several years.

It’s a loose-fitting tee that’s breathability in hot conditions, even if it’s not the thinnest and lightest option, and comes in a variety of designs that all feature Tracksmith’s trademark sash.

I use it mainly for easy and long runs as I personally prefer something tighter and lighter for sessions, though in winter the relaxed fit of the Van Cortland is handy as I can fit it over a base layer easily.

Under Armour Performance Tech Boxerjock

I prefer to wear underwear under my running shorts as I find this more supportive than relying on the liners in shorts alone, and these Under Armour Boxerjocks are both highly comfortable — I never get chafing with them — and unbelievably durable.

Frankly, I wasn’t sure whether to put them in this article, because it’s a little embarrassing to say you’ve been using the same underwear for almost 10 years, but they’ve stood up so well to regular use and washes I had to highlight them.

They’re good value too, and often appear in Amazon sales. Make sure you get the Tech version though, as the cotton ones won’t be as suitable for running.

More from Tom's Guide

• ‘I wear an Apple Watch every single day, and I never knew you could do this.’
• I wear an Apple Watch every day, and this is the free app I use all of the time
• Forget running — I added thousands of steps to my day using this simple trick

Walking, running or ‘Jeffing’ on a treadmill can be a great way to stay healthy in later life, because it allows you to exercise in a controlled environment to improve your cardiovascular fitness, strength and balance.

The best treadmills can be a little daunting to use at first, because they all come with a wide array of controls and settings, and sometimes even apps you have to navigate.

Once you get your head around what you can do with treadmills, however, they become the ideal training partner.

I enlisted James Stirling, personal trainer and Technogym Ambassador, for his advice on how seniors can make the most of treadmill workouts, and which settings they should be using in particular.

What are the benefits of using a treadmill versus outdoor running for older adults?

Running outside comes with the extra benefits of fresh air and the mental health boost of getting into nature (if your local area allows), but there are specific benefits to indoor running as well.

“Most treadmill belts have some give, which reduces impact loading compared to sidewalks,” says Stirling. “For anyone managing joint sensitivity this can be particularly beneficial.

“As we head into a colder season, treadmill running means no ice, no uneven kerbs in the dark and naturally, no dodging traffic. For older adults, a treadmill eliminates a lot of fall risk from an unpredictable surface.”

You also get more control over your speed and incline when running on a treadmill, and you can follow structured workouts that are created for you on the machine.

“For beginner runners, this makes it really easy to follow a run/walk programme where you run a little, walk little,” says Stirling.

Finally, most treadmills have handrails, which can be especially valuable if you’re concerned about balance.

“Handrails on treadmills also provide a reassuring safety net,” says Stirling. “That reassurance often means older adults push a little harder than they would outdoors, simply because they trust the environment.”

What are the key settings and features on treadmills that seniors can use?

The first thing Stirling recommends doing is training on a mild incline, which is a lot easier to do on a treadmill than outdoors.

“Using a modest incline of 1–3% at an easy pace builds strength and cardiovascular capacity without the added impact of speed,” says Stirling. “This is probably the most underused tool for this age group."

“The ability to adjust speed in small increments also lets you progress gradually rather than in bigger jumps than what the body's ready for.”

It’s also worth always using the emergency clip on treadmills, which will pull out and stop the belt if you fall or move too far from the console.

What treadmill workout for seniors would you recommend?

“The run/walk protocol is always the best starting point,” says Stirling. “It breaks the run down into manageable intervals and it’s really easy to make progressions. Aim to gradually build the run intervals, and reduce the walk intervals, until you can run for around 20 minutes.”

Stirling also notes that speed isn’t the only way to progress your treadmill running and make it harder — adjusting the incline means you can push yourself without raising the speed, which might feel more manageable.

• Follow Tom's Guide fitness on Instagram for more workouts, routines, tips, and tricks.

More from Tom's Guide

• 10 Apple Watch innovations that changed the game — from Fall Detection to Hypertension Alerts
• I'm a smartwatch reviewer, and here's my Apple Watch Series 12 wish list — three upgrades I want, and one I don't
• 3 Apple Watch settings I always turn off to maximize battery life

Once the best carbon plate running shoes were established as the fastest option for race day, it was only natural for plates to start appearing in training shoes as well, and for a few years, these plated super-trainers were all the rage.

That era seemed to be ending, however, with a wave of plate-free super-trainers taking their place, led by shoes like the Adidas Adizero Evo SL and Asics Megablast, as runners opted for a more natural, plate-free experience outside of race day.

The New Balance SuperComp Rebel v1 might be the shoe to bring plated trainers back to the fore. It’s one of the best running shoes for fast training I’ve ever tested, with a lightweight, springy and fun design, and the plate helps you to keep pushing during workouts.

While it’s not cheap and some runners might well still prefer a lightweight, plate-free shoe like the Evo SL or Dynafish Xiaonian for workouts instead, the SuperComp Rebel v1 is an outstanding fast trainer and a shoe I’ll continue to use in my own rotation.

I've been putting the shoe through its paces, along with Fitness Editor Jane McGuire. Read our New Balance SuperComp Rebel v1 review below.

New Balance SuperComp Rebel v1 review: Price and availability

The New Balance SuperComp Rebel v1 launched in August 2026 and costs $200 in the U.S. and £180 in the U.K., making it considerably more expensive than the New Balance Rebel v5, which is $145/£140 and doesn’t have a plate.

It’s priced in line with most super-trainers, but there are some notable fast training alternatives that come in cheaper, like the Adidas Adizero Evo SL and Dynafish Xiaonian.

New Balance SuperComp Rebel v1 review: Design and fit

NHF: The SuperComp Rebel v1 is currently available in four colors, including the angora with slate grey model I tested.

It’s quite a tight-fitting shoe, but I was just about OK in my normal running shoe size. If you tend to be big for your size, however, I’d consider going half a size up.

The shoe has a 4mm drop and a stack height of 40mm at the heel and 36mm at the forefoot, so it’s a well-cushioned shoe if not as maxed out as some.

At 7.9oz in a US men’s size 9.5, the SuperComp Rebel v1 is lightweight given the high stack, if not as light as true racing shoes like the New Balance SC Elite v6, which are closer to or under 7oz.

JM: I tested the SuperComp Rebel v1 in a pistachio colorway, which is beautiful. Like Nick, I found this to be a tight-fitting shoe. I normally go up half a size in New Balance, but I went up a full size in the SuperComp Rebel v1.

Upper

The SuperComp Rebel v1 has a lightweight, breathable mesh upper with a little padding around the collar.

It’s not as plushly padded as the uppers on cushioned shoes built for easy runs, but I found it perfectly comfortable on all my runs and had no issues with rubbing or hot spots.

Midsole

The midsole in the SuperComp Rebel v1 is made from the same supercritical aliphatic TPU as the SC Elite v6 and delivers a very energetic, bouncy ride.

It’s the biggest upgrade on the shoe compared with past plated trainers from New Balance I’ve tested, like the SuperComp Trainer v3, making the SC Rebel v1 lighter and more responsive.

Running through the foam is a carbon-infused Pebax plate, which is a little more flexible than the plate on the SuperComp Elite v6, to make the SuperComp Rebel v1 more comfortable for regular use in training.

Outsole

The SuperComp Rebel v1 uses PU rubber to cover the forefoot and heel of the shoe and I’ve found that it grips well in wet and dry conditions.

A large cutout runs down the center of the shoe, which reduces weight and shows off the plate in the midsole. I found that if you run on gravel trails, you can be sure this cutout will pick up the odd stone that needs to be removed ASAP to avoid damaging the plate.

For a lightweight, speed-focused shoe, the Rebel v1 has quite a wide base, which improves its stability, even though it’s still a pretty wobbly, soft shoe.

New Balance SC Rebel v1 review: Running performance

NHF: I used the SuperComp Rebel v1 for a variety of training runs during my testing, including workouts with short one- and two-minute reps, a steady 10-miler and a threshold session running six-minute reps at around half marathon pace.

While I mostly did faster runs in the shoe, I also tested it with some easy running to see how it fared as an all-rounder that can handle all your training.

It impressed me most at speed. The springy midsole and plastic plate produce a ride that’s almost as fast as a full carbon racing shoe, and I loved doing both short and long interval workouts in the SuperComp Rebel.

The bounce from the midsole also holds up throughout long runs, like the steady 10-miler I ran in the shoe, and the SuperComp Rebel v1 could be a good racing option for longer events if you don’t enjoy the feel (or high price) of pinnacle racers.

I also enjoyed using the SuperComp Rebel v1 for my easy runs, even if it’s not the most stable or supportive shoe. It works best in a running shoe rotation alongside a more cushioned and stable daily trainer for easy runs, but if you want one shoe for everything and like speedy sneakers, it would be a great pick.

JM: Like Nick, I mainly wore this shoe for tempo sessions and easy runs. I immediately loved how bouncy and exciting this shoe feels underfoot. If you're looking to travel with one pair of running shoes and get all your sessions done, this is the shoe you'll probably reach for. It's an exciting shoe to run in.

Should you buy the New Balance SuperComp Rebel v1?

The SuperComp Rebel v1 is the best New Balance running shoe I’ve tested in years, maybe even ever. It’s fast, bouncy and fun to run in, especially when doing workouts.

Thanks to the excellent midsole foam, it’s a clear step up from New Balance’s other speed-focused trainers, like the Rebel v5 and SC Trainer v3, though the Rebel v5 is a bit more comfortable and stable for easy efforts.

There are cheaper alternatives that are also brilliant for faster training, though, especially the Adidas Evo SL and Dynafish Xiaonian, and those who want a more supportive and stable super-trainer could look at the Asics Megablast instead.

It’s the best plated trainer on the market right now, though, in my opinion, outperforming previous favorites like the Saucony Endorphin Speed 5 and Hoka Mach X3.

Unless you use a true carbon racer for your workouts, the SuperComp Rebel v1 is as good as it gets for fast training, and it’ll stay within easy reach for my own marathon

As a running shoe reviewer, there are two questions I get asked all the time. One is "What are the best running shoes?" And the other is "How long do running shoes last?"

Both are tricky to answer, but picking the best shoes is one of my favorite parts of my job, and I certainly have a lot of opinions to share on the topic. How long running shoes last is, however, almost impossible to answer definitively.

That’s because different runners go through shoes at different rates, depending on things like foot shape, running style, weight and the terrain they run on.

Running shoes also vary in how long they last — racing shoes are built for speed, not longevity, whereas cushioned daily trainers are designed to be more durable.

To get more insight into how long shoes last, I asked Damion Perry, Senior Product Line Manager, Puma Running, who gave me the best advice I’ve ever had on how to spot when a shoe might be past its best.

How long do running shoes last?

“It’s very tough to tell, because the lifespan is so extended on all of them,” says Perry. “But to paint in broad strokes, most shoes are probably set to last you between 300 to 500 miles comfortably.”

That’s your starting figure, but durability will depend on the type of shoe you’re using, and in my own experience, shoes tend to last me longer than that.

Even with racing shoes like the Puma Fast-R Nitro Elite 3, which is built for speed, not durability, Perry says the lifespan can vary between runners.

“We all want to sell shoes that people can use for long periods of time,” says Perry. “I've had people come back and say that they've got like over 1000km (600 miles) in a Fast-R.”

How can you tell when you need to replace a running shoe?

For me, this is the more important question, because shoes do vary greatly in lifespan. There are some easy ways to spot when a shoe needs replacing, like the outsole being completely worn away or tears in the upper.

However, the main determinant of whether a shoe is still good is the midsole, because when that firms up and loses its spring, it becomes less fun and can even be risky to keep using the shoe.

This is harder to spot, especially if you use a running shoe rotation and swap between sneakers each day, but Perry gave some great advice for recognizing when a shoe is past its best.

“Speaking from my personal running experiences,” says Perry. “When running starts feeling harder and you’re doing the same paces, performing the same routes.

"As runners, we are such creatures of habit that when some weird discomfort starts popping up on the same route that you run like every Monday, and you're like, ‘what is this, this feels terrible.’ This natural sense of ‘I feel like something's wrong.’ That's probably the biggest indicator.”

This advice really spoke to me as a runner because I run the same routes all the time, and I do feel when something is a little out of whack, which for me can also be down to things like being unusually tired or illness setting in.

If you’ve run a similar route for months in a shoe and it starts to feel somehow wrong, it could well be that the midsole has lost its spring. You might even notice an odd niggle starts to arise after using a shoe, which can be another sign your shoe needs swapping out.

“There's user preference, within what that lifespan is, so you as a runner are your own best judge,” says Perry, “Check in with yourself as you start to get around that 3-, 4-, 500-mile mark in a shoe. It's a gut feel on how that Monday morning route feels.”

More from Tom's Guide

• Rheon running shorts are being used by top road, track and trail runners — I spoke to an expert to find out more about the tech
• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money
• No squats! I just tried this 8-minute chair workout, and it’s perfect for seniors, beginners, and anyone looking to build strength without impact

The On Cloudboom Volt first caught my eye at The Running Event in Texas 2025, where brands preview their launches for the following year.

Mostly, that was because it looks fantastic — the light blue color I tested might be the best-looking shoe I’ve tried this year, which is always a plus. However, it was also more affordable than On’s other racing shoes, and looked an intriguing option thanks to the combo of a plate and On’s bouncy Helion HF midsole foam.

By the time I tested the shoe, however, the On Cloudboom Strike 2 had somewhat stolen the Volt’s thunder as one of the best carbon plate running shoes, and the Volt simply isn’t as good a racer as the Strike 2 in my opinion.

However, the Volt is cheaper, and in my testing it emerged as a strong plated option for fast training in particular. I wouldn’t mark it as a must-buy, but I did enjoy all my runs in the On Cloudboom Volt and if you spy it in a sale it might be a worthy addition to your running shoe rotation.

On Cloudboom Volt review: Price and availability

The On Cloudboom Volt launched in February 2026 and costs $200 in the U.S. and £190 in the U.K., making it more affordable than On’s top racing shoe, the On Cloudboom Strike 2 ($250/£230).

It’s cheap compared to most carbon racers, but the price is more in line with other fast training shoes with plates, which is where I’d position the Volt myself.

On Cloudboom Volt review: Design and fit

The On Cloudboom Volt is currently available in four colors, including the light blue Celeste shoe I tested, which is just gorgeous.

I found that it fit well in my normal running shoe size. It’s a bit tighter around the toes than On’s cushioned sneakers in the same size, but that’s normal for a speed-focused shoe, and I didn’t have any trouble with the upper rubbing during my runs.

The Volt has a 5mm drop and weighs 7.8oz in my US men’s size 9.5. It’s light, but not as light as most top racing shoes, which are usually under 7oz in my size.

Upper

The Cloudboom Volt has a lightweight mesh upper with just enough padding around the collar to be comfortable without adding too much bulk to the shoe.

I had no complaints with the upper during my testing. It was breathable enough and held my foot securely during fast runs.

Midsole

The Cloudboom Volt uses two layers of On’s PEBA-based Helion HF foam, which is also used in the brand’s top racers and the On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS.

However, the version of Helion HF used here is significantly firmer than on other shoes, including the Cloudboom Strike 2. It’s not as squishy and bouncy as a result, but it still delivers a good level of energy return in my runs.

A carbon-infused plate runs through the midsole between these two layers of foam, and the Volt has a mild rocker shape to aid in pushing you onto your forefoot.

Outsole

Fast training and racing shoes generally have minimal outsoles to reduce weight, so the extensive rubber coverage on the Cloudboom Volt is a pleasant surprise.

It will boost the shoe’s durability if used for a lot of training, and it grips well on wet roads. I also felt comfortable taking it onto light trails at times, knowing the rubber would protect the softer midsole foam.

On Cloudboom Volt review: Running performance

I did a variety of runs in the Cloudboom Volt, from easy daily training to fast workouts doing short and long reps. I also used it for both runs on a double-workout day, racing up to about 20 miles in the shoe that day.

I’ve tested several On shoes that use the Helion HF midsole, and it was a surprise to feel how firm the Cloudboom Volt was in comparison. However, I still found it comfortable enough for longer workouts, and the firmer feel helped to produce a fast transition from heel to toe.

It’s not the most rockered, bouncy or propulsive shoe, but the Cloudboom Volt is nimble and pushes you onto your toes during fast runs. It could be a good option for those who don’t like the exaggerated rides of highly rockered or squishy shoes, as a result, because the Volt has quite a traditional, natural ride for a modern speed shoe.

I also found it fairly stable and was happy running at easy paces in the shoe, which is not always the case with high-stack plated shoes.

There are certainly significant caveats to the Volt’s performance, though. It’s not as light as you’d expect for a plated shoe aimed at shorter events, and when it comes to my fastest training runs and races, I prefer a more efficient, aggressive ride.

Should you buy the On Cloudboom Volt?

The On Cloudboom Volt might not top any "best of" lists this year, but it’s a shoe that impressed me and one I enjoyed running in, and that’s not just because I’m obsessed with its looks.

It’s an accomplished fast training shoe, and I think it will drop in price during On’s sales. It’s available for around $150, rather than its $200 MSRP; it’s an option worth considering if you like a firmer ride in your speed shoe.

There are excellent fast training shoes available for less, though, notably the Adidas Adizero Evo SL, which is one of the best value sneakers on the market, or the Dynafish Xiaonian.

I’d also consider the New Balance SC Rebel v1 as a springier option with a plate, though it’s as expensive as the Volt.

For race day, I prefer the more aggressive, lightweight design of shoes like the Puma Fast-R Nitro Elite 3 or Asics Metaspeed Sky Tokyo, and the On Cloudboom Strike 2 would be worth upgrading to as well if you’re in pursuit of PRs.

I’ve been running for just over 10 years and consider myself very fortunate to have taken up the sport when I did, because running shoes have never been better.

The most high-profile area of this is carbon plate running shoes, which have proved controversial in aiding rapid improvements in world records for elites and personal records for amateurs.

However, there’s no controversy over the advances in shoe design that have led to brilliant training shoes that everyone can enjoy.

Right now, the best running shoes are lighter, bouncier and just flat-out more fun than shoes were when I started the sport, and that’s mostly down to what’s going on in their midsoles — the part of the shoe between the sockliner and the outsole on a sneaker.

To find out more about advancements in midsole tech and performance, I spoke to Damion Perry, Senior Product Line Manager at Puma Running.

Why is the midsole so important on a running shoe?

Uppers and outsoles are important, but the key to running shoe performance is the foam in the midsole, which serves two purposes, according to Perry.

“One is to absorb the impact of you landing on the ground,” says Perry, “and the second is to return energy for you to feel that sense of lift and bounce.”

Finding a material that does both those jobs effectively is the tricky part.

“You have something soft like sand which absorbs a lot of impact very well,” says Perry. “Then you have something like a trampoline, which provides an extraordinary amount of energy return.

“In a running shoe, you're trying to use a material that effectively absorbs those forces and then gives them back to you as much as it can. That’s the midsole, and we use foam to do that.”

Why have midsoles improved so much in recent years?

When I started, running shoes were a lot better at absorbing energy than they were at giving it back, but foams have improved dramatically in recent years, and a lot of that comes down to using supercritical foams.

“Previously, foams were injection-moulded or compression-moulded,” says Perry. “Plastic-based materials that are poured into the shape of a sole.

“Inherently, with that, they’re quite dense materials. They provide some level of cushioning, but not at the level of what we're seeing today from using the supercritical foaming process.”

Supercritical foams are created by infusing foams with a gas (usually nitrogen) using a high-pressure, heated chamber called an autoclave. This creates air within the cell structure of the foams, making them lighter and less dense than older foams.

“You can use a lot of different raw materials for it,” says Perry, “but the process of supercritical foaming is what's created this drastically new underfoot feel. Materials that compress feel really airy and bouncy and absorb those forces. It allows for a better cushioning experience.”

What are the differences between the foams you get in midsoles?

This supercritical process is used with all kinds of foam used in running shoes. EVA was the main material used for a long time, before springier modern materials like PEBA and now aliphatic TPU became more popular.

Brands still use a variety of foams in their line-ups, though, because each has properties that make it attractive to certain consumers, including EVA.

“Everyone's running experience or use of running shoes is quite different, right?” says Perry. “There's a difference between clicking off three- or four-minute Ks [five- or six-minute miles] and walking.

“If you need something that feels supportive and secure and familiar underfoot, something like EVA is a great solution for that. But if you want a PR in the 5K, you get this foam [aliphatic TPU] that has an extremely high amount of energy return, and mix that with the modern geometries and plates that allow it to be harnessed in its maximized way, there's a clear preference and purpose for that.”

Right now, the market is certainly skewing toward foams like PEBA and aliphatic TPU that deliver high levels of energy return, but when picking your running shoe, it’s not just about the foam used; it’s also about how the brand uses it.

What is shoe ‘geometry’ and why does it matter?

If you look at a shelf of running shoes, you’ll quickly notice that they don’t all have the same shape. Some are much more rockered than others, with a curved sole that rolls you forward, and they also differ in width, stack height and drop — how much higher the heel stack height is compared with the forefoot stack height.

This is the geometry of the shoe, and it has a huge effect on the ride feel of a shoe, regardless of the foam used. Speaking of foams, those can also differ hugely in feel even if they’re made from the same material.

“There are so many things that can be tweaked to create a particular experience that we on the brand side are trying to curate,” says Perry. “This is a daily trainer, this is a racer, this is a super trainer, this is a recovery shoe. We might be able to use the same ingredients, but there are things that we can toy with.

“At the foam level, density is one — just because something is made of aliphatic TPU does not mean it's going to feel exactly the same in every single shoe, because we can change the density.

“We make decisions on geometry, and we make decisions on density to curate an experience that we want you to have.”

The differences in foam can be drastic even if brands use the same name across different shoes, like Puma’s Nitro Elite material or Nike’s ZoomX. You can’t just go by the label — it’s important to look at what the shoe is designed to do.

Cushioned shoes for daily training will generally have more stable, less springy foams in the midsole to protect your body when racking up a lot of mileage, while racing shoes use the most energetic materials possible to try and help you get faster and more efficient, and those foams are often used in tandem with a carbon plate to boost those benefits.

One of the things I love most about testing running shoes is that there is no one best foam or shoe geometry — we all like different things, and experimenting with a mix of shoes is always a good idea where possible.

Follow Tom's Guide fitness on Instagram for more workouts, routines, tips, and tricks.

More from Tom's Guide

• Rheon running shorts are being used by top road, track and trail runners — I spoke to an expert to find out more about the tech
• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money
• No squats! I just tried this 8-minute chair workout, and it’s perfect for seniors, beginners, and anyone looking to build strength without impact

Gravel running is nothing new — runners have been seeking out gravel tracks for as long as the sport has existed, because they offer a quieter, calmer experience than busy roads without the perils of truly technical trail running.

Gravel running shoes, however, are a relatively new phenomenon. Their rise is no doubt partly inspired by the huge success of gravel bikes, and the principles underpinning the rise of gravel shoes are similar to those behind the bikes, which are built to handle a little bit of everything.

That’s why I value gravel shoes myself as a runner. They might seem like a niche product, but they’re actually among the most versatile running shoes on the market, capable of handling a wide variety of terrain and different types of training runs.

They’re perfect for trips when you’re not sure what terrain you’re going to run on, and even if you mostly run on the road and only occasionally hit the trails, they’re worth considering because they work so well on pure road runs too, in my experience.

I’ve picked out the best gravel running shoes I’ve tested below, and I also spoke to Erin Cooper, director and marketing for Performance & SportStyle at Salomon, about what to look for if you’re buying some.

What are the key features of a gravel running shoe?

I’ve been testing the best trail-running shoes for a decade and there have always been good options for light trails, which have been known as road-to-trail or all-terrain shoes in the past.

Gravel shoes are an extension of this area of the market, aiming to combine key features from road and trail shoes to work well on both.

“For Salomon, our gravel shoes are rooted in our road platforms and leverage key technologies from our leading products in both road and trail footwear to find an ideal balance,” says Cooper.

The midsoles of gravel running shoes are often the same soft, energetic foams found on a brand’s road running shoes, whereas traditional trail shoes might use a firmer material for more stability.

This creates the same kind of comfortable, bouncy ride people expect from a modern road running shoe, but with the added benefit of a more substantial outsole.

“Our Gravel contaGRIP outsole provides reliable grip and durability matched with 2.5 mm lugs — vs. 4+ mm in our trail shoes,” says Cooper.

Lug length and shape are certainly key aspects of gravel shoes. The outsole has to grip on light trails with loose surfaces, but still feel comfortable on flat, paved roads. In most gravel shoes I’ve tested, this means 2.5mm lugs with broad, flat shapes, often chevrons.

“Runners should look for shallow lugs,” says Cooper. “These provide enough grip and traction to be confident on light trails, rolling hills, gravel paths, or any other non-technical mountain terrain and a smooth ride on the roads.”

This outsole also boosts durability when on gravel tracks — road shoes often have large areas of exposed foam that can get chewed up on light trails like this.

The upper is also an important feature of a gravel shoe. Road shoe uppers prioritize comfort and breathability, while full trail shoe uppers focus just as much on durability and protection through features like toe bumpers. Gravel shoes, once again, find a balance.

“The upper should be lightweight like on a road shoe, but with added protection for improved foothold and durability on gravel and trail surfaces,” says Cooper.

The best gravel running shoes

Some of my favorite shoes of 2026 so far have been gravel shoes, and I’ve taken several trips where they’ve been my only option for travelling, walking and all my runs.

Unless you spend your time exclusively on the roads or on mountain tracks that require a full trail-running shoe, it’s worth considering adding a gravel sneaker to your rotation.

Here are the three best gravel running shoes I’ve tested.

Salomon Aero Glide 4 GRVL

Salomon has spearheaded the gravel shoe moment, and I think the Salomon Aero Glide 4 GRVL showcases the versatility of this type of sneaker brilliantly well.

It has an energetic midsole made from a supercritical TPU foam called OptiFoam Squared that delivers a good balance of comfort and bounce for easy, steady-paced runs, and the outsole grips well on light trails and roads in both dry and wet conditions.

The quick-lace system brought over from Salomon’s trail shoes will divide opinion as it’s not as comfortable as standard laces, but this allows you to quickly tighten the laces with the toggle.

The North Face Altamesa 500 v2

The Altamesa 500 v2 is pitched more as an all-terrain trail-running shoe than a gravel shoe, but it fits into this category well, in my opinion, thanks to its bouncy ride and impressive performance on the road and light trails.

It has 4mm lugs, which are deeper than on most gravel shoes, but still feel smooth and comfortable on the road, and the Dream midsole foam is enjoyably springy and comfortable on long runs.

I used The North Face Altamesa 500 v2 for all my runs on a holiday this year, covering a mix of road, gravel and trails, and it’s a great all-rounder option for those who vary the terrain they run on.

Asics Blazeblast

The Asics Novablast is one of the most popular road running shoes available, and rightly so in my view — it’s comfortable, fun, and suits a wide variety of runners well for daily training.

It doesn’t have the most extensive or durable outsole, though, and that’s where the Asics Blazeblast comes in. It shares a lot of DNA with the Novablast, including a high stack of comfortable foam in the midsole, but with a full outsole with 2.5mm lugs that excels on gravel tracks.

The Blazeblast is another shoe I took on holiday this year as my main walking and running shoe, and its versatility shone through. I did a 15-mile run on mixed terrain and clambered all over some rocks with my kids, another activity where the more substantial outsole was welcomed.

Follow Tom's Guide fitness on Instagram for more workouts, routines, tips, and tricks.

More from Tom's Guide

• Rheon running shorts are being used by top road, track and trail runners — I spoke to an expert to find out more about the tech
• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money
• No squats! I just tried this 8-minute chair workout, and it’s perfect for seniors, beginners, and anyone looking to build strength without impact

In a world of AI training plans, Runna stands out from the crowd. Its plans are developed by real-life coaches, who create algorithms that help runners of all abilities achieve their goals. I’ve used Runna for my past three marathons, and it is, without a doubt, one of the best running apps on the market.

The app has grown exponentially, and since it was bought by Strava in May 2025, it has continued to roll out new features. Today, Runna announces a partnership with Loughborough University — this collaboration will embed the very latest sports science within Runna’s coach-designed training plans. To find out more, I sat down with Runna’s Head Coach and former Olympian, Steph Kessell.

What does this new partnership mean for runners?

At the moment, Runna uses algorithms created by experienced, qualified coaches to work out which plan is best for a user. To do so, when you sign up for the app, you’ll be asked a series of questions based on your running experience and goal. The Loughborough University partnership takes this a step further, explains Kessell, “Research evolves over time, and we want to make sure that we’re keeping up to date with that. It feels like a really good time to set ourselves apart from AI-generated training plans.”

The focus of the partnership seems to be on ensuring that the training plans on the app can achieve their goals, while minimizing their risk of injury. Is injury the biggest risk with AI training plans? I ask Kessell. “Yes,” she says, “Running is so individual and two runners who have the same experience might need to train in different ways. I can use myself as an example. I’m a marathon runner and compared to other Olympic athletes I was running against in Tokyo, my mileage was a lot less.

"They’d all be doing 100+ mile weeks, but my body is not able to do that based on my biomechanics and how I run. As a beginner runner, you don’t know that, but if beginners come to us [rather than use AI plans] we can build them up based on what they have been doing and start them off at a level that is right for them.”

How does Runna know its users are at risk of injury?

Runna estimates a 43% lower self-reported rate of injury per 1000 hours of training when compared to a 2015 Sports Medicine benchmark. This is an impressive stat, so I asked Kessell how the app currently predicts if a user is overtraining. “We can see from a runner’s data if a plan is still suitable for them. If we see that they’re missing their pace targets, we’ll advise them to slow down. The same applies to people who are running more than they’ve committed to — we might advise that they could go up. It’s about finding your baseline, then Runna is here to either get you back on track, or nudge you along a bit.”

I ask Kessell, as a coach, what she thinks the biggest injury risk is for runners. “I think often you see a lot of coaches getting really carried away by progression and building up volume and intensity at the same time,” she tells me.

“By doing both at the same time, you’re only increasing your injury risk. Sure, you’re increasing the chances of getting fitter and faster, but with running there’s always a risk — it’s a high-impact sport. For me, it’s about deciding: are you going to build up your mileage or do you want to build speed? Something we plan carefully at Runna is to get this balance of volume and intensity right, depending on what a runner’s goal is.”

What does Runna’s Head Coach hope to see next?

In an app that’s constantly evolving, what do the coaches want next? I ask Kessell as our chat comes to an end, “We have so many features in our pipeline I won’t give away, but I think there’s so many important things within running that can make our programs even more personalized. Bringing in the importance of female health into our plans, for example. But also if we can educate more runners on different aspects of running, whether that’s building mileage or intensity, fuelling, warming up properly, strength training — the more education we can provide to our users, the more consistency they’ll have in their training.”

More from Tom's Guide

• Garmin ‘Play Harder’ LIVE: Follow our updates
• How to warm up for a run — 5 running coach-approved exercises
• Yoga for runners: This six-move routine boosts flexibility and builds stronger muscles

As someone who lives in the UK, I’ve only really had cause to use the term ‘heat training’ ironically for most of my life. The very idea seems absurd when heading out for a run under cloudy skies in sub-70℉ (21.1℃) conditions, which is what we often call summer.

However, this year the UK is experiencing the longest and hottest heatwave of my life, and as someone who runs every day, adapting to and dealing with the heat has become a real part of my marathon training.

The temperature has been over 80℉ (26.6℃) on many of my runs for weeks, and it’s peaked at around 95℉ (35℃). As a result, I finally had the chance to test the CORE 2, a thermal sensor you can attach to a heart rate chest strap that monitors skin and body temperature and beams the info live to an app and wearables.

This sensor is often used by athletes trying to adapt to the heat, often before having to compete in scorching conditions. That’s not my main aim — hopefully it will have cooled off before the Frankfurt Marathon, which I'm running in late October — but I still found the data useful, and I picked up a lot of new knowledge about how heat affects the body, and there are benefits to heat training even if you plan to race in cold conditions.

Here are five things I learned running with the CORE 2 thermal sensor every day for a month.

Core temperature doesn’t always track with skin temperature

The CORE 2 sensor shows your core and skin temperature live — I added the Connect IQ data field for it so I could see these stats on my Garmin Forerunner 970.

Of these stats, core temperature is a stronger indicator of the state of your body during exercise and rises more consistently in line with effort and heat.

I was surprised to see how much skin temperature could fluctuate and even drop during activities, owing to factors like sweat and wind cooling the skin.

For example, on this 15-mile Sunday long run, my core temperature rose consistently throughout the workout, while my skin temperature dropped, and even during very hard workouts, my skin temperature might not be that high owing to profuse sweating.

I found this all fascinating, and it shows that you need to get in deep and get those core temperature readings to get useful insights into the body during workouts.

That’s not to say skin temperature sensors on wearables are useless — they are important for measuring skin temperature overnight, which can help predict illness and help track the menstrual cycle.

It takes time for the core to cool down after hard runs

On my hardest hot run with the sensor — an afternoon track workout in blazing sunshine — I hit a core body temperature of 101.8℉ (38.7℃). I also hit over 100℉ (37.7℃) on an easy run when the outside temperature was around 95℉ (35℃).

On both these occasions, I wore the sensor for a while after I hit this peak to see how long it takes to come down, and I noticed it took a while, even when I was jogging at an easy pace after the workout for my cool down.

After the workout, it took 50 minutes for my body to drop back down to its normal core temperature, even though I couldn’t feel that heat anymore.

The takeaway for me was to bear that in mind with my recovery and what I have planned straight after workouts. I used a cooling towel after another workout to help me drop my temperature, and it’s hard to beat a shower where you gradually lower the water temperature.

Get under tree cover when you can

I’m lucky enough to live by a big forest and for most of my runs during the heatwave I’ve been heading under tree cover, which I find makes a huge difference.

It was good to see that, backed up by the sensor data, most notably on the 95℉ (35℃) day, when I spent the first half hour on the road with no cover before heading into the forest. My core temperature rose sharply on the road but plateaued once I was in the forest, even though I felt like I was working harder on undulating trails.

The advice for running in the heat is always to do your runs early in the day and ideally in the shade, and using this sensor has driven that point home to me over the past month.

I can do a full hour in 85℉ (29.4℃) heat in the forest and stay in the lowest heat strain zone on the CORE 2 sensor, whereas if I’m exposed on the road, the same pace and heart rate quickly moves me into higher zones.

Easy efforts need to be scaled back

Captain Obvious will be the first to tell you that running is harder in the heat, so you need to adjust your pace, but once again, even as an experienced runner, I found it useful to have that data laid out before me during runs.

I’ve been running for over a decade, and I do know my body so I can run to feel pretty accurately, but I’m not accustomed to heat, and I did find the sensor useful in showing that easy runs needed to be scaled back to actually be easy, especially when the temperature was over 90℉ (32.2℃).

Having the data on my wrist meant that I could see if I strayed out of the lowest heat zone on an easy run and reduce my pace. I saved my heat adaptations for harder run days.

Heat acclimation takes dedication

The best use for the CORE 2 sensor is to monitor your response to heat training and help yourself acclimatize to it, especially ahead of tackling events in hot conditions.

That’s not really what I was using it for — I was just learning about how heat affects the body, and if anything, trying to avoid getting too hot — but I did think that running every day through a heatwave would boost my heat acclimation.

It turns out you have to really focus and work hard to do this, because I’m still ranked a ‘Thermal Rookie’ in the CORE app and only 4% acclimatized, because I have aimed to run under tree cover and early in the day when possible.

Only workouts directly in the sun really moved the needle for me on acclimatization, and if you're aiming to do this, you’ll have to work hard through dedicated sessions in hot conditions to push your body to adapt.

There are reasons to do this kind of heat training even if you plan to race in cool conditions, because it can also help improve things like your VO2max and lactate threshold, so I might start enjoying lie-ins and getting out for my runs in the sun.

More from Tom's Guide

• Rheon running shorts are being used by top road, track and trail runners — I spoke to an expert to find out more about the tech
• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money
• No squats! I just tried this 8-minute chair workout, and it’s perfect for seniors, beginners, and anyone looking to build strength without impact

Every runner is an individual with their own preferences in shoes. Some love super-squishy and soft cushioned shoes, while others prefer ultra-light and aggressively rockered trainers.

It can sometimes be difficult as a reviewer to pick out the best running shoes for everyone as a result, but I try to highlight sneakers that offer a bit more than their rivals in the same category, whether that’s better value, more fun, or a higher level of performance.

The poll feature at Tom’s Guide gives me a chance to get feedback on running shoes in general, and recently, I asked readers to vote on the brand they wear. After counting 380 votes, I was pleased to see a clear winner that aligned with what I’d voted for myself.

Which running shoe brand do you wear?

Asics actually got more votes than the next four brands combined, and for me that isn’t a surprise, because right now the Japanese brand has some of the best options in a wide variety of running shoe categories.

I’ve picked out my favorite Asics shoes below and also gone into why I think Puma is a brand people are sleeping on.

The poll is still open if you want to add your own vote to see if it shifts the results.

My top Asics running shoes

Whether you’re looking for one of the fastest carbon plate racers on the market or a cushioned shoe for easy runs, the Asics line-up has you well covered, and it also boasts the best all-rounder available in my view, which is the Asics Megablast.

The Megablast is very expensive, though, so the alternative most people might prefer is the Asics Novablast 6, one of my favorite shoes of 2026 so far. It’s a great cushioned daily trainer with a bit more punch for faster efforts than other Asics max-cushioned shoes, like the Asics Gel-Nimbus 28, which I found relatively dull on the run.

For race day, Asics has three of the best super-shoes going. I’ve set PRs in the Asics Metaspeed Ray and Asics Metaspeed Sky Tokyo, while some might prefer the Asics Metaspeed Edge Tokyo to the Sky — they’re similarly great shoes, with different ride feels.

Overall, the Sky would be my top pick in this category from Asics, even over the ultra-light Ray, which is pricier and very soft and unstable, so it might not suit everyone.

If you’re heading onto light trails and gravel paths, then the Asics Blazeblast is a shoe I thoroughly enjoyed testing this summer. It’s as comfortable as a cushioned road shoe with an outsole that offers better grip and durability when off-road.

Puma should be more popular

Looking at the rest of the results, the one that really stands out to me is how low Puma ranked. It’s understandable because for a long time Puma was not a force to be reckoned with for road running shoes, but that has all changed in recent years.

They have a smaller line-up than Asics but challenge for the top spot in a couple of key categories of running shoes.

The Puma Fast-R Nitro Elite 3 just edges out the Metaspeed Sky Tokyo as my top racer right now, while the Puma Deviate Pure Nitro is a great lightweight daily trainer to rival the Novablast 6 as perhaps the best new shoe of 2026.

Puma shoes tend to offer good value in general as well, and they crop up in sales regularly, so they deserve to be higher in the rankings in my view.

It was interesting to see "Other" do well — I’ve been testing shoes from a few up-and-coming brands this year, and some have been exceptional, most notably the Dynafish Xiaonian.

Follow Tom's Guide fitness on Instagram for more workouts, routines, tips, and tricks.

More from Tom's Guide

• Rheon running shorts are being used by top road, track and trail runners — I spoke to an expert to find out more about the tech
• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money
• No squats! I just tried this 8-minute chair workout, and it’s perfect for seniors, beginners, and anyone looking to build strength without impact

I was sold on armless sunglasses from my first run using them, simply because the secure fit provided by the cord immediately rules out the biggest problem I have with running sunnies, which is that they bounce or slip down your nose when you get sweaty.

The only reason I haven’t been using the Ombraz Refugio more often since I first tested them is that I prefer to use prescription running sunglasses over contacts, so when the chance arose to try the Ombraz Teton with prescription lenses, I jumped at it.

I’ve run 200 miles in three weeks using the glasses, as well as using them for bike rides, strength workouts and general use. They don’t come cheap, but I’ve been highly impressed with the sunglasses — here are my likes and dislikes.

Like #1: The fit is rock solid and quick to adjust

The best running sunglasses have to provide a reliable fit to be of any use, and it’s not easy to find a design that fits every face using nosepads and sticky or adjustable arms.

Ombraz’s glasses sidestep these issues thanks to the cord that attaches directly to the frame, which you can tighten quickly and easily using the two toggles.

I found that I didn’t need to have the cord that tight for a bounce-free fit, even during my hardest runs. This means there was no pressure on the back or sides of my head, and I never had to push the Teton glasses back up during runs.

If you’re constantly frustrated by sunglasses slipping or bouncing during runs, especially on trails where I find downhills can make otherwise secure sunnies slip, then this armless design could be the answer.

A bonus of not having to constantly adjust the glasses during runs is that you don’t get sweaty fingerprints on the lenses.

Like #2: I haven’t had any fogging during runs

The Teton glasses have large flat lenses that don’t wrap close to the face. This is a downside in some respects, as I’ll come onto later, but it does mean there’s space for air to flow around them.

This means I’ve not noticed any fogging during hot, sweaty runs, even indoors on the treadmill, which can be another common problem with sports sunglasses.

Like #3: Photochromic prescription lenses are ideal for year-round use

I opted for photochromic lenses with the Teton glasses, which isn’t an option with every prescription Ombraz style but is well worth it for me as a runner in the UK who is regularly under tree and cloud cover.

The lenses darken quickly in the sun but are completely clear when running indoors on the treadmill and react rapidly when I train in my local forest, moving from sun to shadow and dappled light.

I’ve been testing the sunglasses during a heatwave and can also vouch for the fact that they are dark enough for me in bright sunlight, but if you are more focused on reducing glare and just blocking out the sun, other lens options might suit you better.

Like #4: They’re easy to pack

The corded style of the glasses means that they pack pretty much completely flat, and they come with a padded pouch to store them in.

I’ve been on a couple of trips while testing the glasses, and they slip easily into the side pocket of my rucksack and can be thrown into a suitcase without fear of damaging the arms, because there aren’t any.

Like #5: The style isn’t too sporty

While I like the look of very sporty wraparound sunglasses when I’m running, they’re not the best to use outside my training, whereas the Ombraz Teton are good-looking sunnies for general use that happen to be great for runs.

They are quite large, which is the case for most of the Ombraz line-up, but I like a larger style with my sunglasses.

Dislike #1: The price for prescription is much higher

Ombraz sunglasses don’t come cheap in general, but the $160 you pay for a standard set of the Teton isn’t really out of line with many top sunglasses brands.

However, if you do want to get prescription lenses, the price rises very sharply. You shop via Lens & Frame Co and the quality of the lenses is great, but the cost of the Teton rises to $420 for standard glasses, $520 for sunglasses, or $570 for photochromic lenses.

This kind of price rise for prescription sports sunglasses isn’t that uncommon, but there are great options I’ve tested that cost a lot less if you don’t need the cordless design, like Zenni Optical’s Zunnies line-up.

Dislike #2: They’re not full wraparound lenses

As I mentioned above, the flat lenses on the Teton mean they are easy to pack safely, but at times on the run, I noticed I had to turn to get a full view of things in my peripheral vision.

I often run on a bike path, for example, and have to turn my head right around to check that no one is coming up behind me, whereas wraparound styles give you a wider field of vision.

Follow Tom's Guide fitness on Instagram for more workouts, routines, tips, and tricks.

More from Tom's Guide

• Forget back pain, this low-impact ab workout builds strong abs in just 3 moves
• I’m a weightlifting coach — 5 ‘old-school’ exercises that still build functional strength and muscle all over
• No squats! I just tried this 8-minute chair workout, and it’s perfect for seniors, beginners, and anyone looking to build strength without impact

The Hoka Clifton is one of the most popular running shoes in the world, which is obviously great news for Hoka, but does come with one notable disadvantage — how do you update a shoe that people already love without risking disappointment?

One answer is to barely update it at all. For me, the Hoka Clifton 11 is very similar to the Hoka Clifton 10, bar some changes to the upper and a slightly softer sock liner.

Hoka clearly did have some big updates to the Clifton in mind this year, but instead of putting them into the Clifton 11, they went into the Hoka Clifton Pro, which launched at the same time.

The Clifton Pro has a new midsole foam that creates a more energetic and fun ride, and for me it’s one of the best running shoes launched so far this year, and the Clifton to go for over the 11, even if you pay slightly more.

For its part, the Clifton 11 remains a comfortable daily trainer for rolling through easy miles, and it’s also great for those who spend all day on their feet for work, but rivals like the Puma Deviate Pure Nitro and Asics Novablast 6 are more enjoyable options, along with the Clifton Pro.

Hoka Clifton 11 review: price and availability

The Hoka Clifton 11 went on sale in July 2026 and costs $155 in the U.S. and £140 in the U.K., making it $10/£10 cheaper than the Hoka Clifton Pro, which launched at the same time.

Some of its key rivals do come in slightly cheaper, notably the equally-popular Nike Pegasus 42 and Brooks Ghost 18, along with the Puma Deviate Pure Nitro.

Hoka Clifton 11 review: design and fit

The Clifton 11 is currently available in 15 colors for the women’s shoe and 13 colors for the men’s shoe. It comes in wide and standard fits — I found the standard shoe fit me well in my normal running shoe size, but Hoka shoes can run narrow so the wide option is welcome.

It’s listed as being slightly lighter than both the Clifton 10 and Clifton Pro at just under 10oz in a men’s size 10. My men’s size 9.5 actually came in at 10.1oz on my scales, but minor variances like this are normal in running shoes.

The Clifton 11 has a drop of 8mm and a stack height of 42mm at the heel and 34mm in the forefoot, which is the same as the Clifton 10 and Clifton Pro.

Upper

The Clifton 11 has a mesh upper that has some minor changes from the Clifton 10, designed to improve the fit and breathability.

I found the fit and feel of the upper very similar to that of the Clifton 10, which is no bad thing. It’s a comfortable upper that’s breathable enough for me in hot conditions, with some padding around the collar that helps to hold the heel securely.

Midsole

The midsole on the Clifton 11 uses a compression-molded EVA foam, as opposed to the more energetic and impressive supercritical EVA foam on the Clifton Pro. It’s the same midsole foam as on the Clifton 10, but the sock liner has been changed to a softer material.

Overall, the setup feels similar to the Clifton 10, and I think Hoka could have introduced the ProGlide+ foam from the Clifton Pro into the Clifton 11 and made that a bigger update rather than introducing a second Clifton into the line-up.

Outsole

The Clifton 11 uses Hoka’s Durabrasion rubber to cover the forefoot and heel on the bottom of the shoe. It has gripped well for me throughout testing and there are no signs of wear and tear yet, despite me using the shoe on dirt trails for most of my runs.

Hoka Clifton 11 review: running performance

I used the Clifton 11 for a mix of daily training runs at easy and steady paces, with my longest run in the shoe being just over 10 miles.

Throughout testing it felt very familiar to me, as someone who has ran extensively with the last few models of the Clifton. It has a soft, mellow ride feel that’s great at easy paces, with the mild rocker profile of the shoe helping to ease you from heel to toe smoothly.

At faster paces, the limitations of the midsole foam are more apparent, in that it doesn’t give a lot of energy back when you’re trying to push. This is the main difference from the Clifton Pro for me, which does offer more energy return, while also being comfortable and smooth.

During testing, I did a short run wearing the Clifton 11 on one foot and the Clifton Pro on the other, and extra resiliency and bounciness of the Pro was noticeable. The Clifton 11 is softer at the heel, but lacks the spring off the forefoot you do get from the Pro.

I did enjoy my easy runs in the Clifton 11 and it gets the job done as a daily trainer for racking up miles, but there are certainly rivals that do the same job more enjoyably thanks to livelier midsole foams, while also being more versatile with regards to their performance at faster speeds, with the Novablast 6 and Puma Deviate Pure standing out on this front.

The Clifton has long been a popular pick for people who are on their feet all day at work and I still think the Clifton 11 will do this job very well. It’s great for walking too, just like past models of the shoe.

Should you buy the Hoka Clifton 11?

The Hoka Clifton 11 does all the things I expect a Hoka Clifton to do, being a comfortable option for easy runs that will suit a wide variety of runners, as well as walkers.

However, it doesn’t feel as up-to-date as the best shoes in its area, which are using livelier midsole foams that are bouncier and more fun, and the killer rival might well be the Clifton Pro, which I think is worth the $10 upgrade.

The Asics Novablast 6 is lighter and performs better at faster paces for me, while still being just as cushioned as the Clifton 11. The Puma Deviate Pure has a lower stack, but it’s still comfortable and much lighter and faster than the Clifton 11.

Compared to other very popular options, I do favor the Clifton 11 over the Nike Pegasus 42 and Brooks Ghost 18, both of which are firmer, heavier, and less cushioned and smooth. The Novablast 6 or Clifton Pro would get my vote over the entire trio, however.

I run often, but I wouldn't class myself as "a runner," so I write this hands-on with the Adidas Kaphiros sports glasses with some trepidation. I don't want to anger the Adidas lovers among us, but I've got some likes and dislikes when it comes to testing the Kaphiros this summer.

The Kaphiros is a rimless sport shade that is lightweight and offers unobstructed views, as I can attest. And if you're looking for the best running apparel to finish off the summer, the sports glasses are a strong contender for several reasons. However, there were a few issues I had when wearing the glasses, and no, it wasn't down to sizing.

If you're interested, find out what I liked and disliked below, plus whether or not I think they're worth the $154 price tag.

What I liked

They sit well

For those who don't know me, I have a notoriously small head. Sunglasses aren't the easiest running apparel for me to wear at the best of times, but when I'm running, I find sunglasses extremely difficult to wear. Either they don't fit, or they limit my view and distract me, so I always end up whipping them off and going for the "squint and hope for the best" option instead.

The Kaphiros are designed for fluid movement and agility. I had no problems running in the glasses, though they did bounce up and down (to begin with) on my nose, which seemed to rectify itself the sweatier I got. Perhaps I had unlocked some sort of hidden suction feature?

They're flexible without feeling cheap (they're not cheap), with adjustable nose pads, rubber grips and temples for a personalized fit; the result is a secure, lightweight pair of sports glasses that actually allow me to focus on the road ahead. And that's because, unlike traditional lower borders found on frames, the Kaphiros eliminates this in favor of downward sight, which means you can check your terrain and your sports watch.

They offer brilliant protection and uninterrupted vision

As I mentioned, they're rimless, which gives you an unobstructed, expanded field of vision. When running, situational awareness is key; whether you're on the roads or the trails, blind spots are dangerous. The Adidas Kaphiros feel expansive, and I could see my route along the coast really clearly. This was on tricky terrain, which I followed up with a woodland effort and a regular road route, all of which went without issue.

The sunglasses use PowerVizn technology for the lens tints and mirror coatings, which helps enhance contrast and regulate light transmission. I loved wearing them in the bright sunlight, and I felt like they were properly protecting my eyes, especially as they use a wraparound design and block out a lot of intrusive light.

The lenses also feature HD optics with dual-sided hydrophobic and oleophobic coatings. If you, like me, haven't heard those terms before, it helps make the glasses repel water, sweat and dirt or smudging. They're also built to be durable, but only time will tell on this one.

What I didn't like

They pick up smear marks

The Adidas Kaphiros uses a specialized ventilation system with integrated holes along the temples to help increase airflow along the inner lens and prevent fogging. I can't really speak on this one yet, but I will update this hands-on a little further down the line.

I mentioned above that the dual-sided coatings should eliminate smudges and marks, but even with the lightest of touches, my sunglasses were absolutely covered in fingerprints and dirt. Given the design and color of the glasses, it's extremely noticeable and not easy to rub off, either.

I experienced some bounce and slide

This is a bit of a cheat, as they did eventually settle on my face, but initially I found that even with the snug and comfortable fit, the glasses bounced up and down on my nose. Now, is this down to it being a men's model, or would this happen anyway?

The Kaphiros sunglasses feature fully adjustable temple and nose pads, and the rubber grip interior should ideally prevent the frame from bouncing or sliding. I'm a pretty sweaty person when I exercise, and although the glasses did stop bouncing during the runs, they continued to slip here and there, the sweatier I got.

The temple design isn't built for hair

Lastly, let's talk briefly about the temples (the arms of the sunglasses). They have a slightly rugged design, which enhances grip and helps them to sit snugly over your ears. Great, I hear you say, although if you have hair on your head, adjusting your glasses or taking them off just isn't fun.

For those of you with short (or no) hair, this won't be a problem, but for anyone else, it's quite annoying. In fact, it actually hurts. It's a small but fair gripe, I think.

Verdict

I went for these glasses because, in my view, they're unisex, if you get your sizing right. The temples need a little work for anyone with hair, and they pick up a little too much grease on the lenses for my liking, but that said, I love the design, and the quality of the Kaphiros is brilliant, especially if you want to see clearly when running along uneven terrain. Plus, they look very, very good.

Are they worth $154? Annoyingly, I'm just not sure. I plan to update this hands-on once I've spent some time with them during the winter months, but if you want a pair of sports glasses to throw on during a sunny run, you can't go far wrong. It's just whether or not that price tag is scary for you.

Follow Tom's Guide fitness on Instagram for more workouts, routines, tips, and tricks.

More from Tom's Guide

• I tested shoes from 5 up-and-coming running brands — here are the ones worth your money
• Rheon running shorts are being used by top road, track and trail runners — I spoke to an expert to find out more about the tech
• I ran 10K with the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 and my trusty Apple Watch Ultra 2 — here's 3 things Samsung did better (and 1 it didn't)

I've been wearing an Apple Watch to track my runs ever since I ditched Fitbit a few years ago, and I've settled into a good rhythm with one of the best Apple Watches, the Apple Watch Ultra 2, since 2024.

However, before considering a potential upgrade to the rumored Apple Watch Ultra 4 (if it breaks cover), I wanted to see what Samsung's latest — the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — had to offer. So I borrowed the press sample loaned to the Tom's Guide fitness team, strapped it to my right wrist (I wore the Apple Watch on my left) and clocked up my usual 10K (6-mile) run.

The watches are unerringly similar: both sport a rugged design, a shortcut button (Action Button on the Apple Watch, Quick Button on the Galaxy Watch) for starting an exercise quickly and dual-frequency GPS for accurate location tracking.

Of course, one run isn't enough to say whether one is better than the other, but there were a few things that immediately stood out about Samsung's effort. Before we get to them, here's the data each watch captured.

As you can see from the table above, there are some discrepancies in a few areas, which I can explain. I tend to mix running with calisthenics training and aim to complete 100 push-ups during each run.

On the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2, I had auto-pause enabled, which kicked in every time I dropped down to rattle off some push-ups. That explains the difference in duration, distance, pace and cadence (since the Apple Watch Ultra 2 just kept rolling), but I'm not sure why the active calorie count is so different between the two.

Leaving the stats behind and progressing on to good old-fashioned subjectivity, here are three things I really liked about the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 and one where my trusty Apple Watch Ultra 2 still wins out.

3 things Samsung did better

The bright screen

Samsung has given the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 a 1.52-inch Super AMOLED display with up to 5,000 nits of peak brightness. The company is known for making display tech, and over the course of the run I was constantly impressed with how legible the display was. It adjusted smoothly between sunlight and shade, and I never had to worry about glare on the screen.

Literally and figuratively, the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 outshone the 3,000-nit LTPO OLED screen on my Apple Watch Ultra 2. When you couple this with the fact that Samsung's workout display shows fewer metrics in a larger font size, it means the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 wins the glance-ability contest.

I also like how your current heart rate zone is displayed with a rainbow color scale at the bottom, which pops on the AMOLED screen. While you get more pixels on the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 (502 × 410 vs 498 × 498 pixels on the Apple Watch Ultra 2), this didn't make as much of a difference to me as the brightness.

The strong haptics

Apple calls the haptic technology inside the Apple Watch (and iPhone) the "Taptic Engine". But based on my run with both watches, I'd rate the horsepower inside the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 as higher.

I haven't done a teardown of each model, so I can't say for certain which vibration motor is larger or stronger, but I felt that buzz on my right wrist plenty more than the one on my left. I think it's important too, since I rely on the haptics to alert me to each kilometer I cover. It's not as much of a necessity on a small run, but if you're getting to half-marathon or marathon territory, it becomes indispensable.

Even without haptics, the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 called out my splits and pacing from the built-in speaker. It was loud enough (albeit a little robotic) to hear comfortably without ever having to raise my wrist. I disabled this same feature (called Voice Feedback) on my Apple Watch Ultra 2 a long while ago, so I don't have a comparison from this run. But I'll make sure to re-enable it again on my next one to see if the Apple Watch Ultra 2 can hold up in this regard.

The comfortable strap

It seems like a small thing to mention, especially since they're interchangeable, but the bundled Marine Band attached to the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 has caught my attention. Samsung sells this separately for $90, and in my experience, it's an extremely comfortable strap that sat snugly on my wrist during the run.

It didn't slide around when I started to sweat thanks to the channel on the underside that encourages airflow. My Apple Watch Ultra 2's Trail Loop band, by comparison, was drenched in sweat by the end of the run.

While I never wore Samsung's original Marine Band, this latest version reduces the weight by 10g (0.35oz) by, among other things, switching the keeper from titanium to rubber.

Overall, the band is slimmer and as a result more flexible on the wrist. Even if you don't plan on upgrading to the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 from the first generation, I'd encourage looking into this strap as a purchase. It uses Samsung’s Dynamic Lug band attachment system and fits the original Galaxy Watch Ultra just as well.

I have an affinity for chunky watches, so the Galaxy Watch Ultra's 47.4 x 47.4 x 12.1 mm dimensions don't bother me — but it's definitely a watch I'd rather wear for running than for sleeping.

1 thing it didn't like

Apple's Digital Crown still reigns

It's been hot this summer. Like, really hot. But I live in the U.K., where a lot of the time it's cold and/or rainy. This can often necessitate wearing gloves while out running, hiking, or cycling and if there's one thing I've learned, it's that physical controls always win out where gloves are concerned.

During a run, if I want to raise or lower the volume of my audio or scroll through my metrics, nothing beats the tactile feeling of Apple's Digital Crown. The tiny little grooves etched into the metal can be felt through running gloves, and you don't even need to look at the Apple Watch to use it.

Samsung has given the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 a Touch Bezel feature you can activate in the settings, letting you run your finger around the edge of the display to scroll through the watch's functions. There are some vibration haptics that accompany this, but it's just nowhere near as easy or as satisfying as Apple's solution.

Even a physical rotating bezel as you'd find on a dive watch would have been better. I haven't used this feature in the heavy rain or snow, but I can't see it faring as well as the Digital Crown when you need to interact with your smartwatch with cold, numb fingers.

Final thoughts

Coming away from a single run with the two watches, there's no question the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 is the superior device. It's brighter and more performant with greater storage and a longer battery life.

It also undercut the Apple Watch Ultra 2 at launch with a price of $699 to Apple's $799 (the current price of the Apple Watch Ultra 3), so it wins out if you're on a budget, too. Of course, you can currently find the Ultra 2 at a reduced price since it's been usurped by the Ultra 3, but for the sake of comparing apples to...err...apples? Samsung wins on price.

But it's not a complete victory. For instance, I like that the summary of your run stays up longer on the Apple Watch Ultra 2 than it does on the Galaxy Watch Ultra. Also, while the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 is a good-looking timepiece, I'm not entirely sold on the square-circle hybrid case design.

My final takeaway is to see what the Apple Watch Ultra 4 holds if and when it launches in a couple of months. Then I'll decide whether to keep my affinity with Apple going for another year or jump ship over to Samsung's side for future workouts.

What's your wearable of choice for recording your activity? Let me know if you prefer Apple or Samsung (or split the difference and go with Garmin) in the comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I trekked the Cascade Mountains with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Garmin Instinct 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — this is the one I'd take on my next hike
• Garmin Cirqa vs Fitbit Air vs Whoop vs Oura Ring: Our fitness experts are helping you pick the perfect fitness tracker
• I walked 4,000 steps with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — and the winning margin was razor-thin

I’ve been running for over a decade and I’ve tried all kinds of different equipment, nutrition and training routines to help improve my performance. The truth is, we’re lucky to be living in an age where boundaries are being pushed on every front.

The best carbon plate running shoes, combined with high-carb strategies based on advanced gels, have both been instrumental in improving the performance of elites and amateurs alike; if you follow pros across track, road and trail events, you might also have clocked some distinctive running shorts, too.

Rheon Labs tech has been used in shorts made by Adidas, Soar and now Kiprun to boost the benefits that can be obtained from compression, with eye-catching results from athletes using the tech, including Australian sprinter Gout Gout breaking Usain Bolt’s U20 world record for 200m in April this year.

I’ve tested Rheon tech in Soar and Kiprun shorts and tights, including running my fastest marathon, and there’s more on my experience below, but first, here’s the low-down on the tech from James Willmott, product developer at Rheon Labs.

What is Rheon?

Rheon is a strain-rate-sensitive material, which means it’s soft when it’s not needed but stiffens when required. According to Willmott, it’s a bit like custard.

“When you put your finger slowly into custard, it sinks in, but if you impact it very hard, then it stiffens up,” says Willmott.

“The other example is wet sand. If you were to just stand still, you'd sink, but if you run, then you can run along the surface of the wet sand.”

The material was developed by Rheon Labs founder Dr. Dan Plant, who initially looked at using it in protective equipment.

In running shorts, Rheon is used as a film and applied as a pattern, and it stiffens when more impact is put through the muscles covered by the material, such as when your foot lands.

What are the benefits of Rheon tech for running?

Shorts with Rheon tech have been used by elites across track, trail and road events, including Adidas’ elite marathoners and sprinter Gout Gout.

“The material itself essentially controls muscle movement,” says Willmott. “When you look at a sprinter running head-on straight at you, you see their muscles wobbling from side to side. That’s wasted energy, so Rheon helps control that and limit the muscle acceleration.

“Based on those controlling and limiting the muscle vibrations, you get benefits like less fatigue, less muscle damage, and more proprioception — the ability to feel how your muscles are moving.”

Boosting the benefits of compression

These benefits are similar to those gained from wearing compression garments, something I’ve done for many years as a fan of half tights.

Rheon takes those benefits to another level by offering a higher level of compression that would be comfortable to wear in a material that's always stiff.

“To make compression garments that control the muscles even more, you have to just make them tighter and tighter and tighter, so they become more and more uncomfortable to wear,” says Willmott. “You’re trying to squeeze into something which is effectively two sizes too small.

“The benefit of the Rheon material is that at rest, it's not that stiff. You're not adding much compression to a garment. If you just were to slip it on and stand in it, it shouldn't be unbearable to stand in.

“Then precisely when you need the support; when you're engaging the material and your muscles are moving from side to side, that's when it stiffens up and gives you the support.”

The level of muscle control Rheon tech offers has been measured using an accelerometer and it offers roughly 39% more than wearing regular shorts without compression and over 20% more than using compression shorts without Rheon.

What’s it like to run in Rheon shorts?

I’ve tested the Soar Rheon Trail Race Shorts, which come in at a cool $340, and the new Kiprun Rheon Trail Run 900 half tights, which are £39 (around $52).

Both are high-storage half tights, which makes them ideal for long runs and races as you can carry the gels and drinks you need in the pockets around the waist.

I used the Soar shorts when running my fastest marathon at 2:24 for the Loch Ness Marathon, a hilly course with a lot of downhill in the first half. It’s a fast course, if you can manage that downhill without your quads getting wrecked, and I feel like the shorts helped on that front. I also ran my half marathon PR wearing the shorts.

Recently I’ve been using the more affordable Kiprun shorts regularly in training, and while it’s a hard benefit to quantify, they do give me a bit more confidence when maintaining hard efforts, and I like to use them for the first workout of double run days, hopefully keeping my legs fresher for the second session.

I also used Kiprun’s Rheon tights for a lot of trail running last winter and again felt they benefitted me by limiting the impact during downhills — my DOMS wasn’t so bad the next day.

The shorts aren’t going to be a shortcut to improved performance, but with the price of half tights that use the tech coming down, I do think they’re worth a try for runners seeking to maximize their performance in every way they can.

More from Tom's Guide

• Forget back pain, this low-impact ab workout builds strong abs in just 3 moves
• I’m a weightlifting coach — 5 ‘old-school’ exercises that still build functional strength and muscle all over
• No squats! I just tried this 8-minute chair workout, and it’s perfect for seniors, beginners, and anyone looking to build strength without impact

The Cloudmonster 3 might be the quintessential On running shoe, showcasing the brand’s distinctive pod design and delivering what I consider to be a classic On ride, which is a little firmer than you get from most sneakers these days.

Building on the success of the original Cloudmonster, On has expanded the line-up to include the Cloudmonster Hyper super-shoe over the past two years, and right now there are actually three Cloudmonster models to consider — the Cloudmonster 3, Cloudmonster 3 Hyper, and Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS.

The Cloudmonster 3 is the classic On daily trainer, while the Hyper models are super-trainers designed to be lighter and more versatile, at a higher price.

I’ve run a lot of miles in all three shoes, and for me, the Cloudmonster gets better and better as you rise through the ranks, but there are pros and cons to each model, which I’ll expand upon in my On Cloudmonster 3 vs On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper comparison.

On Cloudmonster 3 vs On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper: Price and availability

The On Cloudmonster 3 is the cheapest version of the shoe and costs $190/£180. The price rises to $220/£210 for the On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper, while the On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS is $280/£270.

On Cloudmonster 3 vs On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper: Design and fit

The Cloudmonster 3 is available in 18 colors and there’s a wide option of the shoe. There are five colors of the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper and four of the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS.

All three shoes fit me well in my normal running shoe size, but the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS uses On’s Lightspray upper technology, which means you can’t adjust the fit. If you have high arches or a wide foot, it might not work as well for you as the standard uppers on the Cloudmonster 3 and 3 Hyper.

All three shoes have a 6mm drop, but the stack height rises with the price. The Cloudmonster 3 is 35mm at the heel and 29mm at the forefoot; the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper is 39.5mm at the heel and 33.5 at the forefoot; and the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS is 45mm at the heel and 39mm at the forefoot.

Conversely, the weight drops. In my US men’s size 9.5 the Cloudmonster 3 weighs 10.7oz; the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper is 9.5oz; the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS is just 7.6oz.

Upper

The Cloudmonster 3 and Cloudmonster 3 Hyper both have conventional, comfortable uppers that hold the foot well and proved breathable enough for me during testing.

Things get spicier with the one-piece LightSpray upper on the LS model, which makes the shoe a lot lighter, but also means you can’t adjust the fit.

I know several runners who struggle with this upper, but I love the fit and feel of LightSpray myself, which I find holds the foot well and is comfortable for long distances.

Midsole

The midsole of the Cloudmonster 3 features a triple layer of On’s CloudTec pods made with Helion foam.

It’s CloudTec all the way up in the shoe, whereas with the Hyper models, CloudTec is used as a frame on the bottom of the midsole, with On’s Helion HF foam used for the top layer.

This springy, PEBA-based foam is what makes the Hyper models super-trainers, creating a more versatile ride and a lighter design overall.

Outsole

All three shoes have podded outsoles with all of the pods around the heel and forefoot covered by a thick layer of rubber. Durability shouldn’t be a concern with any of the shoes, and they all gripped well for me during testing.

On Cloudmonster 3 vs On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper: Running performance

I’ve run over 30 miles in each of the Cloudmonster shoes, and nearly 50 in the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS, which for me is the pick of the bunch, if you don’t mind its high price and fixed fit.

The standard Cloudmonster 3 is the firmest of the trio, with the full CloudTec midsole doing a good job of absorbing the impact of running, but not providing much energy return.

I found it worked best for easy runs, where the rockered shape of the shoe helped me to roll through my footstrike, but it lacked the punchy feel I like for faster efforts.

The Cloudmonster 3 Hyper is a step-up on this front thanks to the Helion HF foam in the midsole. It’s a softer, more comfortable shoe, and worked well for long, easy and steady runs in my testing.

It’s still not ideal for faster workouts, though, which is where the Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS clearly excels compared to the other models.

The LS model is lighter and springier, and I loved doing tempo runs in it in particular. It also has the biggest range of the three shoes for me — it’s great for very easy runs, but you can push to your fastest speeds in interval sessions too, I found.

All three shoes handle easy runs well, then the ride gets softer, springier and more versatile as you move from the Cloudmonster 3 to the 3 Hyper and to the 3 Hyper LS.

On Cloudmonster 3 vs On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper: Verdict

The On Cloudmonster 3 is a solid, good-looking shoe that will handle your easy runs and works well for lifestyle use, and it comes in the widest variety of colors at the lowest price of the trio.

I think it’s worth stepping up to a Hyper model for running, though. The Cloudmonster 3 Hyper is a better daily trainer that can pick up steady runs and is brilliant for long efforts in particular; it also looks great for general use in my opinion — I wear it all the time for this, months after I finished testing it.

The Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS is the best running shoe of the three and one of the most versatile and impressive super-trainers available from any brand.

It’s prohibitively expensive, however, and the fit won’t work for everyone. The On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper hits the sweet spot of the line-up overall, but if you can try on the LS model and like the fit, it might be worth paying the extra to get such a great all-rounder running shoe.

I’ve been testing running shoes for a long time, and for most of that period, when I tried a sneaker from a completely new brand, it rarely hit the standards set by more established companies like Nike and Asics.

That makes sense — the biggest brands have been making running shoes for decades and have huge research and development budgets, along with a vast amount of feedback from runners who’ve used them.

However, in the past year or so, I’ve found that up-and-coming brands have been a lot more successful launching excellent sneakers on their first or second attempt, and I’d go as far as to say that some of the best running shoes of 2026 have come from these companies.

I’ve tested a lot of shoes in 2026 from upstart and well-established brands alike, and if you’re interested in trying something new, these are the five I recommend.

R.A.D

R.A.D started as a gym-focused brand but quickly expanded into running shoes and has launched a trio of sneakers for daily training.

The R.A.D Mallow is a max-cushioned trainer, while the R.A.D Synth is a lighter, lower-stack option at a lower price.

However, the pick of the litter is the R.A.D UFO, a springy super-trainer with a wild design and a delightfully fun ride.

The Mallow and Synth are solid but didn’t do much to draw me to R.A.D over many existing shoes, but the U.F.O is a bit special and bodes well for the future of R.A.D running.

Dynafish

Chinese brand Dynafish has been making waves in the running shoe community thanks to the Xiaonian super-trainer, which runners have been finding ways to get on their feet through marketplace sites like AliExpress.

Now available directly in the U.S. through smaller retailers, the Dynafish Xiaonian is an outstanding daily trainer that competes with top super-trainers like the Asics Megablast while costing half as much.

The Xiaonian is especially good for the kind of long workouts and progression runs you do during marathon training, and has stuck around my own rotation for that purpose since testing.

It’s worth seeking out, and I’m excited to see what comes next from Dynafish, and hopeful that future shoes will be easier to buy in the U.S. and U.K.

Mount to Coast

Mount to Coast entered the running shoe market in 2024, mostly focusing on ultra-long-distance running shoes, and has earned a loyal following through innovative designs that use impressive midsole foam and offer a more adjustable fit.

The shoes don’t have the flashiest designs in terms of looks or ride feel, but they’re comfortable, durable and a strong option for those racking up the biggest mileage.

I tested the Mount to Coast C1 this year and found it an enjoyable and versatile daily trainer that’s more stable than many super-trainers.

Tracksmith

Tracksmith has been well-known for the high standards of its running apparel for a long time and has made a move into the running shoe market over the past couple of years with its Eliot line.

The first two models in the line — the Eliot Runner and Eliot Racer — are solid, but they weren’t shoes I counted among the very best in their categories; the new Tracksmith Eliot Ryder does match up well with the most impressive max-cushioned daily trainers available.

It’s comfortable, light for such a cushioned shoe, and looks good for casual use too. It’s one of the best cushioned options I’ve tried so far this year, though as ever with Tracksmith, you do pay a premium for the stylish design of the Eliot Ryder.

Kiprun

This is a bit of a cheat, because Kiprun has actually been around for a while, but the Decathlon-backed brand only launched properly in the U.S. in April this year, so they could well be new to you.

Kiprun has released some of the best road and trail running shoes I’ve tried this year, and though they’re even more attractive in the UK and Europe, where they undercut most rivals, it’s still worth checking them out in the U.S.

The two models I recommend trying first are the Kiprun Kipstorm Tempo, a plate-free super-trainer that can handle almost any kind of run, and the Kiprun Kipride Max, a max-stack cushioned shoe that offers a great blend of comfort and bounce.

More from Tom's Guide

• Forget back pain, this low-impact ab workout builds strong abs in just 3 moves
• I’m a weightlifting coach — 5 ‘old-school’ exercises that still build functional strength and muscle all over
• No squats! I just tried this 8-minute chair workout, and it’s perfect for seniors, beginners, and anyone looking to build strength without impact

Gravel running shoes are on the rise, and the Asics Blazeblast is the latest release to slip into this category of all-terrain sneakers that combine the comfortable cushioning of road shoes with grippy outsoles designed to handle light trails.

In this case, the Blazeblast shares a lot of design features with the popular Asics Novablast road running line, offering a more substantial outsole than both the Asics Novablast 6 and the TR version launched alongside the Asics Novablast 5.

I found it an enjoyable, versatile shoe that proved the ideal companion for a trip away where I didn’t know what surfaces I would be running on, offering comfort and grip on roads and dirt tracks while also being a good walking shoe.

The Blazeblast won’t replace one of the best trail-running shoes for truly tricky terrain, and isn’t quite as lively and fun as top road shoes like the Novablast 6, but it’s a handy jack-of-all-trades that might suit some runners down to the ground.

Asics Blazeblast review: Price and availability

The Asics Blazeblast went on sale in August 2026 and costs $155 in the U.S. and £140 in the U.K., which is the same price as the Asics Novablast 6 road shoe.

It’s a little cheaper than other top gravel/road-to-trail shoes I’ve tested, like the Salomon Aero Glide 4 GRVL and The North Face Altamesa 500 v2.

Asics Blazeblast review: Design and fit

The Blazeblast launched in three colors, including the Black/Sandstorm design I tested, which I think is a pretty good-looking shoe for general use alongside your runs, which is always a handy bonus.

I found the Blazeblast fit me well in my normal running shoe size, the same size I use across the Asics road and trail line-ups.

It weighs 9.7oz for a US men’s size 10, which is pretty light for such a cushioned shoe with a full outsole, even if it’s not a featherweight.

The Blazeblast has an 8mm drop and a high and wide stack of foam in its midsole. The exact stack height specs haven’t been given, but it looks to be over 40mm at the heel and similar to the Novablast road shoe.

Upper

The Blazeblast has a lightweight woven upper that has much more in common with a road running shoe than a trail shoe.

Full trail shoes tend to have a lot of protective overlays to add structure and a firmer toe bumper to guard against stubbed toes, but while the Blazeblast does have a slightly thicker section over the toes, it’s still flexible and soft.

I found the upper comfortable on all my runs, including a 15-miler in warm conditions, and the lack of extra structure and protection wasn’t missed on the gravel trails, dirt paths and roads I ran on.

Midsole

The Blazeblast’s midsole is made from Asics’ FF Blast Max foam, which is the material used for the entirety of the Novablast 5 midsole and most of the Novablast 6.

It’s a soft foam but not so squishy as to be unstable, and gives a little pop off the toes at faster speeds, though it’s not as lively and responsive as the FF Turbo Squared foam Asics added to the forefoot of the Novablast 6.

Outsole

Flip the Blazeblast over, and you’ll find a big difference in its design compared with the Novablast, which is the full AsicsGrip outsole with 2.5mm lugs.

These lugs are quite broad and flat to deliver a smooth ride on roads and flat trails, but give a little extra bite on softer ground and loose surfaces like gravel, while also being more durable than the minimal outsole designs you find on most road shoes these days.

Asics Blazeblast review: Running performance

I’ve used the Asics Blazeblast for a variety of runs on a variety of surfaces during my testing, taking it away as my main holiday walking and running shoe on a summer trip.

For the most part, I’ve run at easy paces on the road, dirt trails and gravel tracks, but I’ve thrown in some faster sections too as part of my regular daily training.

I’m a fan of the Novablast line, and the Blazeblast certainly feels similar to the Novablast 5 in particular. It’s soft and comfortable over long distances, and has a bit of chutzpah when you go through the gears to faster paces, though it’s not a true speedster.

It’s a shame that Asics didn’t opt to replicate the midsole of the Novablast 6 in the Blazeblast, though, because the extra energy return from the FF Turbo Squared foam in the forefoot of the Novablast 6 would have been welcome in the Blazeblast too.

The outsole does provide more grip on light trails than a standard road shoe, but almost more important than the grip is the fact that it will boost the durability of the Blazeblast if you spend a lot of time on gravel paths in particular, which can wear down softer road shoe outsoles quickly.

I wouldn’t opt to take the Blazeblast onto technical trails though. It’s a bit too soft and unstable for jagged rocky paths, and doesn’t have the grip for soft, muddy ground.

Keep it on lighter trails though, and it’s a very enjoyable shoe to cruise around in, and it also performs well on pure road runs in my experience. The outsole still grips and doesn’t really detract from its comfort.

Should you buy the Asics Blazeblast?

The Asics Blazeblast is a really good running shoe and a handy one to have around, but not an absolute essential for me.

Its versatility is a great strength, and if you want one shoe for everything and spend a lot of time on gravel paths, it’s worth considering, but there are more specialized shoes that outperform it.

If you rarely hit the trails, then the Asics Novablast 6 or Hoka Clifton Pro are better cushioned road running shoes for me, with livelier midsole foams. I’ve used them on light trails too, and they work fine there, though won’t be as durable.

Similarly, if you spend all your time on the trails and want a shoe more capable of exploring technical terrain, especially in the mountains, the Hoka Speedgoat 7 would be a better buy.

There are also a couple of all-terrain shoes I personally rate a little more highly than the Blazeblast, namely the Salomon Aero Glide 4 GRVL and The North Face Altamesa 500 v2, both of which have more energetic midsole foams.

I’m excited to see this area of the running shoe market continue to develop, though, as someone who seeks out dirt tracks to run on whenever possible. If the next Blazeblast uses the midsole setup of the Novablast 6, it will be a strong contender for the gravel shoe crown.

The best carbon plate running shoes all share the same purpose: to help you run more efficiently at high speeds, but they don’t all do this in the same way.

I love ludicrously light and aggressive super-shoes myself, like the Puma Fast-R Nitro Elite 3 and Asics Metaspeed Sky Tokyo. Still, they’re not the most durable or practical option for anything other than race day, and many runners find them too unstable and uncomfortable for longer events too.

The On Cloudboom Strike 2 is a super-shoe that offers more comfort and stability than its rivals, and even if it’s not the lightest and fastest racer I’ve tested, it still performed well for me across a variety of hard training runs.

It won’t be the perfect racing option for runners seeking the absolute fastest shoe they can strap on, but the balanced ride of the On Cloudboom Strike 2 might hit the spot for marathoners looking for a more controlled ride that’s still fast enough to chase PRs.

On Cloudboom Strike 2 review: Price and availability

The Cloudboom Strike 2 launched in July 2026 and costs $250 in the U.S. and £230 in the U.K., which actually makes it one of the more affordable super-shoes on the market, though you can get cheaper options by shopping for older models in sales.

It’s one of two new On racers, sitting beneath the On Cloudboom Strike 2 LS in the brand’s line-up. The LS version has a one-piece LightSpray upper that makes the shoe considerably lighter, but it’s also considerably more expensive at $310/£300.

On Cloudboom Strike 2 review: Design and fit

The On Cloudboom Strike 2 is currently available in three colors, with bright green and purple designs joining the white and yellow model I tested in the lineup.

I found that the shoe fit me well in my normal running shoe size. It’s a bit tighter around the toes than other On shoes, but you would expect that in a racing shoe. The traditional upper is not as light as On’s LightSpray material, but does allow you to adjust the fit, and some people find the brand’s LightSpray shoes difficult to get on.

My US men’s size 9.5 Cloudboom Strike 2 weighs 7.2oz, and judging by On’s stats, the LS model would be 1-1.5oz lighter than this. The standard shoe is certainly pretty light, but many top carbon racers are under 6oz.

The shoe has a 5mm drop and stack height of 39.5mm at the heel and 34.5mm at the forefoot to match World Athletics regulations, which limit racing shoe stacks to a maximum of 40mm.

Upper

The Cloudboom Strike 2 has an open-weave upper made from quite a stiff material. It’s breathable and lightweight, and I had no problems with comfort during my testing of the shoe.

I’m a fan of On’s LightSpray uppers, which I’ve tested on the original On Cloudboom Strike LS and On Cloudmonster 3 Hyper LS, but they don’t fit every foot perfectly, so the more adjustable design of the standard Cloudboom Strike 2 will create a better fit for some.

Midsole

The Cloudboom Strike 2 has a dual-density midsole that uses two layers of the brand’s springy PEBA-based Helion HF foam that sandwich a curved carbon plate (called a Speedboard here).

That’s all quite standard for a racing shoe, but what is novel about the Cloudboom Strike 2 is the CloudTec Sphere geometry, where channels have been cut into the midsole to increase the rebound you get from the foam.

There’s also a large cutout in the middle of the midsole that runs the length of the shoe and shows off the carbon plate from beneath, which helps to reduce weight.

Outsole

It’s rare to see a lot of rubber on the bottom of a racing shoe, with most brands opting for minimal patches in the heel and forefoot to reduce weight, so it’s a pleasant surprise to see the fuller outsole coverage you get on the Cloudboom Strike 2.

This does add a bit of weight but will improve the durability if you’re using it for a lot of training alongside racing, and the Cloudboom Strike 2 has also gripped well for me throughout testing.

On Cloudboom Strike 2 review: Running performance

I’ve run 45 miles in the On Cloudboom Strike 2 so far, doing a series of workouts in the shoe on the track and road, as well as some light trails. Those workouts have included short, all-out reps and longer stints at my half marathon and marathon race paces.

Most of my runs in the shoe have been fast, since it’s a racing shoe first and foremost, but I also did an easy-to-steady progression run to see how it feels at slower paces.

The ride is more subtle than with many carbon shoes that have very soft, springy foams or highly rockered midsole shapes. The Cloudboom Strike 2 does have a bouncy feel, but it isn’t exaggerated, so it feels a little more natural to run in.

It’s certainly quick, too, and makes holding fast paces feel smooth and controlled. I did a series of 2km reps in the shoe at around 5:15/mile pace and 60-second reps at sub-5/mile pace, and it turns over quickly and gives the added "pop" off the toes you expect from a super-shoe.

That said, it doesn’t feel quite as fast as my favorite super-shoes, which are lighter and more explosive. The Cloudboom Strike 2 is more balanced and feels better than those shoes at slower paces, but for all-out performance I’d opt for something like the Puma Fast-R 3 myself, and I look forward to testing the lighter Cloudboom Strike 2 LS.

However, the more stable, natural feel of the Cloudboom Strike 2, coupled with its extensive outsole, means that it’s a shoe that I’d be happy to use for lots of training as well as racing. I even found it a good option for fast runs on light trails because it’s not as soft and wildly rockered as some rivals.

Should you buy the On Cloudboom Strike 2?

If you just want the fastest super-shoe on the market, I don’t think it’s the On Cloudboom Strike 2. The Puma Fast-R 3 and Asics Metaspeed Sky Tokyo top my list, or the Mizuno Hyperwarp Pure if you’re looking for a short-distance speedster in particular.

I also think the LS version of the shoe will be a speedier option thanks to its lighter upper, even if the midsole and outsole are the same as on the standard Cloudboom Strike 2.

However, if you need a bit more stability and comfort in your racer, and prefer a more natural ride, the Cloudboom Strike 2 is a strong option, alongside the Puma Deviate Nitro Elite 4.

Both shoes are good options for regularly fast training as well as race day, and are at the more affordable end of the super-shoe spectrum, with the On being more comfortable and bouncy, while the Puma is lighter.

The carbon plate shoe market is crowded, but I do think the Cloudboom Strike 2 fits a profile some runners will be looking for, especially for longer events like marathons.

When I first started testing the best treadmills, all I cared about were the biggest specs on the sheet. Things like top speed, max incline, and motor horsepower.

These are all very important, for sure, but having used a variety of home treadmills for long periods over the past decade or so, they’re not the features that have made the biggest impact on my enjoyment of a machine.

When you’re running on a treadmill regularly, it’s all about ease-of-use, and I’ve tested machines that excel on this front, and some that don’t, instead putting barriers up to make it harder to run.

So if I were looking to buy a home treadmill today, there are a few features I’d now consider dealbreakers that wouldn’t have occurred to me before using one regularly for several years.

Here are six questions I’d ask when looking for a treadmill.

How fast does the treadmill start?

If I’ve carved out some time to run, I want to spend that time running, not navigating my way through a series of increasingly annoying sub-menus on a treadmill console or, even worse, having to wait for a software update.

Ideally, a treadmill will have some kind of quick-start option with manual buttons, but if I do have to fire up an app or use the console, it should still take less than 30 seconds to get the belt moving so I can start running.

As someone who often uses a treadmill to fit in a run while my toddler has a nap, time is precious, and too many expensive treadmills in particular throw way too many options and menus at you before you can actually start running.

The Bowflex Treadmill 10 I’ve used for many years is brilliant in many respects, but not this one, and I’ve often started my runs on it in a mild fury at how long it’s taken to get going.

Is it easy to use without an app subscription?

This is tied to my first question because if you have to fire up an app on the treadmill every time you run, it does add time and software updates to the mix.

Beyond the extra time, if your machine relies heavily on an app to function, the odds are you’ll be paying a significant monthly fee to get the most out of it, so it’s important to know what you get from the machine without paying this fee.

If you’re buying something like the Peloton Tread, you’ll go in knowing that the app subscription is a big part of what it offers, but with machines from brands like Bowflex and NordicTrack it’s less clear how reliant they are on the JRNY and iFit apps baked into them.

You could easily end up using a treadmill for five to 10 years, and may well not want to be paying a subscription for all of that time, so check what features you get without subscribing.

Does it have manual controls?

Bright touchscreens that display all your stats and control the treadmill are fantastic at the start of a run, but after 45 minutes of running, they can become harder to use without smearing sweat all over the screen and inadvertently triggering the wrong controls.

Manual controls for speed and incline are a must for me, and ideally there will be some shortcut buttons to certain speed and incline settings you can use for fast changes during interval workouts.

Does it have a truly foldable design and is it portable?

Big treadmills are great if you have a lot of space and never have to move them, but as someone who has twice had to wheel a huge, very heavy treadmill around my neighbourhood with a friend, getting stuck in a narrow alley at one point, it is handy to have a more portable machine.

Also check how foldable the machine actually is, because that term is used a lot and often means you can lift the belt a little bit, which slightly decreases the floor space used by the machine while making it take up more space in every other way.

Many treadmills now fold completely flat, which is fantastic for storing them under something, or even against a wall (do properly secure them to that wall to avoid catastrophe), and also makes them easier to move around the house.

I think it’s actually worth sacrificing in some key areas like top speed or even belt size to get a machine that takes up less space, but that will depend on your situation with how much space you have to play with.

Does it have Bluetooth connectivity for third-party apps?

Lots of treadmills now come with fitness platforms baked in, or partner apps to link to, which is all very well, but I think being able to link the machine with any app you want is important.

For example, I like to use Zwift to track my treadmill runs, and having a treadmill that speaks directly to the app is easier and more accurate than using a footpod or my running watch to send my stats to Zwift.

This kind of Bluetooth connectivity was a very rare feature when I started testing treadmills, but should now come as standard given the amount of training apps out there you might want to link up with.

How large is the running belt?

This is a big feature, and one most people probably know to check, but still worth flagging up. How long and wide is the running belt on the treadmill you’re looking at, because this directly affects how comfortable it is to use the machine regularly.

I’m 6ft tall and a pretty fast runner, but have a fairly short stride length for my height and can get away with using shorter belts, but feeling cramped on a machine, or even anxious about hitting the front or sides of the treadmill, can really wreck the enjoyment of a run.

A small belt is usually the biggest drawback of cheaper, more foldable machines, but you can strike a balance. The most spacious machines offer 60in x 20in belts or bigger, but I’ve been fine running regularly on treadmills with 50-55in long and 17-18in wide belts.

More from Tom's Guide

• I'm a smartwatch reviewer, and here's my Apple Watch Series 12 wish list — three upgrades I want, and one I don't
• Leaked Apple Watch 12 design change is the opposite of an upgrade — and that has me worried
• Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 needs these 3 upgrades to convince me to switch from my Apple Watch Ultra 3

Now and again, a running shoe comes from nowhere to become a word-of-mouth sensation, and right now there is probably no hotter shoe with highly invested runners than the Dynafish Xiaonian.

Given that many runners will never have even heard of Dynafish, that’s quite different to the last couple of shoes I’ve seen become so popular in the running shoe community, which are the Adidas Adizero Evo SL and the original Asics Superblast.

Those were new lines launched with relatively little hype to become instant favorites that reshaped the running shoe landscape, but were made by two of the biggest brands in the industry, and were available to buy everywhere.

In contrast, the Dynafish Xiaonian comes from an unheralded Chinese brand and until recently was only really possible to get through marketplace sites like AliExpress.

The Xiaonian is now available to buy directly in the US, but only through small retailers like HobbyJogger and ShopNings, and while it’s still good value at $130-$150 through those sites, it’s not as cheap as you can get it through marketplace stores.

I was excited to try the Dyanfish Xiaonian, so I bought it for £97 (around $127) from AliExpress to ship to the UK. The shoe arrived about 10 days later, and it absolutely lived up to the hype.

Here’s why I think it’s one of the best running shoes you can get right now.

It’s extremely light but still highly cushioned

My men’s size 10 Dynafish Xiaonian weighs just 7.6oz despite 41mm of cushioning at the heel and 34mm at the forefoot.

It’s not an extremely stripped-back design, with lots of foam in the midsole, some padding on the upper and generous rubber coverage on the outsole, so the lightweight design doesn’t detract from its comfort as a daily trainer, while making the shoe great for speedwork.

There are very few non-carbon plate racing shoes that offer a similar balance of weight and cushioning, with even other lightweight options I love, like the Adidas Evo SL and Puma Deviate Pure Nitro, being heavier with less foam underfoot.

The foam and rocker deliver a fast ride

The key feature in almost all running shoes is the midsole foam used, and Dynafish has created a winner with the supercritical TPEE material in the Xiaonian.

It’s clearly very light and delivers a high level of energy return during faster runs while also being soft enough to feel comfortable at easy paces.

I also enjoyed the pronounced rocker design on the shoe during my testing, though this might not be for everyone. It really helps to throw you forward with each stride and gives the Xiaonian a smooth feel, especially at fast paces.

It’s as versatile as super-trainers that cost twice as much

I love do-it-all running shoes that excel at a wide range of paces, but you often have to pay big money to get the best all-rounders. The Asics Megablast, Adidas Hyperboost Edge or Asics Superblast 3 are all versatile super-trainers that cost $200 or more, for example.

The Dynafish Xiaonian feels every bit as versatile to me and will set you back at most $150, and likely a lot less, depending on where you get it from.

I’ve done 1km reps in the shoe at sub-5min/mile pace, tempo runs and a whole lot of easy running in the shoe, and it felt great throughout my testing. It’s pretty stable for a lightweight, high-stack shoe too.

I’d say it’s at its best for faster efforts, especially long workouts or progression runs, but the Xiaonian can handle pretty much anything you throw at it.

There’s a full outsole and it’s built to last

It’s fair to say that whenever you come across a bargain in any product area, there’s always a fear that the build quality won’t be up to par, but that’s not the case with the Xiaonian.

I’ve run 60 miles in my pair with no signs of wear and tear, and the feel of the midsole has only improved so far, becoming a little more flexible.

The shoe also has a lot of rubber on the outsole, which is surprising for such a light shoe. Often super-trainers have minimal rubber coverage to reduce weight, but the Xiaonian’s outsole should last and has gripped well for me on roads and light trails.

Should you buy the Dynafish Xiaonian?

If you prefer to stick with more accessible shoes, then the Adidas Evo SL or Puma Deviate Pure Nitro would be good options instead of the Dynafish Xiaonian, and the Evo SL is often on sale these days, so it offers good value.

I expect Chinese shoes from brands like Dynafish and Li-Ning to become more and more popular and indeed more accessible. Steph Curry's mega-deal with Li-Ning will certainly help make them more well-known.

If you're happy to shop through smaller sites or marketplace platforms like AliExpress, the Xiaonian is well worth trying now, though. It's not quite as cheap as it was a few months ago because it's already becoming well-known, but it still undercuts most running shoes while out-performing them.

• Apple Watch Ultra 4: All the design, health, and battery life rumors so far
• I walked 4,500 steps with the Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch SE 3 — and I'm surprised by the winner
• Exclusive: Can an Apple Watch actually spot perimenopause? I sat down with Apple to find out more about its new Women’s Health features

The Hoka Clifton is one of the most popular running shoes available, rivaling the likes of the Brooks Ghost and Nike Pegasus for name recognition.

It’s also a shoe that needed a big update, in my opinion. The Hoka Clifton 10 was a solid but unremarkable daily trainer that risked falling behind rival shoes that use livelier midsole foam.

This big update arrived not in the Hoka Clifton 11, which seems very similar to the Clifton 10, but in a new addition to the line called the Hoka Clifton Pro.

The Clifton Pro is a considerable upgrade on the standard model thanks to a new midsole foam and rocker geometry, and I thoroughly enjoyed my runs in the shoe during testing thanks to its comfortable, smooth ride.

I wish this were simply the Clifton 11, though, because Hoka doesn’t need both shoes in its line-up and putting Pro in the name writes performance checks the Clifton Pro can’t cash. It rivals the best running shoes for comfort on easy, steady runs, but lacks the versatility of a super-trainer, which you might expect from a "Pro" model.

Hoka Clifton Pro review: Price and availability

The Hoka Clifton Pro launched in July 2026 and costs $165 in the U.S. and £150 in the U.K., which is $10/£10 more expensive than the Hoka Clifton 11.

It’s also a little pricier than the Asics Novablast 6, which I’d consider a key rival as one of the best cushioned daily trainers I’ve tested this year. But the Clifton Pro is cheaper than the Nike Vomero Plus, which I consider another standout option in this category.

Hoka Clifton Pro review: Design and fit

The Hoka Clifton Pro is currently available in seven colors, including the white-and-orange design I tested.

I found that it fit well in my normal running shoe size, the same size I’ve used for all Hoka shoes in the past. There are wide models of the Clifton Pro available too.

The shoe actually has the same stack height and drop as the Clifton 11. It has an 8mm drop and stands 42mm tall at the heel and 34mm at the forefoot (in a men’s US size 10).

In my US men’s size 9.5, the Clifton Pro weighs 9.5oz, which is pretty light for a highly-cushioned daily trainer like this, though it’s actually a tad heavier than the Clifton 11.

Upper

The Clifton Pro has a mesh upper that’s proved breathable enough during my testing during a heatwave here in the UK.

There’s ample padding around the heel for the shoe to fit comfortably and securely, and it didn’t feel oppressive to me during my runs.

Midsole

The main upgrade on the Clifton Pro compared with the Clifton 10 and 11 is the ProGlide+ midsole foam, which is a supercritical EVA material, as opposed to the compression-moulded EVA on the Clifton 11.

This foam makes the Clifton Pro bouncier on the run than the standard Clifton, and it also has a more aggressive rocker profile than its cheaper counterpart, which makes for a smoother ride, especially at faster paces.

While EVA foams were the standard in running shoes for a long time, it’s worth saying that most brands have moved on to livelier materials like PEBA, TPEE and aliphatic TPU even in their daily trainers.

This does make the Clifton Pro look a little outdated on paper, but in general I don’t really care too much what a midsole foam is made from myself, as long as it feels good on the run, and the Clifton Pro certainly feels good on the run.

Outsole

The Clifton Pro has a segmented outsole design, but a generous layer of the brand’s Durabrasion rubber does cover most of the bottom of the shoe.

It has gripped well for me on roads and light trail runs, though I’ve yet to test it in the wet because of how dry the weather has been near me this summer.

Hoka Clifton Pro review: Running performance

On paper, the Hoka Clifton Pro doesn’t look all that exciting. It’s not built to be a super-trainer like the Asics Superblast 3, isn’t amazingly light or plated, and uses EVA, which is almost a dirty word among running shoe geeks these days.

However, Hoka has a history of making shoes that look a bit underwhelming on paper but impress in the real world, with the excellent Hoka Mach 7 being just the latest example I’ve tested, and I’ve loved my miles in the Hoka Clifton Pro.

The new ProGlide+ midsole foam combined with Hoka’s reliable rocker geometry creates a ride that’s very smooth and enjoyable at easy paces and works well when pushing to steady or tempo speeds as well.

I found cruising in the shoe to feel almost effortless at times, and when I did a 90-minute-long run in the shoe one Sunday after a tough double workout day, it was protective and comfortable without feeling big or cumbersome, which some max-stack shoes can do when I’m really tired.

It’s not a super-trainer like the Asics Megablast, lacking the speedy feel I like to tackle my fastest workouts, but the Clifton Pro is an excellent daily trainer for your easy, steady, and long runs, and it’s good for walking as well.

Should you buy the Hoka Clifton Pro?

The Hoka Clifton Pro hits the spot as a cushioned daily trainer that’s protective, comfortable and fun to run in.

It’s one of the strongest options in this area, in my opinion, and would be a good all-rounder for runners who prioritize, or work well in rotation with, a faster shoe for workouts, which is how I’d use it.

There’s no need to have both it and the Clifton 11 in Hoka’s line-up, in my opinion, especially given how close in price the two shoes are. The Clifton Pro is an upgrade worth making to do the same job for runners, and I do wish Hoka had simply launched it as the Clifton 11 and kept the price at $155.

The Asics Novablast 6 is a stern competitor, because it’s cheaper and a little livelier at faster paces, making it a more versatile daily trainer. I’d lean towards the Asics myself to make the saving.

If you want an even springier feel on your runs and even more cushioning, the Nike Vomero Plus is a great cushioned shoe, and though it’s more expensive than the Clifton Pro, it regularly appears in sales.

Running sunglasses are more than just a fashion statement — they actively protect your eyes, and unlike your regular sunglasses, they won’t bounce around your face while doing so. I’ve worn the same pair of sunglasses for the past four months, clocking over 100 miles in them, and here’s they're my go-to all year round.

The glasses in question are the Adidas Kentro sunglasses, which come in a range of different colors to suit every style. I used them for the very sunny London Marathon in April, and have been wearing them during the heatwave as I train for the Frankfurt Marathon this fall.

They stay put

As mentioned above, good running sunglasses won’t slide up and down your nose as you clock up the miles. The Adidas sunglasses have a large nose pad that keeps them firmly in place, and I’ve never had any issues with them moving, even after 26.2 miles.

Despite wrapping around your face, they never went foggy either when I stopped at traffic lights.

They stopped my squinting headaches

I hadn’t quite realised how much I squint on the run until I invested in a good pair of running sunglasses. Constant squinting against the sunlight, even if you’re wearing a running cap, can result in tension across your brow muscles. On a long training run, this persistent strain can cause a tension headache.

Running sunglasses can help filter this light and help you keep your facial muscles relaxed. Eliud Kipchoge said his secret is smiling on the run, as it keeps the body relaxed and can help you run more efficiently. While Kipchoge didn’t say anything about wearing shades, for me, blocking out the sunlight helped me stay focused on my run.

The mirrored lenses protect my eyes from the sun

Lastly, the real reason to invest in a pair of running sunglasses is to protect your eyes from UVA and UVB rays. Prolonged exposure to the sun can damage your eyes, so if you spend a lot of time outdoors, sunglasses are a must. A wrap-around lens can also block debris on trail runs, protecting your eyes from scratches.

While the mirrored lenses on my Adidas Kentro sunglasses had mixed reviews with my mates, I love them and wouldn’t be without them for summer miles.

Not for you? Check out our round-up of the best running sunglasses here. You don’t have to spend a fortune, but keeping your eyes as protected as your skin is a must, whatever you’re training for.

More from Tom's Guide

• Forget pricey new running shoes — I would get these last-gen Hoka, Saucony and New Balance at a steep discount instead
• One product has powered every marathon world record since 2018, and it’s not a carbon plate running shoe
• Garmin Fenix 8 vs. Garmin Fenix 8 Pro: should you upgrade?

There's yet another heatwave hitting the UK and US right now, and unlike my colleagues, I'm a fair-weather runner, so it's officially too hot for me to run outdoors.

But my once-a-week cardio sessions are non-negotiable, so I've turned to the gym and the best treadmills instead. I'm not really a commercial gym user, but if you do have access to a treadmill at home or a local gym, I recommend hopping on and giving this 20-minute running HIIT workout a try.

You'll move between paces, including walking, jogging, and running, and deal with inclines, flat roads, and some speedwork. It's helping me stay on top of cardio without sweltering in the sunshine, and I'm very grateful for it.

Don't worry, if you're not much of a runner, this whole routine is beginner-friendly. You get to set the pace of your walks, jogs, and runs, and I'll only ever give you guidelines or recommendations.

What is the workout?

• Warm-up block, 5 mins: Spend 60 seconds at walking pace; this should be something you could comfortably maintain for 30 minutes uninterrupted. Next, spend 2 minutes at jogging pace; you should be able to hold a conversation. Increase incline to 6% and maintain jogging pace for 60 seconds, then drop the incline to flat road and hit your run pace for 60 seconds.
• Incline block, 7 mins 30 sec: Walk for 30 seconds, jog 30 seconds, sprint 30 seconds. Next, jog 90 seconds at 6% incline. Drop to a walk for 90 seconds at 9% incline. Jog 60 seconds at 6% incline, then maintain jogging for 30 seconds at 9% incline. Finally, walk for 60 seconds on a flat road.
• Speed play, 7 mins 30: Jog for 60 seconds, sprint for 30 seconds, then jog for 30 seconds, all on a flat road. Sprint again for 30 seconds, then jog for 30 seconds and drop down to a 30-second walk. Repeat from the top.

Let's take a look at a popular way of measuring effort, which will help you determine your pace without a coach: rate of perceived exertion, or RPE. This will help you work out where you sit for a walk, jog and run out of 10 (10 being your absolute maximum output).

For a walk, as briefly mentioned, it should be something you could maintain happily enough for 30 minutes or so — think a 3-4/10. Your jogging pace is around a 5-6/10; you can still have a conversation with someone next to you, but you're exerting a little more effort.

Your run pace is more like a sprint, think between 7-9/10. This should be a hard effort that you can only maintain for a short time.

The inclines are 6 and 9%, but these are only guidelines, so you can adapt these to your ability. If you're unable to hit the specified times at your given pace, it could be worth making some adjustments.

As you push through the inclines, slightly lean your weight forward without rounding your back, as this will help you engage your glutes. Generally, uphill climbs engage more of your back body, like the lower back and hamstrings, so just be sure to brace your core as you walk, jog, or run to protect your spine.

During the faster running efforts, use your arms to help with forward propulsion, and keep your strides even as you strike the treadmill. Try to avoid crossing your arms over the front of your body, as this reduces efficiency, and also avoid running too far back or forward on the running belt.

Pace yourself properly because fatigue will set in, so you need to think about keeping something back during the warm-up. This is about building speed, power and endurance, so try to keep some energy in the tank for those final rounds.

Follow Tom's Guide fitness on Instagram for more workouts, routines, tips, and tricks.

More from Tom's Guide

• Forget running and swimming — study finds this sport adds 10 years to your life
• I thought power walking was weird — here's what happened when I tried it 30 minutes a day for one week
• No Weights Needed: Build Strength and Tone in Just 20 Minutes with This 5-Move Routine

I like highly cushioned sneakers, which is a good thing right now because most of the best running shoes have max-stack designs with over 40mm of foam packed into the midsole.

However, there are times when I long for a nimbler, more direct feel on the run, and the Skechers Aero Razor offers exactly that. If you’re not a fan of big running shoes, it’s a shoe you definitely need to know about.

It’s incredibly light and has a sleek, fast ride thanks to the rockered midsole and lively midsole foam, but the Aero Razor is still pretty comfortable on easy runs in my experience.

Some will find it a bit too direct and lacking in cushioning, but the Aero Razor is a surprise standout of the year so far for me, and a rival to some of my favorite shoes like the Puma Deviate Pure Nitro and Adidas Adizero Evo SL.

Skechers Aero Razor review: Price and availability

The Skechers Aero Razor launched in February 2026 and costs $140 in the U.S. and £135 in the U.K., a good price that puts it up against some of the best value running shoes available, like the Adidas Evo SL and Puma Deviate Pure.

Skechers shoes also seem to have a happy habit of dropping in price more regularly than other running brands, so the Aero Razor could be even better value — it’s available for $119 at Amazon right now, for example.

Skechers Aero Razor review: Design and fit

The Aero Razor is currently available in four colors, including the black design I tested. I went with my normal running shoe size in the Aero Razor and had a good fit, but it’s a fairly narrow sneaker that fits closely around the toes, so if you have a wide foot, it would be worth trying before buying if you can.

Compared to most daily trainers on the market, the Aero Razor is lighter and has a lower stack height. It has a 4mm drop and stands 36mm tall at the heel and 32mm at the forefoot, and weighs just 7.1oz in my US men’s size 10.

This light, lean design lends itself more to speed training, but there’s still enough cushioning on the shoe for easier efforts.

Upper

The Aero Razor has a minimal mesh upper that aims to be lightweight and breathable rather than being especially padded.

There is some padding around the heel, and I found it comfortable enough, but in general it has a less plush feel than most daily trainers.

Midsole

The Hyper Burst Pro midsole foam is a nitrogen-infused aliphatic TPU material, which means it is light and energetic. It’s the kind of foam used by a lot of my favorite shoes right now, so I was excited to see Skechers use their version of it on the Aero Razor.

In the forefoot of the shoe is Skechers’ H-Wing plate, which adds stiffness to the shoe to speed up the transition from heel to toe without being as heavy and stiff as a full plate.

A pronounced rocker, called Hyper Arc, also works to roll you onto your forefoot rapidly, whether you’re cruising along at an easy pace or going all out in a workout.

Outsole

For a lightweight shoe, the Aero Razor has an impressive outsole, which is made from Goodyear rubber. Most of the heel and forefoot are well covered, and the shoe has gripped well for me even during runs on light trails.

Skechers Aero Razor review: Running performance

It’s been a couple of years since I last tested a Skechers running shoe, but in the past they have impressed me with their lightweight designs, and that’s definitely true of the Aero Razor.

Where past Skechers running shoes sometimes fell short compared with other brands was in the foam used in the midsole, but the Hyper Burst Pro in the Aero Razor is very good.

It delivers a lot of energy return at faster paces, and when combined with the fluid rocker and the nylon H-Wing in the forefoot, the shoe has an effective, efficient ride for workouts in my experience, whether it’s intervals or tempo sessions.

There are some foams I still find a bit more lively, such as the Lightstrike Pro used in the Adidas Evo SL or the FF Turbo Squared used in the Asics Megablast, but Hyper Burst Pro is an impressively energetic material to find in a running shoe at this price.

I also found the Aero Razor to be just about comfortable and supportive enough for a long easy run in my testing; while it wouldn’t be my first choice for that kind of run compared with a more cushioned shoe, it’s versatile enough to handle it.

However, if you are a runner who values comfort highly, the Aero Razor might be a bit too direct for your taste, and you’d need to pair it with a more cushioned shoe for your easy runs.

Should you buy the Skechers Aero Razor?

The Skechers Aero Razor will suit some runners down to the ground, and if you’re a fan of lightweight, lower-stack daily trainers, it’s one of the best options on the market.

It’s a bit of a throwback to shoes like the early models of the New Balance Rebel, and it’s also well-priced and likely to feature in sales regularly.

If you would prefer a more cushioned option, the Asics Novablast 6 is an outstanding running shoe that isn’t quite as quick as the Skechers, but more comfortable and stable, and still lively at faster paces.

Aside from perhaps not being cushioned enough for the mass market, the Aero Razor’s other problem is the rollcall of brilliant rivals in its category, which include the Adidas Evo SL and Puma Deviate Pure, two shoes that are also lightweight and versatile, but also a little more cushioned and comfortable.

I still rate those shoes a little more highly, and the Hoka Mach 7 is another fun, versatile daily trainer to consider, but the Skechers Aero Razor is in great company simply by being competitive with them, and this bodes well for the future of the line.

Unless you’ve been sleeping under a rock (or spending your free time scrolling Strava), you’ve probably seen the viral churning-butter-while-running trend. It looks pretty simple — grab a carton of heavy cream, pour it into a Ziploc bag, add some salt, and head out for a run. In theory, by the time you return, you’ll have churned butter, ready to spread on your toast.

I’ve seen this trend all over my Instagram and TikTok for the past few months, so now I’m back training for another marathon. I decided to give it a try. In a heatwave, of course. I have some thoughts.

How to do it

I’m based in the UK, where heavy cream is known as double cream. But here’s where it gets slightly more complicated: in the US, heavy cream contains at least 36% fat, whereas double cream in the UK is richer and thicker, containing around 48% milk fat.

I’m no dairy expert, but I didn’t know if the higher fat content would make it easier or harder to make butter. According to Google, it would have been easier, and probably the better choice, but alas, my local store is in a black hole with no phone signal.

Instead, I grabbed two pots of whipping cream, which have the same 36% fat content. The next morning, pre-run, I put both of these into a Ziploc bag, sprinkled some salt in, then placed this bag inside another bag, inside my running backpack. What could possibly go wrong?

Right now in the UK we're experiencing a heatwave, with the temperature of my run a warm 32 degrees Celsius, or 89 degrees Fahrenheit. This might not sound like much to my readers on the other side of the pond, but I challenge you to exist in a world without air conditioning.

For anyone who cares, I was running in the excellent Asics Novablast 6 running shoes and tracking the run on my Garmin Forerunner 170.

I ran 10 miles with heavy cream in my backpack, and yes, it made butter (sort of)

I really wasn’t convinced this was going to work, and it sort of didn’t. I checked my cream/butter every few miles, and at three miles, I was still carrying cream. At five miles, the cream looked a lot thicker, and I was convinced I was on the way to having churned butter. By eight miles, it was thicker still, but I realized the second carton of whipping cream was probably too much.

Yet it seems all of this pulling the Ziploc out of my running backpack and putting it back in was where I went wrong. Both bags split at mile eight, and I had cream (or butter, you decide), running down my back and legs for the final mile and a half (I stopped early, for obvious reasons).

When I got home, I didn’t have anything resembling the butter you’d form into a block, like my runners on TikTok. I definitely had butter, but in the loosest sense of the word. Either way, I managed to spread it on some toast and have it for my breakfast. Once I’d put my entire outfit and backpack in the washing machine, that is.

My takeaway? This was a cool experiment, but next time, I’ll just grab some butter on my way home.

More from Tom's Guide

• I'm a personal trainer who works with clients over 50 — these are the 3 mobility exercises I never skip
• After 60, this is the 10-minute routine I use with my clients to stay strong, mobile and independent
• 'I’m a Pilates instructor, and I recommend these 5 core exercises to help older clients build strength and improve posture'

Skechers are the shoe of the summer. Not only does this brand make lightweight, breathable trainers, you'll also find memory foam sandals and running shoes to keep you light on your feet all summer long.

Even better, Skechers are on sale from £24 at Amazon right now. There are lots of options to go through, so if you're having trouble deciding, I've picked out 7 of my favourite discounts to save you some time and cash.

Short on time? My #1 recommendation is the Skechers Go Walk Joy on sale from £24. This is a hugely popular shoe on Amazon with a 4.5 star rating and over 95,000 reviews under its belt. Shoppers love them because they're lightweight, flexible and extremely easy to wear — plus you get soft 5Gen cushioning to support your feet.

Note: prices vary depending on the size and color you select. To find the best deals, check out any different color options available in your size.

Quick Links

• shop Skechers deals at Amazon
• Skechers Go Walk Joy Cushioning Sneakers (Women's): was £59 now from £24
• Skechers On-The-Go 600 Glistening Slide Sandal (Women's): was £44 now from £28
• Skechers Go Walk Max (Men's): was £59 now from £29
• Skechers Arch Fit Arcade-Meet Ya There Sneaker (Women's): was £69 now from £51
• Skechers Max Cushioning Elite 2.0 (Women's): was £114 now from £61

Editor's Choice