![]() ![]() The new TPU guidance frame resulted in added stability. The newly reconstructed sole unit made with PWRRUN foam was lighter and more responsive than EVERUN cushioning.Īt the same time, the sole unit was also bouncier. This may bother some runners with wider feet, but for me, it provided an ideal fit. While this is still true, the Guide 13 is unequivalently a better overall trainer.įrom the moment you slip them on you notice a slimmer more tailored fit from heel to toe in the Guide 13. Last year I gave the Guide Iso 2 a perfect 5 star review stating “The Saucony Guide Iso 2 is an exceptional mid cushioned stability daily trainer, fit for any type of run.” This sentiment would be more fitting for the The Saucony Guide 13. However, this is not the case with Saucony”, said in my review for the Saucony Guide Iso 2 last year. “Sometimes when you fall in love with a shoe you get disappointed with the next edition because of all the major ‘upgrades’. The new upper and the FORMFIT complement each other in providing a secure and adaptable fit while you run. The secure fit adds to the stability of the shoe because it helps lock your feet in place. It is a three layer cushioning system that cradles your feet with a secure fit. While the FORMFIT technology is not new for Saucony, it is a true strength of the upper. Saucony employs FORMFIT technology for the footbed of their upper of the Guide 13. The toe cap is on the inside of the shoe providing more structure in the forefoot area of the upper. This tailored fit starts in the heel and continues throughout the length of the shoe.Ĭompared with the Guide ISO 2, the Guide 13 is a better built durable upper. The tailored fit I have felt in both the last versions of Omni and Hurricane continues in the Guide 13. However, a downside I noticed was a lack of breathability in the upper. This was aided by the updated engineered jacquard mesh they use for the upper, which is more durable than previous versions. The booty-like upper, which I have come to expect from Saucony, is still there, both adaptable and flexible. The ISOFit lacing components caused many runners problems, so they were eliminated. I fell into the latter camp, so I was skeptical going into this review of the Guide 13s without the ISOFit.Īlthough the ISOFit is gone, Saucony kept all the effective parts around it. Some runners couldn’t seem to get a good fit no matter how many times they tied their shoes, while others felt like it was a dream fit. The ISOFit technology was divisive among the Saucony faithful so much so Saucony decided to move on without it. It was noticeable on my first 2 runs which meant there will be an adjustment period for longtime Guide runners.Īlong with the sole unit, the upper part of the Guide 13 has undergone some major updates. The TPU guidance frame will be used in Saucony’s other stability offerings in the future. This was developed to provide the shoe with more structure and support along with durability. It wraps around to the bottom of the foot. The TPU guidance frame is an L shaped piece of thermoplastic polyurethane that sits between the heel and arch on the medial side of the foot. It serves the purpose of a medial post in providing you with the stability you need. Gone is the dual-density medial post and in comes a TPU guidance frame. If you are a stability runner you have probably noticed in the last few years running brands have changed their stability systems.īrooks expanded their guiderails, Hoka has developed the J Frame, while Saucony has historically stayed with the traditional dual-density medial post until now. In my experience, PWRRUN is a lighter and more responsive material. Instead, they have implemented a new TPU/EVA blended foam cushioning, called PWRRUN. Gone is the popular EVERUN EVA foam material. ![]() Saucony completely reconstructed the sole unit with new technology and materials. On the other hand, the sole unit provided that springy natural ride I have come to expect from a Saucony offering. The new TPU guidance frame was noticeable on the run and the cushioning around the upper was slightly overbearing. The sole unit was lighter yet responsive along with a more secure fitting upper. It was a different ride than the Guide ISO 2. The inside of the shoe was plush with more cushioning around the heel collar and throughout the upper than previous editions, My first run out of the box was a relaxed 6 miles outside. The sole felt firmer than expected when I slipped them on for the first time. The accents of orange in the laces, logos, and bottoms of the shoe add perfect pop in appeal. The fade from black and gray in the heel to the blue was smooth. From top to bottom the shoe looked different from the previous edition. ![]() When I opened the box for the first time I immediately thought it was a different shoe than the Guides. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |