adidas Harden Stepback 3 Performance Review

adidas Harden Stepback 3

The adidas Harden Stepback 3 is a solid performer and brings back the Bounce we’ve come to love. A budget model to be reckoned with.

Colorway: N/A

Release Date: 2022

Price: TBA

The adidas Harden Stepback 3 follows the Stepback 2, the budget model that was better than the James Harden flagship adidas Harden Vol 6. It’s rare and unexpected when the budget model outperforms the major release. This time around, though, the same can’t be said. The adidas Harden Vol 6 performs well and better than the Stepback 3. But that doesn’t mean these aren’t worth your consideration. If you’re a fan of Harden, looking for a good budget basketball shoe, or want to support the brand without spending above $100, you’ve come to the right shoe.

Traction

My favorite aspect of the shoe. It just gripped everything I put them on. The last court I went to had a sheet of dust covering the surface, and these still bit the ground well. During my time in them, I only slid once, and it was relatively early in the testing process. The traction pattern looks data-driven, something we’ve seen from the adidas Harden Vol. 1. The only gripe I have with the traction is the solid rubber’s durability. After about four hours on a rough cement outdoor court, it already showed bald spots.

Cushion

The midsole is full-length Bounce, just like the adidas Pro N3XT 2021. However, it’s comfortable this time and does a decent job combining impact protection and court feel. I did notice, however, that at least one of my heels hurt after playing for about 2 hours. This is due to the rubber caging in that area. The strobel board is also made up of a plush foam which I think is also Bounce. I wasn’t astonished by its performance, but it’s an upgrade from the KD 15.

Materials

The materials are what you’d expect. The main build is a mesh with thick padding inside it combined with fuse overlays on the sides and eye stay area. There are also reflective hits on the tongue and pull tab. A piece of cheap felt is found near the top of the collar.  The tongue is a more open-celled mesh. They’re not exceptional, but they’re at least comfortable.

Fit

The shoe looks big when you first see it, but that’s deceiving. Because of the thicker inside, the shoe fits true to size with a thumb’s width of space up front. You can go down half a size for a more snug fit since the materials will loosen over time and wear. Heel lockdown could have been better, though. To get the best fit, make sure to cinch the top as hard as you can.

Support

I had no issues in this department. The base is wide enough to compensate for the lack of a proper outrigger. I didn’t shift in the shoe once I was properly locked in. You sit inside the midsole just enough to be laterally supported but not where you’re too close to the ground. The heel rubber caging works in conjunction with the internal heel counter to provide ample ankle support. Everything did its job, and I was able to walk away without injuries.

adidas Harden Stepback 3 Overall

The adidas Harden Stepback 3 is a solid performer that will not disappoint many. The traction is top-notch for as long as it lasts. The cushion brings back the old Bounce that we’ve come to love. And although the materials aren’t unique, the fit is accommodating enough that most foot shapes and sizes will love putting these on. For the price, it’s worth the purchase.

Nike Zoom Freak 2 Review: Better than the Freak 1?

After putting hours into the Freak 1 not long ago, I’ve decided to continue with its direct successor – hence I present you my Nike Zoom Freak 2 review!

So, in search of a mid-tier budget shoe that’s durable, provides a little bit of everything for different players in a secure, lightweight way?

The Zoom Freak 1 is what you’re looking for. Or is it?

Despite looking very similar in terms of looks and tech specs, AND having the same price tag, Giannis’s second installment in the Freak series claims that it’s a direct improvement from the first.

 

I mean it even has this poster on Nikey’s site which strangely feels like an OG 1990’s ad for a product. Speed, power, and control for every type of player are what the shoe is aiming to deliver.

THE REVIEW: HOW WE’LL DO THIS

Since the first one’s mission was pretty much the same, it’s only right of me to put hours into the Freak 2 and find out if it does all those things better over its younger brother.

I’ll be breaking down the shoe’s:

• Comfort experience & fit
• On court performance
• Overall build quality & value for the price
• Differences from the first shoe

Let’s begin!

SPEC SHEET

Model: Nike Zoom Freak 2

Build: Low-Top

Weight: 12.5 oz / 354 g. (size 10)

Retail Price: $120

Cushion: Forefoot Zoom Air & foam midsole

I. COMFORT & FIT

From the fit and overall comfort aspects, the Freak 2 was pretty much identical to the Freak 1 for me.

I have very wide feet, emphasis on very. But despite the shoe having a pretty narrow area for your foot to sit inside in the midfoot and forefoot areas, the shoe felt completely solid after I broke them in. It took 3-5 days for me to properly break in the first Freak and it was very similar to the Freak 2.

Granted, it sucked big time during that first week. If these would’ve had some kind of a stiff synthetic leather upper, there’s no way I would’ve been able to pull off a true to size.

So, I’d recommend going true to size for most foot shapes, if like a very snug, tight, and strongly contained fit. For those wanting more room inside the shoe, wide/regular footers will want to go up half a size.

These underwent some upper material and some slight fit changes, so the fit is even tighter than the first Zoom Freak. Not to a point where I should’ve gone up but for people who aren’t used to this extremely contained fit, they should definitely either go up half a size or try them on in a store if possible.

On top of that, I noticed these have more internal padding around a few areas and the tongue on these is CRAZY large, as well as soft, making the experience even more pleasant. I said this a lot but I’ll say it again – a traditionally separated tongue construction is the true boss sh*t.

Sure, there are benefits to a one-piece upper but for a shoe such as the Freak 2, they’re already very secure thanks to the contained fit, thus putting these on is amazingly fast and easy.

So combine the classic separated construction, more padding inside, and an enlarged tongue, this feels similar to the Freak 1 but just a tad bit better in my opinion. I love this approach – if it ain’t broke – don’t fix it. And the Freak 1 was certainly not broke in terms of fit and being comfortable.

They tweaked a few things here and there, the tightness of the fit will come down to personal preference, so if you get the sizing optimal to you – you can forget about the Freak 2, since this is a solid, mobile, secure, and distraction-free experience, making you forget you got a shoe on. And that’s always a good thing.

II. TRACTION

For traction, we’ve got a completely revamped outsole that looks nothing like the Freak 1’s. So far, the shoe comes in a solid rubber outsole on some colorways, while the regular black colorway priced at $120 comes with a translucent rubber outsole, which is the one I have.

For translucent rubber, it feels surprisingly durable overall. The grooves are very hard and certain areas have very thick rubber that looks like it’s not about to budge any time soon. That’s awesome but what’s not awesome is that the outsole is inconsistent in terms of the durability of the rubber.

As you can see, the outsole consists of two separate pieces and the back portion of the outsole is EXTREMELY durable. It’s got thick rubber, it’s not shallow and despite the weird pattern, it’s actually well spaced out, so wiping this portion of the outsole won’t be something you need to do.

As for the forefoot area – the story is a bit different. I get the design choice, but I still have no idea why brands still go with this super dense pattern made out of a fragile rubber pattern, such as these dots or knobs, whatever you wanna call them, on the lateral side of the shoe.

This is the area where dust and debris will be more of an issue – not the worst I’ve seen but wiping will surely be needed occasionally to keep the traction at 100%. It’s kind of a half-baked deal for me, why they couldn’t have used the same pattern all throughout the outsole or just went with classic herringbone, I don’t know.

As for traction itself, it was fine, I have no complaints. It’s got a very similar bite with lots of squeaking. I had no major slips or slides, I felt fine and supported during any kind of movement. They gripped the floor equally well indoors and outdoors.

What I’m not cool with is the rubber inconsistency throughout the outsole – I want to call these durable and suitable for outdoor play but when one side deteriorates faster than the other one, it’s tough man.

I’ve seen that the pattern looks exactly the same on solid rubber pairs, so even though translucent, in theory, is not as durable as solid rubber, you can expect similar results.

Overall, I don’t see these chipping away any time soon, especially outdoors but I think a simple fix in the outsole could’ve prolonged these even more. So in a nutshell, good traction, good durability, just could’ve been better by sticking to what works and ditching the pattern on the forefoot area.

III. CUSHION

Despite having different tech specs from the Freak 1 on paper, the shoe feels pretty much the same in terms of cushioning. You’d think these would have tons of cushion for a big, strong individual such as Giannis, but nope – what we have is far from that.

We have a bottom-loaded forefoot Zoom Air unit as well as a foam midsole throughout the shoe (probably Phylon), so it’s very reminiscent of what the Kyrie 5 and the off-white x air force 1 had.

The ride is extremely responsive, it’s quick as there’s almost no real energy return from the foam, you sit low to the ground and the precision of your movements is supplemented as well as just about any other shoe.

The heel area feels almost dead but it will budge and give you some impact protection on harder landings, jumps, or cuts. The forefoot area, you can feel a bit more thanks to a Zoom unit, but it’s still not to a point where I’d prefer. I’m not saying it’s a bad setup – it’s just not really my cup of tea.

For low profile guards that are light, or spot-up shooters, this is a near-perfect setup. But Giannis plays in them, and he’s a very big guy, so it’ll obviously come down to what kind of a ride you prefer. If it’s quick, low to the ground, firm, and precise, the Freak 2 is top-notch for that, and I guess that’s what Giannis goes for as well.

For players who need more cushion and impact protection for one reason or another, you’d want to go with something such as the Nikey Dunk.

IV. SUPPORT

The support & security department once again feels extremely similar to the first Zoom Freak.

We’ve got most of the critical support features you’d require from a shoe – a very secure fit, an internal heel counter, larger outriggers than on the Freak 1 for lateral protection, your foot sits inside the midsole for more stability, and a base that’s not as wide as on the Freak 1 but still wide enough to make you feel stable.

The upper still flexes like crazy as you can literally bend these in half, but just as this wasn’t an issue on Freak 1, it’s still not an issue on this one. The lack of a proper midfoot shank made some people scratch their heads in terms of the Freak 1 but if you’ve played any of the two shoes, you probably realized it’s not an issue at all.

The Freak 2 is very light but provides a secure experience for just about any player out there. I wish I could say the same thing about the cushion but hey, it comes with the territory. You take some and you leave some.

Overall, a great job in the support department – very secure, stable but does not sacrifice mobility. That’s versatility on point!

V. BUILD & MATERIALS

The upper is pretty much today’s mid-tier budget standard – a synthetic textile material with some Fuse and TPU overlays in key areas for more structure.

The shoe took a similar chunk of time to break them in, it’s just as light, just as mobile, and likely just as durable. This is one of those uppers that makes you forget you’ve got a shoe on while playing which is every bit of awesome. Ventilation isn’t very good due to the nature of the materials, so your feet will get hot during play.

I think these will be just as durable as the Freak 1. If you can live with the inconsistent outsole, I think the upper will hold up well outdoors. The TPU overlays do a good job holding the shoe together and I don’t see any signs of wear and tear on the upper so far.

Don’t expect a super premium upper but for $120 – this is a solid option. No gimmicks, no fancy tech names, nothing to get into the way of your playtime.

Solid job!

VI. OVERALL

Pin

The Nike Zoom Freak 2 definitely feels like a direct sequel to the jordan 11 cherry – pretty much every aspect feels similar with some minor changes here and there.

The shoe is comfortable, it’s distraction-free, it feels every bit of light, it grips the floor well, and provides adequate support for most players. If you prefer fast and responsive cushioning, and if you can live with the inconsistent outsole, I think the shoe is a great addition to your rotation.

Is it a direct improvement over the Freak 1? In some areas, yes, while in others it feels more of a slight step back.

Is it a versatile shoe? Yes, if you prefer firmer cushion.

Could the Freak 2 be even better? Yeah, I think it absolutely could, and all that was needed were a few quick fixes, in my opinion.

Would I choose these over the Freak 1? Yeah. I love that large tongue and more padding around your foot – those two things actually felt like the biggest improvement for me. Comfort is everything and a foundation for a good performer. I’m not a fan of the outsole but it gets the job done, so I give props to that.

Hoka Bondi 8 Performance Review

The Hoka Bondi 8 features a super thick midsole that’s on-trend with today’s most popular hyped sneaker silhouettes. Yes, you heard that right. Hoka, the brand that wasn’t cool when it emerged during the minimalist shoe craze, is now fashionable. If this is weird for you, welcome to the shoe industry, where villains become heroes and vice versa on a regular basis.

Now…let’s see how this chunky boy performs.

---

Tyler: After enjoying the last few models of the Bondi, Hoka’s most cushioned neutral offering, I was thrilled to see the brand amp up everything for its 8th iteration. If you’re looking for a summer runner that will provide plush cushioning in a relatively light package (considering its chunky silhouette), you might just find it in the Hoka Bondi 8.

Drew: I pulled the Hoka Bondi 8 out of the box and immediately fell in love with that midsole. And so did my Instagram followers. Air Jordan 1 glamour shots are easily my most liked and engaged Hoka posts. It may not matter how these suckers perform in terms of running as their looks have clearly struck the right chord.

Hoka Bondi 8

Release Date: TBD

Price: $165

Weight: M 10.8oz, W 8.9oz

Drop: 4mm (29mm forefoot, 33mm heel)

Sizing: True to Size

• Rundown: Plush and comfy all-around if a little narrow and heavy. Possibly the best-looking Hoka shoe ever.

Pros

• Cushion
• Looks
• Outsole

Cons

• Narrow Fit
• Weight

Pros

Cushion

Tyler: I said it above. It’s Hoka’s most cushioned road shoe and just slipping into it provides your feet the feeling of – and this is not hyperbole – walking on clouds. Underfoot, around the heel, and across the upper, the comfort that the Bondi provides is nearly unmatched by any other shoe in its category. If you plan to be on your feet all day – running or not – this should be in your consideration set.

Drew: The heel of the Hoka Bondi 8 measures 33mm but feels a lot taller. Not sure why. Maybe it’s the visuals of the sole endlessly sloping down and away from the foot. Regardless, ground feel is not a thing in the Bondi 8. It’s the ultimate “my legs feel torn up from yesterday’s workout, I need max protection” shoe.

And even though you feel like you’re way up high, the stability is solid thanks to the flaring midsole. The Bondi 8 is a very stable shoe with max cushioning that’s the perfect recipe for running when tired or standing all day at a theme park.

Looks

Tyler: Gone are the days of the Bondi looking like an orthopedic shoe. We got a little tease of the direction that Hoka was heading in with the Bondi X, but the Bondi 8 really brings forward a much more current design execution that’s simple and straightforward. The two-tone midsole and single-color mesh upper strive to keep it looking sleek.

Drew: If you removed the logo and told me the Hoka Bondi 8 was designed by Kanye, Drake, or a high-end fashion house, I’d believe you. I really hope Hoka makes a version with leather and suede for casual wear. I think it would sell like crazy and really inject Hoka into mainstream sneaker culture.

Outsole

Tyler: Unlike other Hoka models that sport little-to-no rubber outsoles, the Hoka Bondi 8 has excellent coverage across the entire outsole to extend its life and ensure good traction underfoot. But all that rubber adds weight, and while a max cushioned shoe isn’t going to be a speed demon, I didn’t find the weight of this one to be a problem. It’s meant to be a slow and steady shoe, so let’s remember that.

Drew: I appreciate a shoe built to last and the Bondi 8 gets to that territory with a solid amount of outsole rubber. Since it’s summer, I didn’t get to test the Bondi 8 in wintry conditions but it handled wet conditions well. The traction was secure whenever I needed it.

Cons

Narrow Fit

Tyler: I’m not sure if Hoka tinkered with the fit on the Bondi 8, but my first run was a mid-tempo (and extremely humid) 10K with Drew and it wasn’t until I got home that I noticed two giant blisters on the inside of each big toe. Upon putting the shoes back on for my following runs, it became evident how narrow the upper really is. I think they somewhat opened up after a few runs, but I would recommend checking out both a standard and wide fit (if possible) before committing to them.

Drew: While the Hoka Bondi 8’s toebox does narrow and curve inward a little too sharply for my eye’s liking, I didn’t end up having any problems with those areas like Tyler did. My problem came in the arches. The semi-gusseted tongue is only attached on the medial side and the attachment aligns perfectly with the arch area. There’s A LOT of stitching there and it chafed both my arches eventually resulting in a fat blister on my right foot. This won’t happen for everyone but it’s something to note if you have high arches or your arch area is sensitive.

Weight

Tyler: As I said above, the weight is not a big con, but this is not a super light shoe, although aesthetically, it may look like it. It’s big, chunky, and wide and although it excels for what it does – slow, recovery runs, if you’re slogging through a long run, you might notice the heft of these in those later miles.

Drew: I’m 6’6″ and almost 200 pounds. I rarely notice when a shoe is deemed heavy by other, tinier running reviewers. But I felt the heft of the Hoka Bondi 8. Towards the end of several six miles runs, I found myself constantly thinking about how heavy they felt. I think the weight disqualifies the Bondi 8 as a long run shoe but it can handle one to six-mile runs without the weight factoring in very much.

Hoka Bondi 8 Summary

Tyler: The Hoka Bondi 8 is a great progression from the Bondi 7, save for some of the narrowness in the upper. I’d also call out that as a huge fan of the Nike ZoomX Invincible Run Flyknit, the Bondi 8 provides a very similar experience, but with a much better ride, thanks to a more stable midsole. If you’re a fan of the Bondi, this will be a welcome shoe in your rotation.

Drew: While the Hoka Bondi 8 is so very plush and extremely good-looking, I’m not sure I’d choose it over the Hoka Clifton 8 (currently our favorite Hoka running shoe). But if you’re looking for a high cushion running shoe that looks less like a KD 15 and can easily pass the theme park test, order yourself a pair and embrace the softness.

PUMA Clyde Hardwood Review: A Basketball Shoe You Should Know About

For those who are still sleeping on hoop shoes from the non-Swoosh-Jumpman-Three Stripe brands such as your ANTA’s, BrandBlack’s, Li-Ning’s, or PUMA’s of the world – let me introduce you to my comprehensive 5-month indoor & outdoor PUMA Clyde Hardwood review.

I’ll be covering one of the earlier PUMA hoop shoe releases in the last few-year lineup and breaking down its comfort & performance aspects, examining the build & quality, versatility, and how much value for your $$$ you’re getting amongst the competition and I’ll also give you some potential alternatives.

I. SPEC SHEET

II. 1-MIN REVIEW 

Looking for the quick take? Here’s the gist of it: the PUMA Clyde Hardwood dropped back in 2019 but it’s still just as solid in 201 and later, even when stacked against current competition.

For $120 (and less these days), you’ll get a secure fit (most guys can go true to size), fantastic traction that will also last some time outdoors, decent ProFoam cushion that won’t give you tons of bounce but it’ll provide a fast, stable and low-to-the-ground ride.

Support was no slouch – most players or playstyles will find it sufficient and you won’t lose mobility as a result. The upper features a mix of textile and real leather, so the bang for your buck factor is there.

It’s a good hoop shoe. Nothing shockingly new and won’t exactly blow anyone away but it’s a good buy for those in need of a trusty all-around sneaker without paying a fortune.

III. FIT & COMFORT

How’s the sizing? TTS or should you adjust? What about comfort? Anything else to know?

SIZING GUIDE

Let’s get right into the meat – how does the shoe fit? It fits pretty well.

That’s really the basis of it – it’s not some kind of ultra-premium, feathery light, or among the most comfortable ever. For me, it was enough for the shoe to not get into the way of playing my game seamlessly or hinder a light shootaround session with my buddies.

I’m a wide footer and the shoe didn’t look very wide looking at it online, so I had a bad feeling about these, for me particularly.

My fears didn’t come true though. A couple of weeks were enough for the upper to adjust to my foot’s shape and all is OK since.

I’ve seen that the shoe runs long for some. For me – I don’t really feel they run long but this will depend if you like your kicks to be pretty much one-to-one with your foot or you’re used to a more traditional half-inch of space for the toes.

If you can live with having a tad bit of space up at the front – there’s nothing really jarring about the fit here. You’ll be fine.

I went true to size and after a pretty uncomfortable 1-2 week break-in period, the shoe fits fine. It’s tight, snug, and very condensed but not enough to be particularly distracting.

Still though, this is one of those scenarios where people had different experiences, so my recommendations would be to go true to size for most foot shapes and if you’ve got a more compact, narrow foot, perhaps a 1/2 size down is a better option.

Ideally, it’s best to try these in-store but if you’re reading this one in 2021 and later, it’ll be tougher to find a pair on the shelves. So, true to size is the go – chances are, you’ll be good with that.

COMFORT

As far as pure comfort goes – nothing special. Nothing bad though either – there’s some internal padding (I would’ve liked more but it’s not bad), the material combo really cups your foot securely and allows for distraction-free play.

Plus, the extremely light and bendy tongue makes the shoe very easy to put on.

Overall – nothing extraordinary or very special but it works, no denying that. That’s good enough for me for 120 bucks, even when compared to our well-known competitors in the sneaker market.

IV. TRACTION

How’s the grip on various surfaces? What about dust/debris? How long will the outsoles last?

 

TRACTION PERFORMANCE

Traction is great. Unlike the shoe’s fit, traction is something truly special, no joke. PUMA’s multi-directional pattern in the back portion of the outsole, classic herringbone in the forefoot portion.

I was a bit skeptical with the changed-up lateral portion with the thick line pattern but my worries all faded away after I put some good hours on a few different courts (outdoors included).

The shoe grips all courts so well to the point it’s scary. This reminds me of the level the Kyrie 2’s, Dame 3’s, and a few older retros brought in terms of sheer, consistent bite.

Since the rubber is very tacky and sticky – dust will pile up in the pattern fairly quickly. That would normally be a bit of an issue – not with these though. No matter the amount of dust, I didn’t feel like I needed to wipe to maintain optimal traction. Even on crappier courts!

No complaints about the traction at all – a phenomenal job.

DURABILITY

As far as durability – the rubber isn’t very thick but it’s super tacky. I wouldn’t put these among the most durable outsoles ever but it sure is more durable than your average modern hoop shoe from Nikey & company.

I’ve been putting some hours on a less abrasive rubber court outside and don’t see any signs of wear yet.

I did play on banged-up concrete at my local park once or twice, so you can imagine just how much debris can pile up in the traction pattern.

This is the one time where I felt the grip loosened up a bit due to an overkill of crap in the outsole. But this is barely a nitpick since most shoes would do a similar job – there’s no real solution when you’re on a chore of a court, so wiping the soles down when you’ve got a few seconds is the way to go on such instances.

Great job overall. Grippy – check. Durable – check. Dust rarely is an issue – check. On to the next!

V. CUSHION

How’s the impact protection and energy return? What about step comfort, stability, and ride height?

Full-length ProFoam sounds really good right? Well, it’s just regular EVA foam you’d see on cheaper & older shoes but likely marginally altered by PUMA.

No surprise here for me personally. Brands have been doing this “let’s rename a basic component to a fancy tech name to hype up the shoe” tactic for years now. You can like it or hate it – a tech name on paper won’t change how the shoe performs on the court.

I didn’t hate the shoe’s cushion setup but since it’s not my cup of tea, it’s tough for me to praise it. I simply like my shoes to have some pop underfoot.

The TPU cage all around the midsole ensured the foam is super stable at all times but this also firmed up the cushion even more. Adequate performance qualities are here, it’s just that you won’t feel much of ’em cushion-wise.

Still though, being as subjective as possible, it’s a solid setup for those wanting a quick and responsive ride that’s very low profile and court feel-orientated. You’re low to the ground, stable, and precise in these.

This will work for just about anyone really, but guys who can’t live without some bounce should probably opt for something from the leaper’s lineup of shoes.

VI. SUPPORT

How’s the shoe’s overall security? What about stability and foot containment? Any trade-offs as a result?

Pin

image source: puma.com

For a pretty minimal type of shoe that delivers just what you need and not necessarily what you’d ideally love to get, support was solid in all areas.

It was everything that was needed for the types of players that will enjoy the firmer & more responsive ride as well.

A flat base of the shoe that promotes stability, an external heel counter for heel & ankle lockdown, a dynamic lacing system backed up by cables that tighten up the forefoot area if you require, and the TPU cage around the midsole also does wonders for lateral & medial containment of the foot.

Most players will find this setup sufficient – only those with particularly extensive support needs will likely aim for something else. For that LeBron’ish, tank-like support, I’d say check out this list.

But for the rest of us, this will be more than enough.

I definitely consider myself explosive and aggressive when it comes to slashing to the rim or playing above the rim when possible. I did not find this setup to be lackluster at all.

VII. THE BUILD

What are the materials used and how’s the build quality? How does the build perform and feel on-foot?

BUILD OVERVIEW

For the upper – we got a surprising combo here. A textile material backed up by synthetics in the forefoot area and all genuine leather in the back. Kyrie 8 anyone?

There are some traits of suede but not enough to where it would matter much in terms of durability or performance.

Traditional tongue & lace construction is where it’s at too – I’m still not a huge fan of the likes of one/half-bootie uppers, so the PUMA Clyde Hardwood feels right at home for those sharing a similar quirk.

I found this build to be solid overall if we’re talking value for the $$$. Nothing meaningfully different from what you’d get with $120 from Nikey or adidas.

PERFORMANCE

The front is light and thin, giving you just enough forefoot mobility and comfort to stop and pop, while the leather in the back hugs your heel very nicely after it’s broken in.

This way, you’ll be light on your feet but you’ll also be secure, as the back area is where most of the lockdown comes from.

Breathability was somewhat a mixed bag. The back area where the leather barely has any airflow, for obvious reasons. The front textile area allows for some airflow but these are definitely not among the best-ventilated sneakers. Not that it tries to be though.

I personally don’t have a clear, distinct choice or taste when it comes to materials – if it feels great and performs great, I’m going with that. Nothing less, nothing more. I feel like these gave me what I need – sufficient comfort, sufficient coverage and they play very nicely.

RELIABILITY

As for durability and overall build quality – I think PUMA did a solid job, though not without small culprits. The leather in the back will last you a near lifetime but the forefoot textile area already looks visually tired after a few weeks of playing, especially after some outdoor action.

Not the weakest shoe but the strongest either – these will last you a while but I wouldn’t put these in my outdoor beater rotation.

VIII. OVERALL

Summarizing the PUMA Clyde Hardwood review, final thoughts, and whether it’s worth your money

I admit it, this is officially my first PUMA sneaker I’ve stepped in to play basketball for a good amount of hours before constructing my thoughts to a detailed review.

But it’s a clear example that you should be interested in not only Nikey, Adidas, or Air Jordan but also give the underdogs a chance. They’ve been quickly growing in the shadows for a while now.

QUICK RECAP

The PUMA Clyde Hardwood is a very solid shoe for those that like that type of responsive & low to the ground setup.

They fit great once you get the sizing right, traction is phenomenal and very durable, cushion will come down to personal preference and they’re supportive for most players. $120 is a solid price, especially considering there are Nikey/Adidas shoes that are $150-$180 and have way more issues.

Nike Air Zoom SuperRep 3 Performance Review

The Nike Air Zoom SuperRep 3 may look jarring to some people. Although not as jarring as the original Nike SuperRep we reviewed two years ago. It looks like a training version of the Nike Air Zoom Alphafly Next%. That’s a lot of expectation to live up to, considering that the comparison is one of the best running shoes on the market. Did it meet my expectations? In most ways, yes. I enjoyed my time in these training shoes and here are all the details.

Nike Air Zoom SuperRep 3

Colorway: White/Photo Blue/Pink Prime/Black

Release Date: 2022

Style Code: DC9115-109

Price: $120

Traction

The traction pays homage to the brand’s history with a waffle-themed outsole. Don’t worry if you see what seem to be bald spots on the ball of your foot and in the toe area. They come like that. I didn’t have any issues with grip on any surface. There are also flex grooves placed so you can be mobile, and I found that especially useful during lunges. The bridge posed no problems, and it’s durable, so there’s no need to worry about it breaking.

Cushion

The primary cushion you’ll feel is foam. The foam isn’t named on Nike’s website though it was Cushlon on the original SuperRep. It feels even softer than that. I was surprised by how plush the foam was, especially in the back. It’s fluffier than the Cushlon in the Nike KD 15. The two Zoom pods up front visually remind me of the Nike Zoom Freak 3. You can’t feel them compress though you know they’re there when you put them on. I think the high PSI is the culprit.

Sometimes, it can be off-putting because the back half is much softer than the front half. It can take some getting used to, but it isn’t a deal-breaker. It just means I’ll be covered whether I land on my heel (with foam) or on my forefoot( by the Zoom units).

Materials

The materials consist of mesh and fuse overlays. There are two layers of mesh. The one that comes in contact with the foot is thick and comfortable. The one above that is a screen mesh. The fuse is mainly used in the eye stay area, the heel, and the branding. The tongue is thin, much like the Nike LeBron 19, but it isn’t annoying. It doesn’t chafe up your feet because the plastic isn’t as sharp and hard.

Fit

I went true to size and had a thumb’s width of space upfront, which is how I like it. However, if you’re a narrow-footer, you can get away with half a size down because the materials will loosen up over time and with more use. My tip would be to use the top eyelets and cinch the laces to get the best heel lockdown.

Support

The Nike FlyPlate is included, and it gets the job done. Being a flat-footer, I always have my orthotics in, but most won’t need the extra support. If you’re a flat footer like me, we recommend Move Insoles. The FlyPlate offers ample support for the foot and helps the shoe snap back into shape. The midsole also comes up the lateral sides for containment, and it works perfectly. From the midfoot to the heel area there’s a plastic piece that adds support.

Can you run in these? Yes. They’re good enough for the treadmill, but I wouldn’t run in them for prolonged periods. 10-15 minutes would be good. If you’re flat-footed, don’t do it even with orthotics. The support isn’t sufficient. For everyone else, though, it will work just fine in small doses.

Nike Air Zoom SuperRep 3 Overall

The Nike Air Zoom SuperRep 3 is one of the more versatile training shoes. Want to do HIIT classes? Perfect. Want to lift weights and get bulky? Not a problem. Want to do a quick run on the treadmill? Go ahead. Bring these when you go into the gym not knowing what you plan to do. They’ll be able to handle almost everything. And be assured that whatever you’ll do in them, your feet will be comfortable and well-supported. These deserve a spot on our Best Cross Training Shoes list.