OFFICIAL: Nike Zoom FLYKNIT Collection - Racers + Trainers ONLY - (SIZE POLL ON FIRST PAGE. CHECK TH

Size preference

  • True to size

    Votes: 101 48.1%
  • True to size runs snug, but feels fine

    Votes: 40 19.0%
  • Runs small, need to go .5 size up

    Votes: 51 24.3%
  • Runs big, need to go .5 size down

    Votes: 28 13.3%

  • Total voters
    210
I UNDS my nike flyknits this morning. Man, they are comfortable. I'm happy I purchased my true size. They have that Nike Roshe feeling but more sturdy. When I hopped on the train this morning (BART) here in SF, I had 3 people compliment my shoe. 
happy.gif
 
So what's the main difference between the Racers and Trainers? I'm assuming the Trainers have more cushion?
 
So what's the main difference between the Racers and Trainers? I'm assuming the Trainers have more cushion?

I would say the main difference is the weight. Racer's are 5.6oz and Trainer's are 8.4oz.
 
these are all over NYC if anyone is looking. I just got back from vacation and couldnt believe all the stores that had them...
 
Fleet Feet Sacramento has the volt racers.

2311 J Street  Sacramento, CA 95816
(916) 442-3338

Came out to $161. Free Shipping.
 
i have a feeling nike will do with these what they have done with other limited releases. eventually they will be everywhere. i remember couple years back when the AM1's dropped in the og colorways and people were dropping 200-250. Then they hit the outlets for $50. i'm tryin not to trip.
 
I would say the main difference is the weight. Racer's are 5.6oz and Trainer's are 8.4oz.

The Racer has a different upper weave which is slightly more snug and the sole of the racer is less substantial and more narrow which results in the lower weight.
 
Here are some on feet pics of the white/black. I love this color, yes there could be some tweaks, but all in all it is one of my favorite of the batch.

700

700

700


Thanks, I'm debating which one I should get, I wish I could find the Volt ones, but I guess I'll settle for the Orange Racers.

There are also shape/fit differences. I took some pics, as best I could, for you to see. The shape of the toe box is different, the overall width, the length of the trainer is longer, the height of the trainer is higher, and there is a lot more cushioning in the trainer.

700

700

700


Family pics:

700

700
 
handwashed my htms over the sink with a rubber scrub and dishwashing soap, it did the job, sun dry in the morning, back in the box, almost looks ds, yes! volts are clean again 
 
Great pics up there ^

Struggling between the orange trainers and racers. I'd only get the racers if I thought I'd actually run in them, but I don't know if I'm willing to make the transition back to a non-free running shoe...
 
i have a feeling nike will do with these what they have done with other limited releases. eventually they will be everywhere. i remember couple years back when the AM1's dropped in the og colorways and people were dropping 200-250. Then they hit the outlets for $50. i'm tryin not to trip.
I agree with this. There is a lot of hype around this shoe do to the Olympics.
 
Does anyone have any tips on grabbing those white/black joints? I NEED to order these this weekend...
 
this is just my personal experience, but i've tried running once so far in both the my pair of trainers (w/ socks) and racers (w/o socks), and i've gotten blisters in different areas on both.

lasted only 3 miles before i got blisters on both my back heels with the trainers, and only 2 miles before i got blisters on the bottom of my feet (between the arch/ball) with the racers. after all my blisters heal, i will try running w/o socks in the trainers and w/ socks in the racers to see if i still get the same respective blisters or not. if i do get blisters again, the flyknits may be relegated to just casual wear duty.

i'm sharin' my experience for those of you who may be actually considerin' distance running in them. again, this has just been my personal experience. i'm sure others may not have any blistering problems running in them (might just be that i have ever-so-slightly wide feet).

now you know...and knowing is...
 
and thank you xfile 11 for posting the "top down" pov of the white/black trainers. i'm now convinced that they look better when viewed from the side/profile, while the black/white look better viewed from the "top down." so my question remains...what's more important, how they look from the wearer's perspective? or how they look from an onlooker's perspective?

things that make you go...hmmm...
 
Trainers cut up my achilles too, the area at the centre back of the heel that raises up gets me every time if I'm wearing no show socks. Racers don't do this for some reason. 
 
I have had my trainers since the week they came out.  I ran in them twice, here was my review I posted then:

I had the same problem with mine. I am a 10.5 in all nikes. The first run I did in mine was a 6 miler. About half way through my run I noticed I was getting a blister on my left heel. Ran a 4 mile easy run the next day, and only the left shoe was bothering my heel again. The third day I had a 10k and by the time I finished, both my heels were blistered and bleeding. I had to take 2 days off from running, which was horrible, since I run 7 days a week and had only taken 4 previous days off all year. I have wide feet in the front, and the front fits perfect. The heels have too much room in these for me. I think if I sized down, the front and sides would be too tight. BTW, I ran all my runs with socks and I still had heel slippage.
 
azrael

No problem!

In regards to blisters they both gave me blisters at the top of the heel where the pull tab is with no show socks. This lasted for a week or so, I just kept running with them. Once healed up I have had no problem but I do a better job to make sure my sock comes above the top of the shoe. I have had no other blisters or fit problems with either the racer or trainer.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom