Tag Archives: metcon 2

Nike Metcon 3 Review

IMG_7322

***Click here for the Nike Metcon 3 DSX Flyknit Review***

It seems like just yesterday I received a beautiful package from Nike containing the now antique, the Metcon 1. Since it’s original release, the Metcon has been the biggest thing that’s hit functional fitness since Brooke Wells. For good reason, it is Nike after all.  People were over using their Free’s and begging for Nike to put out a true shoe designed ground up for functional fitness. It wasn’t even that Reebok put out a bad shoe, the Nano’s are quite possibly one of the best designed shoe lines in the history of footwear. To be honest, the only issue that anyone really had with them is that they just weren’t Nike’s.

The original Metcon’s were a great first effort offering amazing stability and response, but they weren’t without their issues. Many suffered from durability issues, heel slippage, and squeaky insoles. All of that wasn’t enough to dissuade anyone, especially me, from stocking up on many of the awesome colorways. Then along came the Metcon 2’s – more like a 1.2 model, meant to address many of the issues that the original shoe had, but in reality, it had failed in doing so. I say failure in the most liberal way because the Metcon 2’s shot Nike from not even being a player in the functional fitness world, to numero uno. In all actuality, the Metcon 2 was a failure because it really didn’t fix the issues that plagued the Metcon 1. Heel slip though lessened, was still there. The overall durability was no better than the last, and that damned squeaky insole was only put off for a little while. Still, they were awesome performing shoes that had the look, and most of all, had the swoosh.

Two years later and were now coming upon the release of the much anticipated Metcon 3. When it was originally leaked, many people weren’t keen to the futuristic look Nike decided to take with the latest model, but it didn’t take long for them to warm up to it. Besides the Romaleos 3, these shoes have definitely been my most requested review of the year, as the previous versions were before it. So what exactly have we been holding our breath for? Was it worth the wait? Is it worth upgrading over the previous models?

IMG_7238


Looks/Construction:

If you were to take a quick glance at someones feet wearing the Metcon 3’s, you probably wouldn’t notice they were a different shoe than the two before it. Granted, the 3’s look the most different than the previous models, they still definitely have the Metcon appearance. Though the upper looks a little different, the lines of the shoe generally remain in the same spots but synergize a bit better due to the redesigned material. While it may look like the 3’s have a knit type material for the upper, the feel is very reminiscent of the thermal wrap found on the 2’s, just to a lesser degree. What it makes for, is a much more sock like feel and pliable upper. The ballistic nylon that was once only found in the toebox is seemingly fused with the thermal wrap and extends all the way from the font to the back of the shoe, slightly reinforced in areas like at the toe and where the rope would make contact. Flywire lacing system makes it’s return and as always provides a nice fit when tightened adequately.

IMG_7246

Durability issues of the Metcon 2’s were mainly due to the upper being so rigid. Most of the time you would see the instep part of the upper starting to crack after multiple rope climbs, or even the thermal wrap coming unglued from the mesh. Since the 3’s have the mesh and thermal wrap fused together, it’s a lot lighter and flexible feeling. This should alleviate issues with the cracking, but only time will tell.  The insole also resembles the original model’s insoles, but now features redesigned flex groove and is ever so slightly thinner. About that squeaky heel, as we know from experience, the 1’s squeaked right away, while the 2’s had to develop it. The bottom of the insole is now a little more tacky feeling, but I have a feeling that over time as moisture builds up in your shoe, it will wear the bottom of the insole out. Maybe it will or maybe it won’t squeak, that’s another thing I’ll have to report back with in a few.

Gone is the hexagonal tread pattern of the outsole and in place is a triangular webbed pattern that is much more pronounced. The material that the outsole was made of remains the same despite the change in tread pattern, but now offers more flexibility. Overall the shape is more narrow than the previous models, most notably in the midfoot, but not so much that I would say the shoe is narrow; it’s still very much a wide training shoe.  The height of the midsole stack also seems to be a little bit shorter, giving you a closer to the ground feel. At the rear of the shoe you’ll find the return of a more well disguised TPU heel clip that’s now matte in texture. New to the 3’s are the TPU heel “cups” found externally on the sides of the rear that help stabilize your foot laterally.

Build quality is mainly what you’d expect from a Nike shoe. The Metcon 3’s are very well put together and feel suited to take on just about anything you can throw at it. Interestingly enough, my blackout models have quite a bit of oversprayed glue, which isn’t a huge deal, but does detract from the sleekness of the shoe a tad. I’m sure this has to do with the previous model’s laces not staying tied, but the laces that come with the Metcon 3 are just plain cheap feeling. I’d gladly take the ones of old and just tighten them up a bit more.

IMG_7243


Fit:

If you’re coming from any of the previous iterations, just go ahead and size the 3’s the same unless you were on the extremely tight side. Remember that the 3’s are slightly more narrow, though the length of the shoe remains the exact same. People with Morton’s toe shouldn’t have to worry about having to size up either, as the shape of the Metcon’s toe box accommodates your second toe well.  Here’s a sizing chart of what I wear, so you can kind of get an idea of how you should size your Metcon 3’s:

  • Metcon 1/2/3 – 9.5
  • Nano – 10
  • Inov-8 – 10
  • Chucks –  9
  • Speed TR – 9
  • Nike Free – 10
  • Romaleos – 9

Another variance that I’ve noticed between my two pairs of shoes is that the blackout’s fit a little more snug and have less heel slip than my grey/volts. If you’re at the store buying them, you might want to try on a few pairs before pulling the trigger on them.

IMG_7248

Performance:

In my opinion, the Metcon 2’s (and originals), though technically designed for all facets of fitness, were the best training shoe for pure lifting. I’ve hit numerous PR’s with both models, including a 515lb sumo deadlift and very narrowly missing a 225lb snatch, so I will usually grab my Nike when I know I need to lift big. What made them excellent lifting shoes also made them a little hard on the feet when it came to plyometric movements. Honestly, it’s a give and take with training shoes; you just can’t have it all. If you want better power delivery, you’re usually sacrificing flexibility, and vice versa. The key is to find the balance between the two, and I think Nike has come the closest out of any training shoe with the Metcon 3.

Squatting is the foundation of everything we do, so if I can’t squat in a shoe, I really have no use for that shoe.  The Metcon 2’s were arguably my favorite squatting shoe of all time. Sure, they are not the most minimal or shoe closest to the ground, but they are plenty flat, stable, and offer excellent energy rebound. I’ve been doing a lot of squatting in Olympic weightlifting shoes lately with the Legacy and Position’s, but I don’t miss them one bit because squatting in the M3’s feels just as good, if not better. As a functional fitnesser, my mantra is to always be able to use what’s available at the time; you’re not always going to have time to change into oly shoes after all. The M3’s manage to keep up with the best oly shoes, but also outshines the previous models because of the TPU heel counters. Lateral stability is far greater than it was in the M2’s and you never get a feeling of spilling out of the sides of your shoe.

IMG_7249

Once again, historically Metcon’s have been my favorite shoes to do Olympic lifts in. Nano 6.0’s had a really impressive showing earlier this year, easily becoming my favorite training shoe because they were so responsive; that is, until I tried the Metcon 3’s out. Power delivery is excellent and the sloping outsole makes for a shoe that translates power well throughout the entire pull when weightlifting. Honestly, the way I would call it between the two shoes is a draw, they’re both equally just as good as the other with the Nano’s having a slightly more minimal platform with better ground feel and the M3’s guiding your feet better with an insole with greater energy return. It just comes down to preference as it’s just too close to call here, but stability would have to go to Nano’s for having a flatter base, but interestingly enough, rowing in the Metcon 3’s feels better due to the shape of the outsole. Compared to the Metcon 2, you lose out a little bit in forward stability, but gain in lateral and heel stability. The reduction in weight and width in the toe area doesn’t really hurt the overall stability much. Also, the drop remains the same as it’s always been as the original models and the 2’s at 4mm.

According to my scale the M3’s come in the lightest at 11.15 oz, followed by the M2’s at 11.57 oz, and the Nano 6.0’s barely being the heaviest at 11.61 oz. My Nano’s are a men’s size 10 and my Metcon’s are both size 9.5.

Since the upper is much more flexible and the redesigned outsole pattern allows for greater flex than it’s previous counterparts, moving around in the M3’s is much more comfortable; an area that the Metcon’s were notoriously bad at. Typically with repetitive jumping movements, my plantar fascia region will develop a burning sensation, but that hasn’t been the case with the M3’s. Speaking of which, all of the jumping movements feel extremely natural in the Metcon 3’s, making more than half of what we do as fitness-ers much easier. That’s in part due to the redesigned outsole having a more pronounced slope up from the midfoot to the toe and the the flexibility being heightened. Since it’s been cold and rainy outside I haven’t done a ton of running, but agility drills felt excellent due to the toe shape and flexibility. I’d imagine that running still will not be the Metcon 3’s strong suit since the outsole is still fairly ridid, but that’s what the DSX Flyknits are for! Beware, the previous models were pretty forgiving if you had the tendency to lean forward on your toes, but the M3’s are not quite as much due to the new shape.

IMG_7258

I never really understood the need to have the TPU heel clip for handstand push-ups. Other than doing strict handstand push-ups, your feet should almost never drag up the wall. With the Metcon 2’s, I never really noticed the heel clip ever sliding and if anything it would actually stutter up the wall. Doing handstand push-ups in the M3’s felt a little better since the material of the TPU is less tacky, but I never noticed any kind of enhanced smoothness with my kipping. Another area I noticed the M3’s lacking in are sadly, rope climbs. I’ll usually baby my new shoes, but since I know I’m going to get a ton of inquiries about this, I just went for it. It was embarrassing how many times I lost my footing trying to coach rope climbs. Spanish wrap or j-hook, it didn’t matter, the rope slid right through my feet almost every time. I didn’t think the M3’s would falter so hard in this area since the outsole reaches up quite a bit more. I’ll keep trying, maybe the outsole needs a bit of wear before it starts to grab the rope better.

Value:

So why spend double, when you can get a fully functional pair of Metcon 2’s or Nano 6.0’s for almost half the price? Mainly social & brand recognition. That’s not to say the Metcon 3’s are a bad pair of shoes, they’re actually excellent training shoes and definitely one of my favorite picks. The previously aforementioned are still some of the best training shoes of all time and you’re currently able to pick them up for about half the price of Metcon 3’s. Why wouldn’t you want to go with that? It comes down to appearance, sometimes fit, social proof, or because one doesn’t have a swoosh on the side. I will admit that Metcon’s are easily the better looking shoe, and always have been, though the Nano 6.0’s aren’t an ugly pair of shoes.

In my opinion, the Metcon 3’s are an excellent pair of shoes, but they don’t do anything drastically different that what’s already out there. Unless your pair of Metcon 2’s, or even 1’s, were falling apart, you don’t necessarily need to upgrade your shoes. The enhancements are fairly incremental, and the overall feel isn’t that much different than the previous iterations. If for some reason you don’t like the way Nano’s fit your feet (the m3’s are narrower), then you might want to look into some Nike’s. Any way you cut it, the Nike Metcon 3’s  are still some of the finest training shoes on the market, and quite possibly the only true competition for the Reebok Nano’s. If you certainly must have the Metcon 3’s or you’re in dire need of an upgrade, the latest version of Nike’s Metcon are the most well rounded iteration of the shoe yet and you definitely will not be disappointed with them.

Purchase your Nike Metcon 3’s here!

Now what about those DSX Flyknit’s…

IMG_7237

Advertisements

Inov-8 F-Lite 235v2 (Late 2016)

IMG_7012

With all the talk about Nano this, Metcon that, it’s easy for Inov-8 to get overshadowed by the bigger companies. The grand papi of minimalist training shoes, and really the first functional fitness shoe (besides Vibrams), Inov-8 just keeps on chugging along making great trainers that often get overlooked because their marketing budget just isn’t quite as big as the other giants. They’re still producing the widely loved and well regarded 195, which you can find being worn in many boxes to this date. The 195 was a workhorse of a shoe that just did everything right, without any fancy bells or whistles.  Sure, it has it’s share of shortcomings, but if you wanted flexible, comfortable, minimal and lightweight, the 195 is the shoe to get…well…until Inov-8 brought out the 235.

Last year’s model of 235’s took Inov-8’s training shoe know how and upped it 100%. Many issues that plagued their previous training shoes were addressed, and it was one of the finest training shoes I had ever used. The 250 was a spin on the 235’s, and ended up being one of my favorite training shoes of the year. Fresh off the press, the 235v2’s look to up the ante by improving on everything that made the 235’s excellent to make a play for the title of the best functional fitness shoe.

IMG_7013

Looks/Construction/Fit:

Quite possibly the only thing that’s going to prevent the 235v2’s from being a star in the functional fitness world, are it’s hate it or love it looks. Personally, I don’t hate the way the shoes look, but I don’t love them either. I can appreciate them trying to do something different with the styling, which to be honest, is pretty true to Inov-8’s standards. Most people are not going to see it the way that I do and will go for one of the more “safe” choices. The actual silhouette of the shoe isn’t awful, but some of the colorways don’t quite get along with the lines of the shoe. The grey/blue/black scheme that I got is definitely the best of the bunch and I have gotten compliments on it. Though I have heard quite the opposite about some of the others. This can easily be remedied down the line, as Inov-8 usually does this and then adds in more “safe” colorways later on.

The F-Lite 235 is a completely new shoe designed specifically for functional fitness, but it still carries on the creed of the 195, with enhancements for today’s athletes. Sporting the new “Standard” fit, the 235v2’s has a wider base and much denser heel for stability during lifts. A well known issue with the 195’s was the durability; a few rope climbs and you’d see some pretty substantial damage to the shoe. Inov-8 added the Rope-Tec guard a little bit later on in the 195’s life, but honestly it didn’t do a ton to fix the issue as you couldn’t always count on the rope being in that exact spot. The redesigned 360 Rope-Tec system now carries onto the 235v2’s upper and with the inclusion of the much denser outsole, provide excellent tracking and durability against rope climbs.

IMG_7018

On the feet, the 235v2’s feel just as well built as any of the top fitness shoes on the market. You can definitely feel the solidity of of the Powerheel, but also how incredibly flexible the new “AdapterFit” technology upper is. During movement the upper conforms to your foot and provides one of the most natural feeling shoe experiences around. Upon entering the shoe, you’ll notice the midfoot “hug” from the Met-Cradle, which provides a more customized fit in the midfoot. Also new to the 235v2’s is the external heel counter that was present in the 250’s, working hand in hand with the Powerheel to up the shoe’s stability.

The flat laces are more dense but have the tendency to become untied unless you really tighten them up. Another slight annoyance is that the toe area of the shoes have a tendency to attract dirt and marks that take a little more than water to wipe away; nitpicking here, but it drives my clean shoe OCD crazy.

This time around, I went with a size 10 compared to my normal size of 9.5. I’ve been finding myself needing to size up lately as deep into workouts, my feet have the tendency to swell and my toes jam up into the front of them. The front toe guard is kind of a double edge sword here: it’s gives extra protection when doing burpees, but if you’ve got Morton’s toe like me, it’s inability to flex will end up smashing your second toe. Only an issue I had deep into workouts with the 250’s, but isn’t an issue with my size 10 235v2’s. The fit is comfortable and never feels too big, so consider going up half a size ONLY if your second toe is longer than your big toe.


IMG_7014

Performance:

Zero drop.

The 235v2’s are FLAT, just the way I like it. Since the fall of “minimal” shoes happened (Vibram?), there hasn’t been a ton of zero drop shoes on the market. Personally, I like to do everything in flat shoes, and the flatter the better; granted this might not be the same for everyone, especially those with poor mobility. Is this a huge departure from the popular training shoes on the market? Nope, most of them have a 4mm drop, which is pretty darn close to nothing, and it doesn’t take long at all to get acclimated to a zero drop shoe. What is quite different than most of the shoes out there, is the amount of ground feel that you get from the 235v2’s due to its low (10.5mm/3mm insole) stack height. The 235v2’s are as close to “barefoot” shoes as you can get without sacrificing protection. This makes for a very responsive, if not the most responsive feeling training shoe out there.

The outsole brings back some familiar technology in the Meta-Flex split grooves and Dynamic Facia Band (DFB). The latter keeps you in motion while the former makes it so your foot doesn’t feel constrained doing it. The pattern used is designed to maximize the contact area of the shoe’s sticky rubber outsole, giving you a sure step every time.  Traction in any terrain has never been an issue and is maximized if you’re stepping into a gym with rubber flooring. Tread with confidence.

IMG_7016

Power delivery is excellent with anything from Olympic lifts to plyometric movements. This has been my “go-to” shoe, and I haven’t ever looked back towards any of my big named shoes. Not saying they’re not excellent picks either, but the 235v2’s are just as good, if not better at things. Squatting in the 235v2’s couldn’t feel any better due to the zero drop and extremely dense Powerheel. I’ve saved some snatched that had gone awry from the 235v2’s keeping my feel planted into the ground. Did I mention that these are the most flexible trainers I’ve ever used? I did, but just so you know, moving around in the 235v2’s is like a breath of fresh air. Speaking of which, the 235v’2s are also the most breathable shoe I’ve ever used. Probably awesome during the summer, but also could be a bad thing if you live in cold areas. It’s getting California cold (50-60 degrees, lol), and sometimes my feet can get really cold.

If you’re looking for a true, minimal training shoe, this is the one. Zero drop, flexibility of a Yogi, reflexes of an F-1 car and light as a feather at 8.2 oz.

IMG_7015

Value:

The F-Lite 235v2’s run for a standard price of $129.99 per pair. This puts them in direct contention with the major manufacturers. I know you’re thinking you might as well go with the popular options for that price, but if you’re looking for a minimalist fitness experience, the big names just can’t deliver. Don’t get me wrong, they’re excellent shoes and some people might be looking for a little more support, or like the styling better, but give the 235v2’s a shot and I promise you won’t be disappointed.  The purist experience just can’t be replicated by anything other than the Inov-8 F-Lite 235’s.

Now to check out the crazier All-Train 215’s…

Get your Inov-8 F-Lite 235v2’s here!

The BEST CrossFit Shoes of 2016

These are, in my opinion, the best shoes for CrossFit in 2016. There has been a slew of amazing training shoes this year, but these are the best of the bunch. I didn’t just want to give you a flat out list, so I categorized each into what they’re best suited for. Every shoe here is an excellent choice for CrossFit in general and you can’t go wrong with any; there are just some that might suit your needs a little bit better than others!

 

Reebok CrossFit Transition/Combine Review

IMG_6189

What are thooooose?!

I’ve seen a ton of wacky shoe designs, but nothing even comes close to the Reebok CrossFit Transition. It looks like a cross between an oly lifter, sneaker, and chukka boot. With looks only a mother could love, the Transitions are probably the most controversial shoe that Reebok has ever put out. Which is what made me most interested in the shoe; I had no idea what to expect from them because they’re so…different. It’s no surprise that people will be turned off by the looks of the shoe. A shame, because there are probably a ton of people that could use a shoe like the Reebok CrossFit Transitions.

IMG_6187

Looks:

I’m probably one of the very few people in the world that actually think the Transitions aren’t the most god awful looking shoe of all time. They’re not thaaaat bad in real life; granted, most people are only going to see them in their stock pictures. You’ll find no Kevlar infused upper here, just a standard synthetic upper with a thermal wraps resulting in a very flexible shoe, that doesn’t look like it would be. The “covert” colorway is just for the most part all (shiny) black with a little bit of camo inside the shoe. The medial strap is the only place you’ll find Kevlar on this shoe, though it doesn’t say anywhere that it uses it. Around the back you’ll find a pretty sizable TPU heel counter that extends to the sides of the shoes, but doesn’t clash with the design and looks quite good.

The outsole design from the side looks very similar to Reebok’s lifter shoes and is probably the only other hint besides the medial strap, to what the intended use of the Transitions is. At the bottom of the shoe you’ll find a diamond lug pattern never seen before on any Reebok shoe.

I’m not going to tell you these shoes look good, but they sure as hell look different.

IMG_6191

Fit:

I’ve learned nowadays to just stick with my normal size of 9.5 for most shoes and I’ll be good. Little did I know that these shoes are modeled more after Lifters and not Nano’s so my typical size fits me a little loose. It’s usable, but just keep in mind that these should be sized more like a Lifter (half size down).  Though they are a mid-cut shoe, they don’t really feel like a mid shoe but there is quite a bit of ankle support, not that you’d go play any pick-up games in the Transitions anyways. The insole is quite thick, but not enough so that I could say these are any more comfortable than any other trainer.

IMG_6193

Performance:

The day I got the Transitions, I still had no clue what their intended use was. CrossFit shoes always kind of have the same product descriptions so reading the specifications was pretty useless. The first thing I did with the shoes was take them on a run. As stated before, they’re a lot more flexible of a shoe than they look like and the run was surprisingly comfortable throughout.

All the movements that I’ve put the Transitions through have proved them a worthy CrossFit shoe, but even more so a competent WOD shoe. The wide platform is very stable for overhead movements and oly lifting, but the responsiveness of the shoe is also great for rebounding box jumps and double-unders. While Reebok left out the heel clip on the Nano 6.0’s, the Transitions retain it in the way of the TPU heel counter. Not only does it act as a buffer for handstand push-ups, it adds another dimension of lateral stability for your foot. Flexibility is probably the Transitions best suit since you can do all of the above and go on a fairly long run comfortably. Surprised? I was too.

IMG_6199

It wasn’t until I got back home that I got word what the intended purpose of this shoe was: a cross between a trainer and lifter. The Transitions have a heel height of .70″, which is the same as Reeboks lifters, but has a more standard EVA outsole for more versatility like a normal training shoe. With the omission of a TPU heel, the Transitions also get a slight weight reduction at 14oz. .Like with all Reebok lifters, it’s kind of hard feel the raised heel because of how gradual the drop is. Basically, if you had bad mobility, but you wanted a shoe that you could also WOD in, the Transitions would be your go-to.

Are they a replacement for a true oly shoe? No. Are they a replacement for Nano’s? No.

They’re a slightly worse off lifter, but a more stable trainer with a raised heel.

IMG_6197

Value:

Personally, I try not to wear oly shoes because I don’t want to get reliant on them. My mobility isn’t bad, but certain movements like overhead squats and pistols get the best of me because I have weaker hamstrings. Giving me a little extra to lean against helps me out a bit, but not having the hard heel still makes me have to work for it. This puts the Transitions in a weird spot value wise as most people have Nano’s and oly lifters, making them a “specialty” shoe. If you don’t have a pair of Lifters yet but don’t like the idea of not being able to comfortably run in them either, you would probably want to consider the Transitions. They’ll set you back only $119, which is cheaper than Nano 6.0’s but you can pick up a pair of Reebok Lifters for much cheaper than that.

I’d only recommend this if you were just a shoe whore, or you feel the same way that I do about oly lifters.

Pros:

  • Elevated heel and stable platform.
  • Good for just about everything WOD’s throw at you, including running.
  • You won’t have to change your shoes often.
  • Cheaper than Nano’s.

Cons:

  • Not as stable as oly lifters.
  • Nano’s are more comfortable for most WOD’s.
  • They cost more than oly Lifters.
  • Looks can be subjective.

IMG_6200

The fatal flaw about the Transitions is that they just don’t fit perfectly anywhere, but I almost guarantee anyone that tried them out would be a fan of the way they perform. Most people aren’t going to want to spend full price on a shoe that looks like this, given that they are pretty impressive performers. Hopefully, Reebok comes out with some colorways that are a little less bland or ups their marketing campaign on the Transitions. I don’t think the latter is happening anytime soon, as I do feel like these shoes are more of just a test that’s already being discontinued given the lack of publicity behind the Transitions. If you’re interested in them, chances are they’ll be on sale pretty soon, in which case I’d say go for it. Otherwise, if you’re content with switching between your Nano’s and Lifters, you can probably skip over the Reebok CrossFit Transitions.

Reebok CrossFit Nano 6.0 Review + Video Review

IMG_6124

Six years, six iterations of the Reebok CrossFit Nano.  My first pair and in some ways still my favorite are the 2.0’s, mainly due to the sentimental value I have for them being my first CrossFit shoe. This should go without saying, but every year Reebok makes a better version of the shoe. Now you might not like the shoe, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s not a better shoe than the previous year’s. From adding in the Ropepro, to the Duracage, and the Powerlaunch toe box, there’s always something Reebok is adding in an effort to make the best CrossFit shoe possible. The thing that I really like about Reebok is that at the end of the day, they were the first to actually invest in CrossFit; without them, you might still be WODing in running shoes.

A shoe design has a typical life of two years, with the Nano 6.0’s being an evolution of the 5.0. This is very apparent if you look at the previous Nano’s as well and something that also applies to other brands of shoes. The big changes from the 4.0’s are still here: we have the Kevlar reinforced overlay, improved Ropepro, and multi-directional outsole. The only thing we’re “missing” is that the 3mm drop has been upped back to the 4mm that’s been the standard for Nano’s.  It’s slight, but some people will miss it (including myself), though most people won’t ever notice a difference. What’s new to the Nano 6.0 is a new overall look with a huge Reebok logo, a tough medial guard, a heel loop, slight changes to the fitment, and the new Powerlaunch toe box.


IMG_6116

Looks:

From an aesthetic standpoint, comparing the Nano 6.0 to the 5.0 would be like comparing your freshman yearbook picture to your senior picture.  You look the same for the most part, but you’re a little more fleshed out and slightly more mature looking, though you still have a lot of growing up to do. Honestly, when I first saw the Nano 6.0’s, I didn’t think they were as bad looking as a lot of people did; or at least one side of the shoe wasn’t. In my opinion, the delta isn’t as cheesy looking as some people say it is; it’s a hell of a lot better than all the junk they put on the 5.0’s. Going around the the medial side of the shoe is a different story, the new medial guard is an eyesore on certain colorways as it totally clashes with the refined look of the shoe. It’s not so bad on the dark colorways, but it really sticks out like a sore thumb on the brighter colors. Function over form I guess.

You can just tell by looking at the Nano 6.0’s that they’re a bit more sturdy.  The quality of the upper feels a lot more premium than the 5.0’s did. Areas like the toe box and the rear of the shoe are more reinforced and a lot harder to depress. The shoe holds it’s form better than the flimsy upper of the Nano 5.0. A huge upgrade that might not sound like much is that the tongue is way more substantial and padded. You won’t have to worry about it sliding to the side like the 5.0’s did. Lastly, the shoe laces are much nicer in general with a wider, flatter, and better looking set. I never had an issue with the laces of the 5.0’s, but the new speckled laces adds some character to the 6.0’s.

IMG_6120

Fit:

It seems to be a pretty normal thing for the first complete overhaul of the Nano to be big and wide, and it’s successor to be more fitted and narrow. That’s not saying much since the Nano’s are wide shoes in general. I’m a fan of the wider fits because I have a bunion on my right foot, but even the more narrow models fit me just fine.  You’ll find the biggest change in fitment at the vamp (toe box) of the shoe. The front is now optimally sized for toe splay, without being overly wide and less stable. The upper is now mainly a new more breathable mesh in this area, allowing for greater flexibility over the 5.0’s. These factors essentially equate to the Powerlaunch toe box. What this feels like is a more competition-ready feel, as there’s going to be less of your toes sliding around.

The fitment is generally the same everywhere else, but overall it’s a tighter fitting shoe. Keep this in mind when sizing the Nano 6.0; if the 5.0’s fit you tight, consider going up half a size. Once again, you might notice the difference with the drop being increased back to 4mm, but it’s slight and you’ll probably forget about it in minutes. If you’ve got Morton’s toe, you might need to go up half a size due to the flat shaped front. My second toe rubs a bit in a size 9.5, not totally uncomfortable but I might consider purchasing 10’s in these shoes from here on out.

UPDATE: Purchased a pair of 10’s and they fit much more comfortably than the 9.5’s did. Overall, I would say size up half a size.

IMG_6118

IMG_6117

Performance: 

Every year a new Nano comes out, everyone in the CrossFit world says the same damn thing.

“This is the best one yet.”

I hate that it’s so cliche, but it’s true. Every year, I find myself liking the new one better than the last; as you or I should. Improvements have varying degrees of usefulness, but they are always improvements. I don’t think I’d actually say the Kevlar introduced on the Nano 5 was an “improvement”, but things like the 3mm drop and the outsole pattern were to me. With the Nano 6.0, you’re basically getting a better version of the 5.0, similar to when Apple releases an “S” version of their phones. For the most part it’s looks the same, but it’s the stuff that you can’t really see that makes the difference.

Though it sounds gimmicky, the Powerlaunch toe box feels great during lifts; which probably has to do with it being more fitted, so you’re not bleeding power all over the place. Like all Nano’s the outsole is dense and extremely responsive. My squat volume has been down lately, but I still went up to my 95% back squat at #385 without any hesitation or missed lifts. I had some troubles with oly on the first day I used the shoes (probably lack of mobilization), but after getting used to the platform, the 6.0’s are nothing short of confidence inspiring. Every jump feels effortless, every landing feels stable as a rock. Moving throughout WOD’s with varying movements is no short task for any shoe, but the Nano 6.0’s prove to be the worthiest of contenders. Box jumps and double under rebounding feels as responsive as ever and since the flexibility has been increased, my feet don’t hurt as much after repeated bounding. Win.


IMG_6179

The redesigned mesh area at the vamp doesn’t crease in any way that it would ever make your toes uncomfortable. Don’t get me wrong, these are still Nano’s and Nano’s are clunky due to the general shape of the shoe and density of the outsole. Running in them is just okay, but that’s on par to how they’ve always been. I wouldn’t gripe too much about this because there are still only a handful of shoes that you can really do any and everything a WOD throws at you, in. Nano 6’s being at the top of that list. Unlike all other Nano’s, they’re also actually pretty comfortable to just wear on the daily. Though I am in the process of reviewing these shoes, I find myself actually wanting to wear them at all times.


Nano’s have always been rough and tumble shoes, just a workhorse designed to take a beating and keep on ticking. The 6.0’s are no different feeling. This alone is probably why I like Nano’s so much. Don’t get me wrong, I love my Metcon’s, but if the WOD came to throwing around tires, getting dirty, or climbing ropes, I’d be coming with my Nano’s that day. (I’m not going to comment on the medial guard until I get some solid time on the rope.)


UPDATE 7/28: Finally got to testing rope climbs and I have to say that these are the best rope climbing Nano’s yet; previously the 4.0’s were my favorite. The inclusion of the heavily textured kevlar medial guard provides excellent “grip” when climbing the rope, though it does require some positioning with your feet. I found it most beneficial while I was fatigued and needed to take “breaks” as I was climbing. Best of all, it does an AMAZING job of attenuating the amount of friction the rope has on your shoes. After all the rope climbs I did, my shoes have almost no signs of wear!

Personally, I weighed the shoes in at 10.94oz for a men’s size 9.5, though I’ve seen lower listed weights. Not the lightest of the Nano’s yet, but not as heavy as some of the competition either.

IMG_6183

Compared to:

Nano 5.0 – If you weren’t a fan of the ultra wide toe box of the Nano 5.0, you’ll definitely like the 6.0’s.  Otherwise, the difference in the drop is only going to be noticeable to the pickiest people. Looks wise the 6.0’s are also better, but that’s always subjective.  If you’re a Nano fan, the 6.0’s are a must buy, but if you’re not in need of an upgrade, the 5.0’s (or any Nano prior) will do just fine.

Speed TR – Nano’s are a little bit wider and more squarish at the front than their agile younger brother. I would opt for the Speed TR’s if you have a very narrow foot, or if you have Morton’s toe, or if you just wanted a bit more midsole cushioning. They’re still a great performer day to day, but if you really wanted to move serious weight, I’d go Nano.

Nike Metcon 2 – The Nano 6.0’s are a more minimal feeling shoe with a slightly lower outsole height. Both are great performing shoes, but if you have issues with your toes jamming up in the front of Nano’s due to the flatter front, you might want to look towards the Nike’s. Otherwise styling is subjective, but most people tend to think the Metcon’s are a better looking shoe.

NoBull Surplus – The Nano 6.0’s are a flatter shoe overall with less cushioning, but the feel is very similar to NoBull’s Surplus trainers. The fit is similar to the Metcon’s though. If you’re looking for something that’s kind of a cross between the Metcon’s and 6.0’s, that’s the NoBull Surplus trainers. Beware of the slight upwards slope in the front outsole of the NoBulls; if you’re constantly on your toes, you might want to look into the flatter 6.0’s or Metcons.


Value:

Just like the 5.0’s, the Nano 6.0’s carry a fairly hefty price tag of $130. Most people are used to this by now, but I remember what it feels like to be a first time buyer of CrossFit shoes.  Reason it out like this, if you’re at the box more than 5 times a week and spending multiple hours a week working out, you’ll probably want to be wearing the best that’s out there. If you’re that person, you probably don’t need much persuasion to get the newest Nano’s though. For the more casual person that goes around 2-3 times a week, you could opt for the still great Nano 5.0 that you could easily snag for just around $50 nowadays.

IMG_6177

Conclusion: 

Reebok has been on a roll lately with the Speed TR’s and now, Nano 6.0’s. I haven’t found myself as in love with another shoe since the Nike Metcon 1 came out. Fitment preferences aside, the Reebok CrossFit Nano 6.0’s are simply one of the best shoes out there, if not the best shoe, for CrossFit. It took a while, but the Nano’s are finally starting to mature into that senior about to leave for college. Styling still has a bit of ground to make up before catching up to Nike, but it’s getting there; you can’t really fault Reebok for sticking with that bulldog-ish look. Where the Nano 6.0’s shine the brightest, is where it matters the most, performance. You can argue all day and night that the Nano’s aren’t a good looking shoe, but no one can question the Nano 6.0’s ability to perform any task given.

Hats off to you for reeling me back in, Reebok.

Please help support these reviews and use my links to purchase your gear!