Metcon 1 Vs Metcon 2 Review – The Big Difference
When Nike showcased their new Metcon shoe, it was with one purpose. They wanted to challenge Reebok within the CrossFit community. However, their attempt failed after the CrossFit games banned the shoe in 2016. This meant Nike had to go back to the drawing board and come up with something better, which they seem to have done. You can read all about it in this Metcon 2 review. Here’s a look at how Nike upgraded the shoe and why it’s inching closer to Reebok’s reputation.
What was Wrong with Metcon 1
Despite the banning of Metcon 1 shoes at the games, there were some athletes who liked the direction Nike was taking. As expected, a fan base for the shoe began to form and expectations for the update were met with great anticipation. Nevertheless, the first attempt lacked flexibility in terms of running long distances, as well as being too soft at the forefoot. The latter issue makes movements for double-unders and push presses more difficult than they have to be.
Although there is a small list of errors that can be associated with Metcon 1, we’re going to focus on the upgrades with Metcon 2. This should speak to the problems of Nike’s first attempt, while providing a good perspective on how they match up in general.
Metcon 2 Review – What’s Right with it?
According to Drew Conant, product director for Nike’s training footwear, there were three focus points for improvement. In order to achieve these goals effectively, they approached some of the most renowned CrossFit athletes in the world. These include Sara Sigmundsdottir and Mat Fraser. The three focus points were durability, flexibility and breathability.
One of the first changes that were made is the added abrasion-resistant TPU skins, which is for durability. During the training week they scheduled for the Metcon 2, Nike looked at the sections that wore out the most. Provided that a week can’t really speak to how effective the TPU skins will work, Conant is positive.
Another problem that surfaced with the Metcon 1, namely the friction at the Achilles section, was solved with a waterfall heel. The design imitates the same concept as a high-end running shoe, but still maintains flexibility with the foot overall. It literally moves with your foot.
However, there was another flexibility issue at the forefoot. For this Nike added extra mesh across the section. In terms of ventilation, the predecessor kept its cool during some very intense exercise. And a three mile run felt much more refreshing compared to the former design. It goes without saying that any Metcon 2 review is going to be better than those of Metcon 1.
It gets Better
In addition to all these adjustments, Nike gave the shoe a hard plastic ridge at the heel. It was suggested by the athletes, because it gives zero drag against wall exercises such as hand-stand push-ups. Even though it sounds like a simple and rather obvious feature to add, you won’t see it often. In fact, you’ll have a hard time finding that hard plastic ridge.
Introducing the Metcon 3
However, if you haven’t tested either the Metcon 1 or 2, you might want to skip them both and jump for the Metcon 3. It’s fresh in the Nike range and it continues to improve, making it unique from 2 and worth testing. Some quick info on the Metcon 3, it features a drop-in mid-sole for increased stability and it aims to cover all the bases. If the developer can be trusted, it’s the type of shoe that will make just about every exercise easier.
Metcon 2 vs Metcon 3?
From the reviews that’s pouring in for as long as 3 has been on the market, it seems Nike is definitely getting the hang of designing CrossFit shoes. Make no mistake, Reebok’s Nano range is still a force to be reckoned with. And it should be mentioned that the 3 is leaning towards heavy lifting, whereas 2 is a God-send for runners.
Hope you enjoyed our Metcon 2 review and come again for more great CrossFit articles. Checkout our top Crossfit shoes for 2017.