![]() For reference, other foams produced by Nike returned 60-65% of the energy. Nike states this ZoomX formula gives you 85% energy return. If you’re not aware of what ZoomX foam is, it’s the lightest, most energy efficient foam Nike has ever made. The real meat and potatoes of this shoe is all in the ZoomX foam. However, I’m sure the shoe will start to lose a lot of traction after several hundred miles when the hex rubber patterns are worn down as they are relatively thin. I found the outsole to be well suited for racing, track workouts and most daily runs. This rectangular patch is partially there for durability, but seems to be there as a vestigial design that used to mimic the rectangular fabric line on the top of the original Pegasus Turbos that is no longer present on the Turbo 2s. One quirk of the outsole is a pronounced rectangular outline on top of the hex pattern near the forefoot. The hex pattern of rubber gives moderate traction, and the expanded spacing that begins to leave gaps that expose the foam seems to keep the shoe light but durable.Īpart from two bands of rubber running the edge of the shoe, the entire midfoot is exposed rubber that holds the same hexagon pattern around it.Ī gap this wide exposing that much foam points to the shoe’s focus on lightweight running at the expense of durability. Protecting the ZoomX foam while also giving you some traction is the rubber overlay with concentrations at the heel and toe of the foot. Most of the Pegasus Turbo 2’s value is within the sole of the shoe. I’m sure adidas’s adizero lineup is seeing this shoe as a solid competitor, along with many other $150 or higher price point cushioned racing-styled shoes like the Brooks Glycerin 17s. Nike is competing with other top of the line marathon racing shoes for the masses with this shoe since the foam tech came from Nike’s Breaking2 attempt, and Nike is placing it on the platform of a popular model. I felt the latter, where it took me a handful of runs to get a handle on how to properly adjust the upper without it feeling too tight around the heel. Some find this to be a welcomed weight reduction and improved fit, but others find the thin tongue and heel area to be troublesome when attempting to make a good fit. The Turbo 2 also slims down the tongue and heel area when compared to the original Turbos. The Turbo 2 keeps the same outsole and midsole design, and alters the upper for a simpler design without Flywire or a pronounced central fabric line over the toebox. This model is only the second in the line of the Turbo shoes, where it makes marginal changes to the original. Rather than introduce a dramatic price hike and design change, Nike spun off the Turbo 2 variant to capture the market that wants the overall design of the Pegasus shoes, but with the most bleeding edge tech on the foam with Nike’s ZoomX foam. ![]() Measurements are done without motors enabled.The Pegasus line of shoes has a long history with Nike, generally offering a low-risk, high reward type of shoe that’s been tested and iterated for years and years. If I do these tests with the same parameters on a Geobrick-LV with identical firmware version (but without Macro IC0) or with a stand-alone Clipper (just 5V PSU), I do not see this phenomenon, there are no clear peak loads observed. The unit is running just by itself by 24PSU, no cables or busvoltage attached. It peak seems to be related to the PWM frequency. The peak values are depending on the frequency settings as described below. The phase frequency load (red bar) regularly jumps to up to four times the continous load. I have a clipper drive unit and I am seeing strange peaks in the CPU resources graph.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |