Running Mania

Hey everyone,

Just thought I'd put in a quick plug for the Triumph ISO's. I was looking for a pair of shoes with a softer feel to compliment the Mizuno's I normally run in and these are AWESOME. I just did a short 8K on the TM to try them out, but wow, really nice stuff.

The fit of the upper is great. It's a stretchy material that sort of wraps around your foot and it really feels like the shoe is locked down.The fit in the rear is also very nice. Lots of cushioning and no heel slippage for me at all.

The cushioning in the shoe is definitely softer than my Mizuno's, but not so soft that they feel overly mushy. There is still some responsiveness there. For shorter races or speed work I think I'd still prefer something with more feel, but for longer runs (which is why I bought them), the extra cushioning will be greatly appreciated. I had no fatigue whatsoever after the first run with them and no hotspots. They do have an 8MM drop, but I didn't notice any issues with that coming from shoes with a 12MM drop.

I do have a wide foot so I got the wide size in the Triumph ISO's. The fit is perfect. I had tried the wide size in the last iteration of the Triumph and found it terrible, like they just added fabric without changing the width of the sole. On these, the sole is definitely nice and wide and it creates a great stable platform for my foot (I did have some older Triumph's in wide that I loved so I'm glad to see they went back to this design).

If you are in the market for a neutral cushioning shoe, I'd suggest checking the Triumph ISO's out. Highly recommended!

That is my other option from trying the Hoka shoes. I have three pairs of Triumph 10 in the rotation right now and it is time to invest in some new shoes. The Triumph 12 (ISO version) is tempting....

I'll post another update once I do a longer run in them, but after one run, I'm sold. They feel awesome on the foot!

thanks for the review! i'm wearing the saucony ride right now, and they are just ok. i just discovered that the toe box is too narrow for my forefoot though on a long run, so might need to examine wide options.

Yeah, my foot is very wide in the forefoot area and the wide size fits great. I don't feel like I'm forcing my foot into it at all, it's like the entire shoe was designed with the extra width in mind.

I have a pair of ISO but haven't taken them outside yet.

I tried the Triumph but I didn't like the drop. I ended up buying a pair of ISO Zealot which has a 4 mm drop and they are or seem to be a bit lighter than the Triumph. Took them out for a 20 mile run and they felt great.

I did buy a pair of the Triumph ISO when I returned the Hokas. I also have a pair of the Ride 7. The Ride is a bit firmer but still well-cushioned. The Triumph is softer but still feels good and works for me. The new upper does fit nice & snug but I don't really have a problem with the one on the Ride. Will see how the Ride performs in the 10K race tomorrow morning. Agree that a 4mm drop would be nicer but I'm OK with the 8mm as I'm only doing 25K a week these days. I though the Zealot was closer to a stability shoe?

I am pretty sure the Zealot is a neutral shoe, same upper has the Triumph and yes I do agree that it does fit real good. The guy at the RR sold it to me as a light marathon running shoe.

True, the Zealot is neutral. But apparently the sole is very firm and better suited to faster runs...according to a couple of reviews. I knew there was something about the shoe but could not quite remember what it was. I might need to look at this shoe at some point.

I will be wearing them for the race tomorrow. I'll let you know how they hold up.

I wore my Triumph's in the 10K this evening and they were AWESOME. I really can't say enough about these shoes!!!

Unfortunately, I ended up disappointed

Two issues:

- I find them very hot.
- With the shape of the toe box, I found my last two toes on my left foot were bumping the side and crowding together within ~16K - and that's doing the usual going up a half size to accommodate swelling.

So I guess I will save them for cooler weather and shorter runs.

Caocao wrote:I am pretty sure the Zealot is a neutral shoe, same upper has the Triumph and yes I do agree that it does fit real good. The guy at the RR sold it to me as a light marathon running shoe.

So I wore the ISO Zealot for the Ottawa Marathon this past Sunday. Loving this shoe, light with plenty of cussioning and the 4mm drop I was looking for.

I bought a pair today. I like them. They feel good on my weird feet.
Feel better than the Nimbus 17. At least that is my assessment: I ran on the tm for 60 mins and then power walked outside for 50 mins.

ISO 2

I've had a pair for a couple of weeks now. I like the lower part of the shoe; cushion and such. The upper not at all.

The toe box is much smaller and the shoe overall narrower. I asked person at Roadrunnersports about that. She said that the toe box is supposed to be form fitting. Thats the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Toe nails and toes like their space if you are a marathoner or longer.

So while I wear a men's 10.5 in Asics (already half size up), perhaps an 11 in ISO2 would be roomier. But shoes also get bigger in other ways and arches are not in the same place. So be wary of the first pair of these you buy.

I've been running in a pair of ISO 2's as well. To be honest, I don't like them as much as the original ISOs. I agree about the upper. It doesn't fit my foot as well as the original ISOs did. The originals felt like a slipper that formed to my foot in all the right places. These just feel like a shoe that covers my foot.

I've found the cushioning to be fine, although it does seem a tad firmer than the original.

The biggest problem for me is the flexibility. They just seem overly stiff. I thought the original ISOs moved very well with my foot. They felt very responsive for such a well cushioned show. The ISO 2's don't have that feel to me. Again, they feel like they are attached to my foot, not part of my foot. I don't find them all that smooth.

To me, the 2's are definitely a step backwards and I wouldn't buy them again. 6.5 or 7 out of 10. The originals were an easy 9.

Thanks for the update; I’m just now starting to break-in my ISO's I got last year. Long story short... I get shoes as compensation for leading half clinics at the store I deal with. I got the ISO compliments of the store & Saucony last year, as they sponsored my clinic. I already had a new pair of Glycerin’s and Nimbus in my rotation, so I put them aside for future use. The Nimbus are finally dying there slow death.

Now I like the ISO for many of the reason you explained, however it has taken me some time to get used to the 8mm lift; since I'm used to my go to Glycerin's at 12mm. Besides that, I'm very happy with them. Though I will be giving the ISO2's a second look given the recent review as I'm due for another pair by the store for the current clinic I'm doing. I may just go with a pair of trail shoes as my Mizuno's are coming near there end.

I love my Nimbus way way more

Spirit wrote:I love my Nimbus way way more

I'm not sure I would say the same. Don't get me wrong, I like my Nimbus as well, but I do find them heavy when you get into the longer in duration runs. They are a nice cushy ride, but I’ve raced in them a few times and found them to be somewhat heavy later in a half and therefore prefer my Glycerin’s.

I’ve worn my ISO for two of my last track workouts and loved them. I can’t wait to try them out in my next race in a month time.

I just bought a pair of Triumph ISOs & I'm in love. I've been running in them for about a week. I love how light - but cushionie - they feel.

I've been struggling to find the right shoe for about a year & I think they're a keeper. Today's long run will be the final test.

I also wear the Kinvaras but they aren't enough shoe for my long runs. I'll save them for speed stuff & racing.