Lately I’ve been hearing a lot of rumors about some new Nike Free running models that will soon be coming out (including this post from Jason Robillard). I have very little in the way of details, but managed to come across some photos of what I think are two of the shoes after doing a bit of web searching (this thread on Sole Collector was helpful…).
Both look to be a bit lower in the heel than the wildly popular Free Run+, and as always Nike does a great job making good looking shoes (I think the Free 3.0 v4 photos are only the women’s versions). The toebox on the Free 3.0 v4 looks particularly intriguing to me as it appears to be a bit roomier than in previous Free 3.0 models (narrow fit is the major reason why I no longer wear the 3.0).
If you have any additional details, please leave a comment!
Here are photos of the two shoes posted on product pages for the two shoes at Finish Line:
Nike Free 4.0 v2
Nike Free 3.0 V4
You might also like:
Saucony Grid Type A5 Running Shoe Review: A Phenomenal Racing Flat!
Runblogger’s Top Running Shoes of 2011: Lightweight & Minimalist Trainers, Trail Shoes, Racing Flats, and Barefoot-Style Shoes
Saucony “Drops” 3 Flagship Shoes: Guide 5, Triumph 9, and Hurricane 14 Moving from 12mm to 8mm Heel-Forefoot Drop
New Balance MT101 Trail Shoe Available at Running Warehouse
Cross Country (XC) Racing Flats as Minimalist Shoes
About Peter Larson
Oooh – I like the look of those black 3.0s. That is interesting you say you stopped wearing the Free 3.0 because of the narrow fit. Narrow in forefoot or heelcup? What is an alternative “minimal” shoe that is a little roomier? How would the fit compare say to the fit of something like an Inov8 road or Flite?
Narrow in the forefoot. The Free Run+ fits better up front, and the Inov8 Road-X are much roomier in the forefoot. The older Free 3.0’s have narrower fit..
Well I finally tried on a pair of 3.0 (v3), and they were far too tight for me across forefoot. Even a US12 was small (my casual shoes are US11). I ended up buying the Free Run which felt a lot roomier. The down side is they are more shoe than I wanted, but I don’t have many other 4mm drop minimal shoe options (only NB avail here is MR10, no Kinvaras, and Brooks Pure range is waaaaay to expensive.
Hopefully they run nice.
I still like the Free Run. A bit much in the heel, but comfort and fit are excellent for me.
What have you heard about the nike flyknit? They look pretty crazy.
First I’ve heard of it – this what you are referring to? http://p.twimg.com/AmMEraUCMAE…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
this was posted on nike running’s Facebook page today.
Thanks – here’s what I could dig up quickly. Now back to work :) https://runblogger.com/2012…
The Free 3.0 V4 looks promising. I’m a big fan of the V2s and was lucky enough recently to stumble upon one of the last few pairs you can still buy on the interwebs nowadays. Wouldn’t touch the V3s with a 10-foot pole, as the spandex-like material behind the heel doesn’t seem to me like it’s durable at all.
As for the narrow fit, I can still run with the Frees but had to stop wearing my Kinvaras, as they were mangling the two smallest toes on my left foot. I guess it’s all a matter of how each runner’s feet are shaped.
Wow, I feel the same about 3.0v2 vs 3.0v3! I ran several marathons in v2’s and hated the v3, so now running in Merrell Sonic Glove and Trail Glove (love them both). I will at least try on 3.0v4, but they really screwed up with all the changes in v3.
Thanks for sharing this nice post.If you are like me very much in love nike zoom rookie,then welcome to your return visit.
Those 3.0 v4’s don’t look quite right. I actually held some in my hand and tried on a demo model. (I’m part of a local Fleet Feet Racing Team that has a Nike sponsorship deal). The 3.0 v4 flex grooves are waaaaay thinner and deeper. They’re using a new process. With the shoe unflexed you can hardly see the grooves they are so thin, but the shoe is still crazy flexible. Was pretty cool. Also I can confirm that the heel-to-toe drop in the 3.0 v4’s is drastically reduced, I believe the Nike Rep said it was 3mm and it sure seemed that way to me as well, the 4.0’s were something like 6mm. Perhaps this is a sign of things to come in their “barefoot” line? Toe box seemed a bit roomier than it’s predecessor, but then again it was a half size larger than I normally wear (perhaps I’ll go up half a size then!).
Thanks for the info, I have high hopes for the new 3.0.
Good to know the 3.0 V4s will be as flexible as the older versions. The only thing I don’t like from the pics is how far back the outsole extends behind the heel of the shoe. Hopefully this will not promote heel striking.
Alain, I ended up hooked up last week to the new 5.0 and actually tried the 3.0 v4 and did a run around the store. I bought the 5.0 cause no one could explain me the differences, and liked the color of them. None of them promote heel strike neither the 5.0 nor the 3.0 v4, you would actually need to heel strike intentionally in my opinion.
nike site says 4mm for the 3.0 v4
Got this number from Nike’s Chinese site. The 3.0 v4’s heel/toe is 17/13mm
Big fan of the 3.0 v3 but one thing that is a bit irritating is that stones get stuck in the sole. I looks like the grooves in the sole are much reduced (particularly in the midsole) so should stop this from happening. Ron Y also mentions that they are likely to be reduced from the picture – even better!
not really JohnB, I got hooked in the 5.0 (the newest version they are) and I get stones stucked too, (soles are very similar, basic difference to the 3.0 V4 is the sole in the heel)
My only concern with the 3.0 v4 is ventilation. One could NikeID a pair of 3.0 soles with the 5.0 (FreeRun) upper, but it will cost you an extra 30 bucks, and that’s before online discounts. More like an extra $50 over a standard 3.0.
It would actually be nice, if someone could compare the breathability of both. If the 5.0 are truly more breathable I´d definitely pay for having the 5.0 upper with the 3.0 v4 sole.
Although in the nikeID they state the following:
“For a snug fit and more support, opt for the Free 5.0 upper with the dynamic fit lacing system, which tailors the shoe perfectly to your foot. For enhanced breathability and a lightweight feel, take advantage of the super-minimal Free 3.0 upper. “
Seems like marketing gone awry. I can’t see how the completely overlayed upper of the 3.0 could breath more than the open toe box mesh design of the 5.0.
Can be… , though I have been running in the 5.0 and they are not that breathable as they seem to be either; particularly if you run in very hot weather
Yeah, I think this may be an issue. I got a pair last week, but they were too small. They did not feel like they will breath well. Getting a half size bigger so we’ll see.
Don’t let your wife see you do it Pete, but if you cannot physically blow easily through the upper with your mouth on the shoe, it’s going to be hot. I’ve got a pair on the way too, but if they don’t pass this test they are gonna have to run damn well to stick in my quiver for colder months. Think I’ll probably be returning and waiting for those Bionics to get my flex groove on.
Thanks for the tip – I’ve never tried that!
Sent from my iPod
Too small indeed. I usually wear a 10.5/11, but the 11s were short and tight. I don’t think an 11.5 will have enough forefoot room either, ah well. Inov8 233 and Hagio still my go to shoes.
Tried the 4.0s on at Finishline, much more space, but they feel clunky and mushy.
Can the soles come out of the shoe?
In the 3.0, yes, not sure on the others but I think so.
—-
Pete Larson’s Web Links:
My book: Tread Lightly – http://ow.ly/bdUO0
Work: http://www.anselm.edu/internet…
Blog: https://runblogger.com
Dailymile Profile: http://www.dailymile.com/peopl…
Twitter: http://twitter.com/oblinkin