Brooks Adrenaline GTS 20 vs Hyperion Elite 2

As a runner I find myself drawn to all the new superfast shoes increasingly coming to market over the past few years.

This wave was stared by Nike with the Vaporfly 4% and has expanded to all the major brands. In almost all cases the shoes are super lightweight andhave a thick bouncy foam in which is embedded a carbon plate.

The idea is the combination of the stiff plate and the superbouncy foam increases the spring of the legs and gets the runner more speed for each unit of energy expended.

Brooks is my go to brand and the Adrenaline is my go to shoe (hence its abbreviation GTS).

Brooks Adrenaline GTS 20

This shoe has always served me well though it is heavy at 10.27 ounces (291 grams).

Last year Brooks released a Hyperion Elite fast carbon shoe but said it would only last 50 miles. Last month they launched the longer lasting Hyperion Elite 2. This shoe has bouncy thick foam, carbon plate and a weight of 7.43 ounces( 210.5 grams)

Brooks Hyperion Elite 2

In this story I compare two road runs done on exactly the same course and weather conditions exactly one week apart with same fitness and using a Stryd power meter and Garmin heart rate monitor strap. The first run was done with the Adrenaline and the second with the Hyperion Elite 2.

The goal is to see how these shoes affect running parameters and performance.

The pace I chose to run was easy and it is possible more differences would show up at faster paces. For me any easy pace is ~ 9:30 /mile.

Here is a table of key metrics comparing the two efforts:

So it turns out the metrics for each of these runs are amazingly similar, with relatively minor differences in favor of the Hyperion Elite 2.

The pace was :02 / mile faster for the same power output, an increase of just 0.4%.

One would expect if the shoe were more efficient, it would take less cardiac output to achieve the same power output. That was true too but again to a very minor extent of 120 bpm in the Hyperion Elite 2 vs 122 in the Adrenaline GTS20, an improvement of only 1.7%.

Running Effectiveness, a measure of economy, was only minimally better in the Hyperion Elite 2 as well but that likely was explained by a slight increase in cadence during that run, 185 vs 183, which also inversely affected stride length, 1.11 m vs 1.13 m. GTC and RSS were very similar however the most notable difference between the two shoes was a lower VO in the Elite 2, which was 5.8% lower. This did not translate into any meaningfully better performance however.

Another difference not shown by these metrics was the feel of the runs. The rocker shaped bottoms of the Elite 2 presumably is to help propel the runner forward, and likely translates to the lower VO. However for this runner, it created a sensation of more effort and more stress on the legs.

So in conclusion it appears for a more uncomfortable run any gains in running performance with the Hyperion Elite 2 vs the Adrenaline GTS 20 were negligble for this runner at an easy pace.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments!