Pearl Izumi N2 v3 Road review

I have had an off and on again relationship with Pearl Izumi shoes. I ran in the N1 v1 road for a while and loved them, but it coincided with ongoing foot pain so I ditched them. Turns out that the foot pain continued for a year afterwards, so I'd be that they were not related. 

I also ran in the N1 v2 trail shoes for a while, but found the toebox a little too narrow for trail running, and like with other PI models, the tongue tended to slip down to the side during running. 

But with both shoes, I really enjoyed the fit of Pearl Izumi for my foot. The upper is generally very breathable and has some give to it - no hot spots. The E: Motion rocker has worked well - I have found it very well thought through, and helps rather than hurts my running motion from heel/midfoot impact to toe off.

I decided to try the N2 V2 for a couple of reasons.
- Positive reviews on the webs, including from The Ginger Runner.
- Loving my Saucony Breakthru 2s, but looking for a little more structured shoe for longer runs.
- I like the 4-8 mm heel to toe drop of this shoe.
- I think I do better with firmer shoes, especially during races, particularly with a fairly rigid heel cup which this shoe has.
- I like having a couple of models that work at any given time. Since I plan on doing more road running, I needed something else in addition to the Breakthru 2. I checked out the Kinvara 7, and it was too soft for me to race with. And the Ride 9 was too narrow.

Of course, the best time to try out a new shoe is on race day! JK. But I did.

I wore the shoe on a half marathon course today for the second time. Yesterday I did a brief 5K run, and it felt great, so I decided to risk it. Since I wasn't doing a "race" - I just wanted to have a good time and not hurt myself because I haven't been doing a lot of longer running over the past month, and I have two more in the next three week.

The shoe came through big time. Even though it was pretty sweaty for me, I didn't have any hotspots or discomfort. The firm heel held my foot down nicely through the impact to toe off. And the firm midsole (about as firm as I could possibly tolerate - maybe a 3.5 on a softness scale of 10 being softest) worked well for me, keeping my legs feeling good the whole race and allowing me to pick up the pace at the end pretty easily.

Some key takeaways about the model:

- The 3D printed upper is about as good as I've tried in any shoe. It has plenty of room for my toes and forefoot, yet my foot doesn't move much. That's exactly the kind of fit I love.
- The upper is very breathable.
- The tongue stays in place, and laces stayed tied for 13.1. It's a little thing but drives me nuts when they don't.
- The outsole is quiet yet provides decent traction. I didn't feel any slipping on some wet pavement at race-like pace (for me).
- I like the reflective fabric on the tongue and on the shoe's upper.
- It just looks good.

This post would suck without photos. Note: the color washed out a bit in the sun for the second and third photo - the red turned a bit orange - so one and four are more true.

Deep (more like quick) thoughts: Hoka Odyssey 2 vs Clifton 2 vs Challenger ATR 2

Midsole:

Odyssey 2: nice and firm. It almost was as firm as the old Saucony Mirage which at times felt like running on dehydrated sponges on the first run. It seems like it has softened up a bit on the last couple of runs - a little more forgiving. I'd give it a 4 of 10 in terms of softness (10 softest).

Clifton 2: really almost squish soft. Too soft for my taste for use as a regular trainer. Maybe a 7.5 of 10 for softness.

Challenger ATR 2: a little softer than the Odyssey 2.  I had previously said it was about a 5.5; that seems about right in that it is closer to the Odyssey 2 than the Clifton 2.

Upper:

Odyssey 2: A pretty locked down feel. Plenty of room for my toes, no hotspots, no sliding around. A bit more structure than the Challenger 2, a lot more than the Clifton 2. A 7 of 10 for structure (10 the most locked down feel).

Clifton 2: About a 4 of 10 for structure. My feet had lots of room to move, perhaps a bit too much.

Challenger ATR 2: 5.5 of 10. A touch less than the Odyssey. More toe room and a softer fee.

Tongue:

Odyssey 2: Maybe the best tongue so far on a Hoka for me. No slip sliding down during the run, substantial enough to provide cushioning. A 9 of 10 (10 being moderately cushioned and stays in place).

Clifton 2: A 7 of 10. Nice cushioning, perhaps a bit too much for my taste. But really slides down during runs.

Challenger ATR 2: A 8 of 10.  Much like the Odyssey 2s, maybe a bit thinner. Mostly stays in place with a little slippage.

Laces:

Odyssey 2: Don't have to tie too tight to keep the upper in place and the tongue from sliding.  And they don't come untied. Proper length. A perfect 10.

Clifton 2: I found I couldn't get the laces tied with the proper tension, but the laces pretty much stayed tied.  8/10.

Challenger ATR 2: I have a hard time getting the right tension to keep the tongue in place. It requires using the last eyelet so I can tie a heel loop, but ends up using too much lace. 6.5/10.

Weight:

Odyssey 2: Feels like the heaviest of the three when running, but doesn't weigh in much heavier.  8.8 oz men's size 9 according to Running Warehouse.

Clifton 2: Says an 8.7 for men's size 9, but it feels much lighter than the Odyssey.

Challenger 2 ATR: 9.8 in men's size 9, according to Running Warehouse, but feels as light if not lighter than the Odyssey.

Ground feel:

Odyssey 2: You definitely feel "higher" up than with the Clifton or the Challenger ATR 2. But I was able to run very comfortably on the trail with them. I will consider using them as a trail shoe.

Clifton 2: Because of the marshmallow-y feel, I didn't have a good feel for the ground and didn't love the feel especially on pavement.

Challenger ATR 2: The best of the bunch. I love the ground/trail feel. A pleasure on both road and pavement.

Durability:

Odyssey 2: Remains to be seen. I haven't noticed any overlay peeling, and they seem well made.

Clifton 2: Not good. Both pairs I had saw the overlays coming off the fabric fairly early in the lifecycle of the shoes - in the first 50-100 miles.

Challenger ATR 2: Fair. I'm getting close to 100 miles running with a good amount of hiking as well, and the fabric on the upper is starting to wear visibly. Hard to imagine getting much more than 250 miles or so before holes start opening up in the uppers.

Odyssey 2 on left, Challenger ATR 2 right: