On Cloudrunner 2 review

We think the Cloudrunner 2 from On is a significant upgrade. We were impressed by how it blends the heritage of the v1 with new enhancements, making it an excellent choice for:

• Runners seeking a supportive workhorse willing to invest a little extra money when compared to similar shoes.
• Those in need of a reliable, mid-level stability shoe that performs well across various types of runs.
• Loyal fans of the original Cloudrunner, as this model enhances all the core features while preserving the essential DNA of its predecessor.

Although the Cloudrunner 2 is softer than the previous generation, it still offers a firm ride that may not suit fans of plusher midsoles. We believe there are better choices for those seeking a softer experience, such as the tried-and-true ASICS Gel Kayano 30, which features a plush FF Blast+ midsole.

We've also observed that the Cloudrunner 2, despite being lighter than before, still could benefit from a lighter design. If shoe weight is a concern for you, check the Hoka Arahi 7, a top choice for mild-stability footwear—it provides more cushioning, especially in the forefoot, in a lighter build.

The Cloudrunner series is a go-to shoe for everyday runs and all-around activities. As such, we expect this line to embody a standard design in many aspects such as fit and stack height.

That's why we weren't surprised to measure the heel at 33.6 mm, a figure that perfectly aligns with moderately-stacked running shoes. This makes sense especially considering On has already established a strong presence in the maximalist segment of the market, and doesn't need to add any shoes there.

The forefoot is also moderately stacked at 25.1 mm by today's standards, making it an excellent, reliable choice for daily runs.

On claims the Cloudrunner 2 features a 10-mm heel-to-toe drop, but our lab measurements—taken in accordance with official World Athletics guidelines—indicate a slight discrepancy, showing an 8.5 mm drop instead. We are content with this finding as this is a negligible difference.

For us, running on an 8.5-mm or 10-mm drop doesn't significantly alter the running experience, as both are mid-to-high offsets that generally suit all types of footstrikes, though they may be particularly advantageous for heel strikers in our view.

Many runners found the first-generation On Cloudrunner to be too firm and unresponsive, with a durometer hardness of 31.2 HA. This has significantly improved in the latest model.

On has now incorporated its Helion instead of Zero Gravity foam—a good change—and we measured it at 27.3 HA using our Shore A durometer—noticeably softer than before. While it may still seem firm to some, it's important to remember that On's CloudTec design enhances the compression of the midsole, offering a softer sensation underfoot compared to the average midsole design.

Does this mean that the Cloudrunner 2 feels super plush? Not exactly. Like most On models, it leans towards the firmer side compared to cloud-like foams, but we think it's more balanced than its predecessor.

Finally, we'd like to address a point, as On describes the shoe as featuring "Helion superfoam." However, Helion isn't a superfoam for us but rather an improved standard foam that blends EVA with Olefin. Its performance is comparable to other quality training foams, such as the FF Blast+ found in the ASICS Nimbus 26, and it's far away from On's advanced, Pebax-based Helion HF foam featured in the Cloudmonster Hyper.

We just said that Helion foam is not merely standard EVA; it's a blend of EVA and Olefin. This composition was key during our evaluations, especially since EVA foams typically harden a lot in cold conditions.

Yet the Cloudrunner 2 showed remarkable resilience in our cold-temperature tests. It stiffened by just 16.5% after spending 20 minutes in our freezer. While it may not match the energy return of superfoam, it certainly performs like one in freezing temperatures!

Previously, we noted that the Cloudrunner 2 adopts an average design philosophy, and the insole perfectly exemplifies this approach. Its 4.7 mm thickness is typical, embodying the essence of "standard."

The Cloudrunner 2 offers a classic, natural ride, diverging from recent trends seen in many brands—a move we highly commend. While rockered shoes have their place, we believe that adopting an overly curved profile for the Cloudrunner would have been a misstep.

We conducted our initial measurement in the toebox at its widest part to gauge the space inside. We recorded just 97.8 mm, a typical design approach for this Swiss brand, known for not creating particularly roomy uppers.

While most runners will find this size adequate, those with very wide feet may find it restrictive. In such cases, we recommend the Nike Pegasus 41, which offers a slightly broader fit and it's a fantastic workhorse.

The big toe area also proved to be spacious, alleviating one of our major concerns based on previous designs by On. We measured it at 78.9 mm, which is an average result.

Additionally, the vertical space within the toebox was sufficient. Although the mesh isn't particularly stretchy, it never felt constrictive, allowing for comfortable toe movement.

While On markets the Cloudrunner 2 as a stability shoe, we believe it's actually between the neutral and mild stability categories. We saw that it incorporates some supportive features, yet it predominantly functions as a neutral trainer.

One aspect where the Cloudrunner leans more toward a neutral design rather than stability is its torsional rigidity. As previously demonstrated with the outsole evaluation, it features multiple grooves that enhance flexibility.

Additionally, the absence of the Speedboard plate contributes to a moderate score of 3 out of 5 in our torsional rigidity test.

The heel counter on this model is notably robust, resembling those found in dedicated stability shoes, with a maximum stiffness rating of 5/5.

This feature is particularly beneficial for heel strikers with pronation issues, providing excellent support. However, it may cause discomfort for runners with sensitive Achilles tendons.

Now it's time to delve into the dimensions of the Cloudrunner 2. Our measurements show a width of 117.9 mm, slightly suggesting it as a mild support shoe since it's broader than many neutral trainers.

Nonetheless, as the market trends towards increasingly wider designs, this dimension does not particularly stand out as exceptional.

The heel mirrors the forefoot, being just slightly wider than a typical neutral shoe. This dimension, along with the extremely rigid heel counter, makes it a solid choice for those seeking a supportive heel experience.

One peculiar aspect of the original Cloudrunner was undoubtedly its stiffness, primarily due to the Speedboard plate which On has traditionally been hesitant to remove in some models. However, we're pleased to see that they are finally phasing out this TPU plate in shoes where it didn't made in any sense.

In fact, our tests show a decrease in stiffness from 34.2N for the predecessor to just 21.1N, a change that aligns much better with a shoe designed for versatility and comfort in a variety of activities beyond running.

We conducted another 20-minute freezer nap to evaluate the shoe's stiffness under extreme winter conditions. The results showed that it required 34.8% more force to flex the shoe afterward, significantly reducing its flexibility in cold weather. 

A significant drawback of the first-generation Cloudrunner was its weight, which many runners felt was excessive given its moderate stack height, tipping the scales at over 10.3 oz or nearly 295g.

Happily, we discovered that On has implemented subtle but effective design tweaks to address this concern. The Cloudrunner 2 now registers just under the 10-ounce mark at 9.7 oz or 275g. While not groundbreaking, this reduction is a welcome improvement!

On maintains a strong reputation for the quality of its running shoes—complemented by its premium pricing—so we were really eager to analyze the upper and its airflow.

Our visually striking smoke test demonstrated that ventilation is quite effective; we rated it nearly perfect at 4/5. This confirms that the shoe will provide excellent airflow in all conditions, regardless of the temperature.

However, it's important to note that ventilation is primarily concentrated in the toebox, as On has reinforced the upper in the midfoot and heel for added structure. This design choice boosts stability and durability but does restrict airflow in these areas—a difference clearly seen when examining the upper against light.

Moving to a microscopic level, we delved into the finer details of how On crafted the upper.

We were pleased with the results. On utilizes a multi-layered engineered mesh that not only enhances comfort but also ensures effective ventilation with sizable gaps between the threads. Afterwards, we explored the sliced upper with our hands. 

It features only minor enhancements from the first edition, which is fine since the original design was effective. The upper is comfortable and well padded, making it ideal for all-day wear. Additionally, it is crafted from 100% recycled polyester, definitely a plus.

During our manual assessment, we noted the shoe's mesh is composed of multiple layers—a design choice that generally boosts durability, especially compared to single-layer monomesh uppers that often fail quickly under our fierce Dremel test.

In this particular evaluation, the recycled, polyester-based mesh of the shoe held up well, earning a positive 3/5 rating.

In our lab, most running shoes typically score 1 or 2 points higher in this test than in the toebox, but that was not the case with the Cloudrunner 2.

We observed the same 3/5 score here, which is slightly disappointing though not as concerning as a score of 1 or 2 would have been.

Moving to the outsole, we noted the classic On design that's prevalent in other models like the Cloudmonster 2—a central groove paired with horizontal flex points to enhance flexibility, complemented by rubber only in high-wear areas like the forefoot and heel.

We found slightly less rubber coverage compared to the first version, yet we believe this is still sufficient to withstand wear and tear for most runners, potentially contributing to weight reduction.

In terms of hardness, the outsole measured 85.4 HC, slightly above average, which we hope will translate to excellent durability.

Unfortunately, our results did not meet expectations after measuring the indentation left by the Dremel.

We discovered a 1.1-mm indentation, which, while not terrible, was slightly more pronounced than we had hoped for in a rubber of this type. 

But On was aware of this issue, of course, and that's why they added a bit more rubber to those pads. Instead of the typical 3 mm used in most trainers, they increased it to 3.7 mm to compensate for the rubber's lower durability and extend the shoe's mileage.

We've always believed that brands have a significant opportunity to enhance visibility by incorporating reflective branded logos on running shoes—and this time, On has checked the box!

The tongue of the Cloudrunner 2 features impressive padding, composed of two main foam slabs with a third layer created by folding one of these at the top.

We measured the total thickness at 9.0 mm. This design is ideal for runners who prefer their laces as tight as possible and comfort over everything else, as it prevents lace bite and accommodates a cozy fit.

The tongue is partially gusseted to the sides of the shoe, providing secure lockdown without being overly restrictive. This design aligns perfectly with our expectations for a daily trainer that's positioned well above the entry-level price range, ensuring both comfort and security even at faster paces.

Staying true to On's latest design cues, we found no finger-loop heel tab on the Cloudrunner 2, giving the rearfoot area a cleaner look.

The insole of the Cloudrunner 2 can be easily replaced with an aftermarket one if desired, as it's not glued to the last.