Adidas Adizero EVO SL ATR review

In our opinion, the Adizero EVO SL ATR suits perfectly:

• Fans of the Adizero EVO SL who struggled with its poor grip and protection in wet conditions.
• Runners who liked the original model but wanted more confidence beyond perfectly paved roads, as the ATR handles mixed surfaces much better.
• Anyone looking for a cold-ready daily trainer with very high energy return that still comes at a reasonable price.
• Runners in cold climates who want one shoe for everyday runs and daily use without giving up speed or performance.

We’ve observed that the EVO SL ATR’s heat-trapping upper works great in winter, but we do not recommend it for warm weather. In our experience, the low airflow becomes uncomfortable fast, and we believe that the On Cloudsurfer Trail 2 makes more sense for mixed terrain during summer.

We’re under the impression that the ATR label can be misleading for some runners. We think it’s not the best choice for serious trail running, as the shallow-lug outsole only suits very mild paths. From our evaluation, dedicated trail shoes like the Nike Zegama 2 or the Saucony Xodus Ultra 4 are far better picks for real off-road use.

Thanks to its tall stack height and Lightstrike Pro superfoam, the EVO SL ATR delivers excellent shock absorption, posting 149 SA in the heel and 132 SA in the forefoot. Interestingly, if you compare it with our data for the regular Adizero EVO SL (147/126 SA), there is a small increase despite both shoes using the exact same midsole.

The explanation is straightforward: the ATR has a thicker outsole with more rubber underfoot, which takes the first part of the impact.

The flip side is energy return. While 71.1% in the heel and 71.8% in the forefoot are excellent results, they sit slightly below the regular EVO SL, which reached 74.3% and 73.5%, respectively.

The explanation is the same as before—those extra Continental rubber lugs hit the ground first and return less energy, which slightly hurts bounce. Still, anything above 70% is really impressive especially at this price point.

Adidas lists a 39 mm stack height for the EVO SL ATR, and our measurement came in at 39.2 mm.

That lines up perfectly with expectations, as there is plenty of Lightstrike Pro underfoot to soften landings and help shield heel strikers from impact.

The forefoot is also generously stacked with foam, even if it comes in a few millimetres lower than expected. In our measurement, it reached 31.1 mm.

This results in a true 8.1 mm heel-to-toe drop. Since Adidas states that the midsole is identical to the regular EVO SL, which we measured at 8.0 mm, this fully checks out. A 1 mm difference sits well within normal manufacturing tolerance and is not a meaningful change.

What the ATR version confirms is what we saw in the regular edition: the advertised 6 mm drop feels a bit higher on the run, and our lab data clearly backs that up.

The highly praised Lightstrike Pro returns here in its original formulation, not the newer version from the Adios Pro 4, but the one many of us loved in the Adios Pro 3 for its legendary durability/performance mix.

We confirmed in our testing that softness stays at a balanced 21.5 HA, although the EVO SL ATR feels slightly firmer than the EVO SL because the hard Continental lugs hit the ground first, similar to what you feel when running in trail shoes.

The EVO SL ATR retains the same early-stage forefoot rocker as the original, beginning around 60% from the heel. This design promotes quick transitions while keeping the ride smooth and not overly aggressive.

We found again a plastic shank in the midfoot area, positioned above the Lightstrike Pro foam.

It brings a controlled touch of stability while avoiding the added stiffness of a full-length carbon plate or Adidas’ Energy Rods.

Despite sharing the same midsole and last, the upper is completely different, which can affect fit and internal volume. To check this, we created a gel mould of the interior.

Our first measurement came in at a wider-than-average 97.7 mm, fully in line with what we saw on the original EVO SL.

The toebox also tapers in the same way as the EVO SL, so toe fit feels very similar in the EVO SL ATR. Our callipers measured 72.8 mm in this area.

To complete the fit assessment, we took a third measurement for toebox height.

At 27.4 mm, there is enough vertical room for most runners, confirming that space is not an issue. That said, the ripstop upper doesn't stretch at all, so the volume may feel slightly lower for some.

One of the weakest points of the EVO SL was traction. It was acceptable at 0.40, but limited on wet surfaces. That changes here, as the EVO SL ATR delivers a much stronger 0.65 score.

The trade-off is a heavier outsole, but we believe this is a positive trade-off that will benefit a large share of runners looking for more confidence underfoot.

While the midsole of the EVO SL ATR stays exactly the same as its sibling, the outsole sees meaningful changes. The race-inspired layout is gone, replaced by a more rugged design with Continental rubber and wider coverage, especially under the heel.

This revised outsole also adds dozens of small 1.5-mm lugs to boost traction beyond dry asphalt. Gravel, dirt roads, parks, and even easy trails are all fair game. As a result, the ATR becomes a far more versatile option than the standard model, while still gripping confidently on sunny road runs.

One of the first things we noticed during our initial strides in the EVO SL ATR was its higher stiffness. With the thicker outsole and water-repellent upper, it reached 14.6N, a 48% jump over the regular model, so expect a less natural feel underfoot.

You don’t need to be a running shoe wizard to expect the EVO SL ATR to weigh more than the regular EVO SL. Anyone can see that the water-repellent upper and the more rugged outsole clearly add extra mass.

We measured an 18% increase in weight, bringing the shoe to 9.3 oz or 264g. While this is still a very reasonable number for the size of this shoe, it undeniably feels heavier than the original version while running, and that’s something you should keep in mind.

As a winter-focused version of the EVO SL, we expected breathability to take a hit. While the ATR is not waterproof, it uses a water-repellent mesh that clearly prioritises protection over airflow.

When we pumped smoke into the toebox, almost all of it stayed trapped inside. Because of that, we gave the EVO SL ATR the lowest possible ventilation score: 1 out of 5.

This is clearly a benefit for runners targeting cold weather, as the upper holds warmth well. However, it clearly rules out the EVO SL ATR for summer running.

Under the microscope, the ripstop mesh looks tough and tightly woven. There is little space for air to move through.

Compared to the road-only version, the upper focuses more on comfort and protection. Extra padding and multiple protective overlays improve the winter-ready feel, although they also add noticeable weight to the overall build.

While the EVO SL ATR is still clearly a neutral shoe, this version brings a touch more inherent stability thanks to the reinforced upper and higher stiffness. It is easy to notice on the run, but those of you who truly need support will not find it here.

The new Continental outsole delivers much stronger grip, but it also makes the shoe noticeably more rigid in every direction. In our torsional test, the result was a clear 5/5, almost as if the shoe had a carbon plate inside.

The heel counter feels very similar to the original, earning a 3 out of 5 in our manual assessment. It delivers standard support and solid comfort, exactly what you would expect from a daily trainer.

Our first measurement showed a forefoot width of 116.4 mm, a sensible result for a shoe built around versatility. It avoids the bulky feel of many recent maximalist designs and keeps the ride agile, which we really appreciated.

The heel follows the aggressive design seen across most Adizero models.

At just 84.7 mm wide, it is one of the main reasons we do not recommend this shoe for runners who need support, especially those who land on the rearfoot.

The ripstop mesh used by Adidas helps prevent random tears and minor damage, but it is not built to be extremely tough. In our Dremel test, it earned a 2/5 score due to the thin material used in the toebox.

However, it is worth noting that the shoe uses several TPU reinforcements in key areas, which add a bit of weight but feel fully justified for the ATR version.

We expect no issues with heel padding durability, as the Dremel met strong resistance. Because of that, we awarded a solid 5/5 here. Excellent, let’s move on.

The partnership between Continental and Adidas works great for everyone. Both brands have collaborated for decades, and for us it usually means dependable traction and strong durability.

That is exactly what we found here, as our Dremel test removed only 0.7 mm of rubber. A very good result.

There has been some debate about whether the EVO SL ATR is a road or trail shoe because of its shallow 1.5 mm lugs. For us, it is clearly a winter-ready EVO SL that can handle very easy trails, but at its core, it remains a road shoe.

The outsole supports that idea. With a total thickness of 3.5 mm, it does not feel different from a road setup, especially when compared to something like the Pegasus 41 GTX.

We measured a thinner-than-average insole sitting on top of the Lightstrike Pro midsole, with just 3.1 mm of thickness. If that trade-off means more Lightstrike Pro underfoot, we are not complaining.

The insole is removable, but the Adizero EVO SL is not an ideal shoe for swapping it with a thicker alternative.

Lightstrike Pro is a TPEE-based foam, so it handles cold temperatures extremely well. In fact, it performed so consistently that after 20 minutes in the freezer, we measured no change at all.

The EVO SL ATR lacks reflective elements, which is a bit disappointing. For a shoe positioned as more adventure-ready, having at least a few details that bounce light back would have been a welcome touch.

One of the biggest advantages of buying every shoe ourselves and not relying on brands is that we have zero bias. If you’re a RunRepeat regular, you’ll remember we’ve been very critical of Adidas' lace choices, including on the EVO SL. Come on, even the ultra-expensive Pro Evo 2 came with cringey laces!

Thankfully, there’s real progress here. The EVO SL ATR uses textured laces that are simply excellent. They stay put, feel precise, and hold tension well. If you guys from Herzogenaurach are reading this, we’d love to see these on all future top-tier Adidas shoes.

As for the tongue, we found a pull tab that could be a bit larger. We also noted that the design stays very slim, like most Adizero models, with just 1.7 mm of padding to keep weight as low as possible.

One of the biggest drawbacks of the first EVO SL was the tongue, which felt clearly subpar, especially when compared to the midsole. The EVO SL ATR improves this noticeably, adding a semi-gusseted tongue that stays in place instead of moving freely like before.

We believe the EVO SL ATR is priced fairly. It is not a cheap running shoe, but it pairs a world-class midsole with rugged upgrades to the upper and outsole that, in our view, fully justify the higher price.

The horizontal fabric heel tab provides an easy pull-on point, keeps bulk to a minimum, and adds another all-terrain detail that sets this version apart from the regular version.

It’s pretty clear that Adidas built the ATR version for the winter running crowd, and the water-repellent upper makes perfect sense for cold, wet months—especially for high-mileage runners training toward a spring marathon like Boston or London.