Our verdict
Whether it's a short training run or a marathon race, you won't be disappointed in the Nike Air Zoom Pegasus Turbo 2. It gave our feet the comfort and lightness they needed for the short haul, and when it was time to run in marathon paces, it gave us the peppy ride we were looking for!
Pros
- Versatile in use
- Springy ride
- Barely-there upper
- Great lockdown
- Accommodating toebox
- True-to-size
Cons
- Thin, non-gusseted tongue
- Not the most durable outsole
Nike Zoom Pegasus Turbo 2 review
No matter if you are a rearfoot or forefoot striker, neutral runner or pronator, the Turbo 2 will most likely suit your needs.
It is light and responsive enough to be used for short runs, yet cushioned and springy enough to be used for marathons.
Of all the new Nike releases this year, this has been my favourite. While the VaporFly is reserved for only the elite runners with perfect form, the Pegasus Turbo is the shoe for the masses.
Feel-good upper
Gone is the thick racing stripe. The new upper feels thinner, lighter, more breathable, and more flexible. It kind of feels like the Vomero 14 upper, except with less pronounced heel pods.
The tongue is thin and slides around as there is no gusset. I preferred the Pegasus 35 Turbo’s tongue over this one.
With the Pegasus Turbo 2’s tongue, when you lace the shoe right up until the last eyelet, you feel the pressure of the laces since the tongue is not long or padded enough.
The toe box is not as shallow. Hence, it is much more comfortable, especially if your feet have a large volume.
The more relaxed toe box allows the foot to rest in the centre of the shoe—not off to the side like in the first version. The heel has very little padding, but there is no heel slip if you tighten the laces.
I ordered it in my normal 8.5, and it runs true to size. It is a little too roomy if you wear it with thin, hidden socks. But, the fit is perfect with thick running socks.
Turbo 2 midsole: true to the name
This is one of those rare shoes where the forefoot is softer than the heel. This is due to the ZoomX being thicker than the React foam in the forefoot.
In the heel, it is the opposite: there is more React than ZoomX. Because the forefoot is softer than the heel, the shoe encourages you to forefoot strike.
ZoomX is so lively and springy that even when you are walking at normal speeds, you can feel the foam compress and bounce back.
I ran in the Zoom Fly 3 before this shoe. In comparison to the Zoom Fly 3’s firm, heavy midsole, the Turbo 2’s midsole is a breath of fresh air.
Sure there is no carbon fibre plate, but I don’t miss it one bit. I would rather have a light shoe than a heavy carbon plated midsole.
Normcore outsole
The hard rubber is placed in the forefoot and heel but not in the middle. The placement causes the shoe to bend in the path of least resistance, just where the hard rubber starts, in the forefoot.
This is the only Nike shoe model with such an outsole design. The outsole has acceptable levels of durability. However, it still doesn’t come close to Continental levels.
The outer heel area where I heel strike is the place that shows the most wear.
Nike Zoom Pegasus Turbo 2 vs. Pegasus 35 Turbo: it's a different shoe!
Nike Zoom Pegasus Turbo 2's predecessor, the Pegasus 35 Turbo, was possibly the worst shoe I have ever run in. One 8km run in them, and it gave me an injury that had me limping for a week.
The cuboid syndrome was the diagnosis. It happens when your cuboid bone everts (moves outward) from your foot while your calcaneus, or heel bone inverts (moves inward) from your foot.
There were two problems with the first version that caused my injury:
- The upper and midsole were designed in such a way that it loaded over the edge, so your foot partially rested on the edge of the midsole.
- The shoe flexed in the middle instead of the forefoot, providing absolutely no midfoot stability.
Thus, when I first saw pictures of the Pegasus Turbo 2, I was not excited. The updates looked minor, and the midsole looked exactly like the previous version. I was going to sit this one out.
However, when I tried them on in the store, they felt VERY different:
- The first difference was the obvious one, the upper: It is now more accommodating and not as shallow in the toe box.
- The second difference was the midsole. It feels firmer and more stable. This is due to the holes in the strobel lining being covered up. The ZoomX foam no longer pokes through the holes.
- Overall, the shoe felt more stable. The pleasant surprise was that the midsole now flexed further up the shoe towards the forefoot and no longer in the middle.
On paper, this update looks minor, but the tweaks that Nike made have turned the shoe from being unwearable to an excellent shoe.
