Join me for this week’s review where I’ll be testing the Hoka Skyward X to find out how it compares to two other “super trainers”, the Asics Superblast and New Balance SC Trainer V2.

	Hoka Skyward X	Asics Superblast	New Balance SC Trainer V2
Drop	5 mm	8 mm	6 mm
Plate	Carbon Fibre	None	Carbon Fibre
Weight	320 grams	256 grams	282.2 grams
Stack	49.5 mm heel, 44.5 mm forefoot	45.5 mm heel, 37.5 mm forefoot	40 mm heel, 34 mm forefoot
Type	Neutral	Neutral	Neutral
Midsole	PEBA & Supercritical EVA	FF Turbo & FF Blast+	FuelCell

Reviewer

To better help you ascertain whether a shoe may or may not work for you, here are some key pieces of reviewer information: Weight: 68 KG/149 LBS; Foot strike: Mid-foot (occasional heel) Pronation: Mild to Moderate Overpronation

Overview

If like me you have a relatively safe (though reasonably expensive) addiction to running shoes, it’s likely you’ve heard the term “super trainer.” For those sensible readers yet to go down the rabbit hole, here’s a crash course. Oh, and apologies in advance to all about to decimate their bank accounts. At least it’s not crack.

While there’s no formal definition, a super trainer typically shares many characteristics of the more established super (or race-day) shoes. We’re talking “super foams” (in other words the most responsive foams), carbon fibre plates (or rods such as those utilised by Adidas), rockered geometries, and other features that work to enhance propulsion, improve efficiency and performance. Where the super trainer and super shoe differ is in the latter’s preference for weight saving at the expense of (sometimes) comfort and (almost always) support. Comparatively, super trainers favour the antithesis.

Considering the move of many players in the industry to stick carbon plates in just about anything, a number of shoes could be considered to border on super trainer status. The Adidas Boston 12 or Saucony Endorphin Speed 4, for example. There are, however, a number of shoes created specifically to target this unique category. The Adidas Prime X Strung, New Balance SC Trainer, Asics Superblast, and all new Saucony Endorphin Trainer are some of the usual suspects.

The Hoka Skyward X is the latest offering to the super trainer segment. Strictly speaking, it isn’t Hoka’s first attempt. The Mach X was and still is an excellent trainer, though is probably better suited to faster workouts than performing equally well across the board as you’d expect from a super trainer.

Hoka have been performing remarkably well of late, though. The Rocket X2 and Cielo X1 found success in the super shoe market, a segment the brand has historically struggled in. Perhaps similarly, Hoka just needed a couple of attempts to dial in their super trainer.

In today’s article, I review the Hoka Skyward X against two other shoes in the category – the beloved Asics Superblast and the less-loved-because-of-its-predecessor (but still incredibly good) New Balance SC Trainer V2. I’m going to be ranking each of the three shoes in respect of looks, performance, comfort, and affordability in the (almost) ultimate “super trainer” showdown.

Looks

Hoka Skyward X

No review of the Hoka Skyward X would be complete without the author’s entirely subjective view about the shoe’s appearance.

Hoka typically get a bad rep for their looks, at least in the online running communities I frequent. I strongly disagree. Hoka have some unique and exciting designs that distinguish them from the competition. Moreover, the established models have a multitude of colourways to choose from to suit disparate preferences. Models like this Mach 6 are, in my view, some of the best looking shoes on the market.

When it comes to reviewing the Hoka Skyward X, though, I have to agree with the masses. Hoka decided to go big in pretty much all areas with the Skyward X. Begging to be seen, it stands out in a crowd and helps you to do the same. Wearing the Skyward X, I’ve achieved a lifelong dream of being 6 ft tall. This, I can only assume, explains the name.

Unfortunately, you’re seen for all the wrong reasons. Hordes of teenagers patiently await your passing, the words, “What are those?”, serenading you as you pass.

I think part of my disdain for the appearance of the Skyward X is due to the men’s colourway. The splashes of blue and red on the predominantly white midsole would perhaps make more sense if the shoe was named the Skyward X Colgate, the shoe resembling a giant slab of toothpaste.

The women’s colourway is significantly nicer, fortunately. So hopefully we’ll see more colourways released. There’s a lot of shoe to play with here, so it would be a shame if the design team didn’t make the most of it.

Despite the seemingly harsh criticism I’ve thus far given in reviewing the Hoka Skyward X, I don’t necessarily dislike them. Yes, it’s ugly. Yes, the colourway is toothpaste-esque. But the Skyward X is the shoe equivalent of a pug. You love it because it’s ugly (no offence pug owners). I’m certainly not ready to say I love the Skyward X. But for now, let’s just say I’m agnostic about it.

With that in mind, the Skyward X earns a respectable (if somewhat kind) – 5/10.

New Balance SC Trainer V2

As I’ve already reviewed the SC Trainer V2, I’ll keep this brief. I highly rate New Balance’s designs, and the SC Trainer V2 is no exception. The subtle curves of the FuelCell foam are aesthetically pleasing and there’s a number of bright colourways available (though actually, the shoe would benefit from a few more). In my view, the best looking of the three – 8/10.

Asics Superblast

I’ve seen a number of complaints about the colourways for the Asics Superblast. While I agree there could be more (and better) choices, I have no complaints about the White/Sunrise Red colourway (which is slightly pinkish) I own. Admittedly, there’s nothing special about how it looks. The design is simple if a little mundane. In stark contrast to the in your face nature of the Skyward X, the Superblast is subtly designed, something I personally prefer. When you put the two shoes side-by-side, it’s hard to believe they’re manufactured for the same sport. One resembles a running shoe, the other a colossal basketball shoe – 7/10.

Winner: New Balance SC Trainer V2

Performance

Hoka Skyward X

I’m currently working on building a stronger aerobic base, so a lot of my runs are now done at easy (or Zone 2) effort, translating to a pace range between 6:00 – 6:52 /KM. I first took the Hoka Skyward X for an easy 45 minutes with 6 strides, providing arguably the perfect opportunity to test and review the shoe in arguably the circumstances it’s designed for. Perhaps partly due to the strides and partly down to my excitement about testing the Skyward X, I finished the run a little quicker than intended with an average pace of 5:44 /km. According to Garmin, the strides were in the region of 3:45 – 4:15/km.

The Skyward X worked well at keeping my legs turning over. Despite the stack height, the shoe felt completely stable when running (less so when walking). I haven’t tried the Prime X Strung, but I’ve read that the stack height causes some issues with stability. The Skyward X seems to negate this through the use of a wide base and Hoka’s Active Foot Frame, providing moderate stability that works for runners with a neutral gait. Considering the Skyward X has a stack height just shy of 50mm in the heel, this is a real win for the technology used by Hoka.

The ride of the Skyward X is an interesting one. In my experience, they provide a responsive, bouncy ride at quicker paces, but less so at easy/recovery. During the strides component of the workout, the Skyward X were one of the most fun shoes I’ve ever used, not too dissimilar to the feeling of the Cielo X1. Admittedly I didn’t hold those paces for long periods, so can’t comment on how they feel at sustained efforts.

Unfortunately, at easy/recovery pace, the Skyward X was just a bit … bland? It wasn’t a negative experience per se, it was just a bit meh. Nothing jumped out about the shoe, not even its ability to keep the legs fresh. In reviewing the Hoka Skyward X, I’ve taken them on a few 40/45 minute easy runs and one easy 1:10 long run. Aside from the strides, I didn’t feel any “wow” factor from the shoes.

I think this is partially down to the configuration of the shoe, but it’s likely also impacted by the user’s weight. The carbon plate sits too close to the foot, just under the layer of soft PEBA foam. As a result, at slower paces the shoe (at my weight) feels extremely firm and rigid. As I put more force through the shoe during strides, the Skyward X came alive. Consequently, I can only assume that the heavier runner might be better suited to the Skyward X, unlocking the unbelievably fun bounce of the shoe at a variety of paces. Unfortunately, unless I decide to carb-load for the foreseeable, I can’t see the Skyward X fitting into my rotation.

In some respects, the shoe feels conflicted. It’s as if the Skyward X is experiencing some form of shoe dysphoria. It’s a max cushioned, max stack shoe, indicating its suitability for easy, recovery paces. At the same time, the responsiveness of the PEBA midsole and carbon fibre plate make the Skyward X a serious contender for race day or tempo workouts. By virtue of it vying for the super trainer category, this is understandable. But for a shoe to be a super trainer, it needs to be great, or at least good, at both simultaneously. Unfortunately, this hasn’t been my experience. While performing excellently at tempo efforts, the shoe is too heavy and bulky to be used predominantly for this purpose, with many better, lighter, and cheaper options available. At easy/recovery pace, I’d much rather lace up a basic daily trainer, like the Puma Deviate Nitro 3, Saucony Ride 18 or New Balance 1080 V14

While it might be a bold claim, my assessment of the Hoka Skyward X is that the inclusion of a carbon fibre plate is a mistake. It’s as if the product development team asked what technology the shoe needed and Hoka simply said, “Yes.” The shoe would likely have performed better and suited a wider demographic in the plate’s absence, the layer of PEBA foam on top of supercritical EVA being similar to the midsole configuration of the Asics Superblast.

Maybe Hoka didn’t want to be seen to be copying Asics, which is completely understandable. But as it stands, the Skyward X just doesn’t work for me in the circumstances I’d expect a super trainer to perform. As a result, I’m scoring the Skyward X – 6/10.

Asics Superblast

I’m not going to spend as long on the other two shoes, instead focusing on what I see as the key differences (I’ll hopefully write a review of the Asics Superblast when version 2.0 is released). In comparison to the Skyward X, the Asics Superblast feels at home at all paces. While the Superblast performs excellently at what I would consider fast paces, it’s certainly not as fun as the Skyward X. You don’t get the same bounce from the Superblast, which is understandable as there’s no plate. But the dual foam setup of the Superblast seems to work well irrespective of the distance or pace you throw at it. It’s also significantly easier to pick up the pace in the Superblast. I’m not sure it’s necessarily down to the weight of the Hoka Skyward X but rather its clunkiness, which seems to require more effort to get the shoe up to speed.

The Asics Superblast, on the other hand, is the running shoe you put on your feet and forget about, irrespective of the workout you’re doing. In comparison, I think I’d have to seriously think about whether the Skyward X would be suitable for a particular run. For me, the Superblast is a significantly superior shoe – 9/10.

New Balance SC Trainer V2

When I first started using the SC Trainer, it was predominantly my long run shoe. As a relative newcomer to the sport at the time, the focus was on increasing the distance rather than pace. For this purpose, the shoe is excellent. It’s exceptionally soft and the plate provides subtle amounts of energy return which help keep the legs feeling fresh. I remember doing my first 15 KM long run in the SC Trainer, at the time slightly doubtful about the claims that a shoe could leave you feeling fresh in the days following such distances. Despite it being my first time running said distance, the claims were spot on. I awoke the following day, legs feeling as though they had spent the previous day relaxing.

For anyone looking for a long distance running shoe, the SC Trainer V2 is one of the best on the market. Even if you’re not a fan of plated shoes, I wouldn’t simply pass up the SC Trainer. Yes, it’s plated. But unlike the Skyward X, it’s not immediately obvious.

With the softness of the foam, you’re unlikely to see this shoe propel you to many PBs. That’s not to say you can’t pick up the pace in the SC Trainer, you absolutely can. But there’s noticeably less energy return than with the Skyward X.

Of the three, though, the New Balance SC Trainer V2 is my second favourite. It’s perfect for easy recovery miles, easy miles with strides, and long runs. Consequently, it’s an almost-perfect all-rounder (though not quite as good as the Superblast) – 8/10.

Winner: Asics Superblast

Comfort

Hoka Skyward X

While the shoe has a comfortable step-in feel, it’s the only running shoe I’ve worn to date that’s caused rubbing on my little toe. As someone with narrow feet, I never expected to write this. But the toe box feels almost too narrow. Instead of allowing my toes to splay, the upper felt restrictive and my toes started to cramp during my long run. Additionally, while I didn’t find my heels slipping while running in the Skyward X, it did feel quite finicky trying to achieve a secure heel lock. Hoka’s normal width 8.5 has always been a perfect fit, so I’m surprised to find issues with the Skyward X – 6/10.

Asics Superblast

The Superblast is an exceptionally comfortable running shoe that only improves (softens) with mileage. The upper provides ample support and comfort and I never struggle with heel slippage – 8/10.

New Balance SC Trainer V2

Owing to the softness of the midsole, the SC Trainer V2 is perhaps the most comfortable of the three. The upper isn’t quite as cushioned or supportive as the Superblast, though, so it’s a tie on this one – 8/10.

Winner: Draw between Asics Superblast and New Balance SC Trainer V2

Affordability

Super shoes command super prices. Unfortunately, so do super trainers. Where the two differ though, is their durability. The super trainers listed in this article are capable of lasting upwards of 500 miles. Their price per mile is therefore pretty reasonable, at least when comparing them to some of their super shoe counterparts.

At the time of writing, the New Balance SC Trainer V2 retails for a staggering £210/$260. The Asics Superblast isn’t far behind, at £195/$243. Finally, the Hoka Skyward X comes in the cheapest, at £185/$230.

At RRP, the Hoka Skyward X just edges the competition.

Being the flagship models, it’s often difficult to find deals. This is particularly true for the Asics Superblast which I’ve never seen on sale (though watch this space as the Superblast 2 release is around the corner). As for the other two, I did manage to purchase the New Balance SC Trainer for £147 (a chance encounter browsing the New Balance website one day it seems), and used a 10% discount to score the Skyward X for £166.50.

While undoubtedly expensive, prices seem to be increasing across the board. Something like the Asics Gel-Nimbus 26, a comfortable and cushioned daily trainer, retails for £180 from Asics. Similarly, the New Balance 1080V14 goes for around £160. Considering that the super trainers above could replace two, perhaps even three, shoes in your rotation, they start to look a little better value for money.

Verdict

I’m a big fan of Hoka. I’ve tested a number of their shoes and they’ve never missed a beat. The Hoka Cielo X1 is one of the most fun and forgiving super shoes I’ve tried, while the Hoka Mach 6 is arguably one of the best lightweight daily trainers to be released in 2024. Unfortunately, this Hoka Skyward X review does not meet with the same happy ending. For the first time, a shoe from Hoka simply does not work for me.

For the Skyward X to replace other super trainers in my rotation, it needed to perform well at more than one type of workout (or session). The placement of the carbon plate in tandem with my reasonably lightweight (68KG) build makes the shoe feel extremely rigid and uncomfortable at slower paces. While it is exceptionally fun at faster paces, the weight and clunkiness of the shoe makes it almost impossible to choose the Skyward X based solely on said performance.

As I’ve already mentioned, this could be the perfect shoe for heavier runners who are consistently able to put the requisite power through the shoe to negate the stiffness of the carbon plate. If heavier runners experience the shoe across a range of paces the same way I do during strides, then Hoka are certainly onto a winner with that demographic.

For anyone with a similar build to mine in the market for a do-it-all super trainer, my recommendation would be the Asics Superblast, closely followed by the New Balance SC Trainer V2. For me, the Superblast performs remarkably well irregardless of what you throw at it. The New Balance, by comparison, is an exceptionally capable recovery, easy, and long run shoe.

Of course, this Hoka Skyward X review is just an opinion piece. We all have unique bodies and you may well find, even at a similar weight, that the shoe works for you. While I’m disappointed that the Skyward X wasn’t the super trainer for me, I’m confident that subsequent releases will iron out the issues highlighted in this review.

While I don’t think it needs further clarification, to sign off this review I’ll add one last thing in response to the article’s question. Is this the number one super trainer on the market? For me, that’s a no. The Asics Superblast is still king of the super trainer segment. If I’m honest, there is a shoe from Hoka that I personally think is closer in terms of the expected performance of a super trainer than the Skyward X – and that’s the unassuming Hoka Mach 6. Don’t believe me? Try it out here.

Disclaimer

Thanks for reading our review of the Hoka Skyward X! This article contains affiliate links from which we may earn a small commission. If you’ve enjoyed any of the articles on our website and are in the market for new running shoes, we would really appreciate you considering using these links for your future purchases. All the shoes we’ve reviewed are purchased by us. They are not sent to us, nor are we paid to write the review. If you don’t need any new running gear but would still like to support the blog, please share the website and articles on social media or with your friends and family!

Where Next?

For the budding trail runner, why not check out our trail gear roundup or recent review of the Altra Lone Peak 9+.

If you’re a fan of Nike’s Vaporfly laces, cop a pair here.

Want more super shoe goodness? Read our multi-tester review of the SC Trainer V3.