1080v15

Everyone saying this is an ad...I can personally vouch for this!! I have tried multiple iterations of NB's 1080's - literally just sent some 1080v15's 4E back, they were no wider than a standard Asics Gel Nimbus 24! I have read that the 2E is just more toe box material - to allow for width stretch. 4E is meant to be a wider last, but I dont see/feel it myself! My Altra LP9+ Wide fit my 11cm feet perfectly for width (THIS IS NOT AN AD)😉

Enjoying the NB 1080 v15’s. My first ever decent runners were the 1080 v14’s (I’ve had two pairs) and some reviews said the v15s weren’t much better, so I didn’t bother. There was a 50% off sale over Easter so I treated myself and I would say they feel so much lighter and better for running long distant, at decent speed, in a comfortable trainer. The v14s feel like tanks now so I tend to use them for walking or recovery runs. Helped me get my pace quicker for the upcoming Sydney hoka half marathon this coming Sunday and I’m pumped!

i’ve had my fair share of long shifts, and honestly, the [brooks ghost max 3](https://oklookup.com/review/brooks-ghost-max-3-running-shoes/) has been a game changer for me. the cushioning is like walking on clouds, and they’ve got decent room for my custom insoles. but, like, the outsole does wear a bit quicker than i’d like. the new balance 1080v15 is also solid, but i found it not quite as plush for all-day wear. kinda feels more firm, ya know? just my two cents, but if you need that max cushion and room for your insoles, ghost max is worth a shot.

I used to be a sprinter (60m,100m,200m 12-13 years ago) and now i'm looking to get into long distance running. so I am looking for some advice before I pull the trigger: I did a foot scan at a store in Toronto + in-store fitting and I’m deciding between: * ASICS Gel Nimbus 28 (9.5D vs 9.5 2E) * HOKA Clifton 10 (9.5D) Leaning toward the Nimbus, but unsure on width. **Measurements:** * Scan (with socks): \~US 9–9.1 E * Width: \~105–106 mm (borderline wide) * Arch: neutral * Brannock (no socks): 8.5 Store recommended going up for running: * Suggested size: **9.5** * They said to base it more on the scan (with socks + weight) vs Brannock since you’re not running barefoot — curious if that’s generally accurate? Full scan results here: [https://my.volumental.com/en/customer\_rulebook/4aac49da-0b86-4ae3-8f50-9b59df227e05/?utm\_medium=myvemail](https://my.volumental.com/en/customer_rulebook/4aac49da-0b86-4ae3-8f50-9b59df227e05/?utm_medium=myvemail) It includes: * 3D foot model (top + side views) * Pressure distribution / heat map * Detailed length + width measurements **Main issue:** A lot of shoes gave me noticeable **arch pressure** (even just standing or light jogging in-store), so I ruled those out pretty quickly. The only ones that didn’t give me that issue: * Nimbus 28 * Clifton 10 **Shoes I tried:** * HOKA Clifton 10 → great, very natural, no arch pressure * HOKA Bondi 9 → noticeable arch pressure * ASICS Gel Nimbus 28 → very comfortable, no arch pressure * New Balance 880 → arch pressure * New Balance 1080 v15 → slight arch pressure * New Balance Ellipse v1 → didn’t feel as natural overall * Nike Vomero → comfortable but a bit narrow/snug **Nimbus fit:** * 9.5D → feels spot on, secure, no pressure anywhere * 9.5 2E → also comfortable, but more volume above toes and slightly less locked in **Use case:** * Getting back into running (starting 5–10km, building up to start then eventually work up to half / full marathon but for now 5-10k) * Some walking / casual use * Former sprinter years ago, but now focused on general running/fitness **Questions:** * Would you go: * Nimbus 28 9.5D * Nimbus 28 9.5 2E * Or Clifton 10 9.5D * For someone borderline wide (E), is it better to go wide preemptively, or stick with regular if it already feels good? * And is it valid to prioritize the scan (with socks + standing) over the Brannock measurement? * Also is the size 9.5 the right choice here? I'm used to more form fitting shoes being an ex sprinter with spikes, so let me know based on the scan results / physical metal measurer i mentioned above. Also open to any other recommendations based on this (neutral arch, slightly wide, sensitive to arch pressure). Thanks!

Honestly the Nimbus 28 regular felt good to me, but my main concern is the width. Standard size (D) = 99-103mm (right?) and based on my scan my width is 105-106mm which is at the top of E/bottom of 2E. But i liked the feel of the Regular even though it's smaller but the store said it fit right with enough room around the toe box. Keep in mind my feet measured 9e/9.1e for my left and right and i already sized up to 9.5 so i think that's why the regular fits fine so not sure if i need to go with the wide version. So i'm not sure which to go with and why to choose one over the other?

It’s been a while since I’ve ran in the 1080s and I received the V15 for free. They are really great. Nice everyday shoe that I can pick it up a bit if I want to or just run easy. I have about 60 miles on them so far.

I just got the 1080 v15 and this is easily the best version I’ve owned from the line. I had different versions over the last 8 years It’s a great recovery shoe

For me SB are a long run shoe, and I believe the vomero plus is similar. I think the rebel v5 is a tempo shoe, with the 1080 being a daily shoe. Honestly the amount of shoes out there fry my head, and I would love it to be simplified

I REALLY love the cushioning and bunch of the New Balance 1080v15. You can feel it as soon as you step into the shoes. I got mine last Thursday and have run about 30 miles in them. Haven't gotten any splits since I've been feeling more strain in areas like my quads and hamstrings after endurance training. I got another pair, as well as the Eclipse, because, coincidentally, they were released last night. They also have some reflective tags and color selections. My best advice to you, though, would be to check out your local running stores to see if they carry these brands and/or specific shoes so you can try them in person.