Introduction
Zara Athleticz was created around 2021 to explore active wear for men. According to themselves it was created as a start up inside the big corporation using some of its resources with limited resources .
In an article written in Runningsucks101 by RaziQ Rauf the person apparently in charge for this shoe and some of the latest Zara (26 1 1 8) running shoe – Erik Coca Gonzalez-Albo – share some of the secrets behind the first of some to come, carbon plated racing inspired running shoes.
A two year development
According to Mr Coca traces on Instagram after two years the shoe was unveiled in the Zara AthleticZ Speed Run in Madrid #zaraathleticzspeedrun
The shoe has been developed and tested with help from external consultants and professional athletes.
We reviewed their latest running shoe, still on their shops and online in even more colours, and concluded that for the price (39 €) it was quite a good l entry level shoe with more quality than the ones from adidas, nike, asics and others.
Can a fashion retailer like Zara deliver a good running shoe?
Most of the articles you can find on the web or specially in social media were quite against the idea oz Zara building a decent shoe.
Zara clothing kind of sucks. Nothing against their idea for running, but their clothes are kind of a less shitty H & M, so not a label I’d wear on the run or not running.
Many of these people arguments were related to the “Zara Modus Operandi” they detect a trend and produce a “not so bad version” of the products at at affordable price.
Obviously this is Zara’s strategy in a nutshell but when you’re talking about running shoes the background of Zara making cheap copies of popular running shoes silhouettes is nothing to be ashamed.
Specially when you see the models “Luxury Brands” have been producing at several hundred, even thousands that are not even good for walking for a performance standpoint.
Is Zara’s Carbon Plate Long-Distance a good buy at 119 Euros / 179 $ / Whatever Price?
Short answer: No
At this price the shoe has not enough quality to be considered even a chepa option against other carbon plated models of slighter higher price and an outlet reduced price model from any major brand deliver far better value.
When you buy a low cost trainer you are not going to use it for a long time and you can live without any of the performance better models can give you. Besides you can risk to invest your hard earned cash and try to figure out if the shoe is for you.
More elaborated answer: At this price point it lacks quality when comparing to competitors even without try on the shoe
Our Review
Aesthetic Appeal
Visually, the shoe draws inspiration from high-end models, but some design choices feel unpolished, particularly in the lacing and finishing details. The tongue is directly inspired in the Vaporfly from Nike and this is weird as it has been one of the more criticized details of nike’s shoe upper.
Laces are the cheapest looking ones we have ever had in our fingers, much worse than the 39 € running shoe from Zara we reviewed.
Stack Height / Drop Measurements / weight
With a stack height of 38 mm and an 8 mm drop, the shoe is just on par with most carbon plated moder shoes (probably higher drop) The rocker is notorious, bigger than Vaporflies and similar to Adidas adios Pros. This is something that one must consider as a big thump up that saves the shoe from being a totally dead brick.
Weight is 297 grams in size 45 EUR, way to much for a modern running shoe in 2025. And the weight comes from the midsole not the upper or rubber reinforcement. Same size Vaporflies 3 are 238 grams and “heavy” Adios Pro 3 around 250
Upper Design and Durability
The upper is breathable and relatively lightweight, but the stitching and finishing lack the finesse seen in any modern running shoe. Their entry level shoe has a booty stretch upper that fits really well with good protections and comfort. That uppers look much more premium than this one that besides doesn’t fit well (too baggy) for a race alike shoe.
The shoe boasts a mix of synthetic materials and light thermosealed reinforcements. While lightweight, these materials have raised us concerns about durability.
Midsole and Outsole Construction
The midsole has a carbon plate embedded in a dual-density foam (apparently the upper layer is softer). Zara says it’s a TP-A material. It’s unclear whether it’s TPE or EVA, but the foam is very hard, feels hard and, worst of all, is unresponsive.
This is the main problem with this shoe. Both the midsole foam and the carbon plate need to make sense, and it’s not just the use of both that delivers performance. The big brands were shocked when Nike came out with a patented foam and carbon plate (also patented) and their first attempts to produce something “runnable” were total disasters (Adios Pro, Asics Metaracer, etc).
The carbon plate in this Zara pair adds a firmer ride to a very firm foam that gives back almost nothing of the effort you put into it. The Adios Pros are on the firm side, but you feel the rebound and the energy in every step. This isn’t the case with the Adios Pros, only the aggressive rocker makes you feel the need to pick up the pace, but there’s little on this sole to help you move your legs.
A similarly priced Joma R5000 (around 150 Eur) is far more responsive even thought the plate geometry is not optimal for my ride.
Sole
The rubber outsole may be good, it just does not like it. I cannot say anything bad about it, but the outsole is very plain and not particularly attractive.
Zara Long Distance Carbon Shoe On foot
Tested on the treadmill and in a short tarmac run the impressions other runners (Yowana, Fordy Runs) that have tested it are basically the same. The shoe has little to offer and the foam used is subpar when you compare with NON racing plated shoes.
- Asic Magic Speed (169 €)
- Nike Fly 4-5 with React (heavily discounted)
- Any Joma R3000 / R1000 / R5000 – about 120-150 €
Conclusion and Value for money
We firmly believe that a company like Zara and its holding company have the resources, knowledge and industry contacts to create a great modern carbon shoe.
Even on a shoestring budget, Mr Coca’s agenda is likely to be bigger than that of second-tier sports shoe companies, and large Chinese factories will be eager to satisfy his needs for advice, cutting-edge materials or any help he may require.
Apart from Nike and Adidas, who have had to take a different route and develop their own technology, the big effort has been made by the Americans and there is enough second-tier foam, sheet design and construction to make a good carbon sheet that can be produced at an affordable price.
The second and next generation of this limited test (according to Zara’s chief designer) can produce a serious shoe at a good price or not.
The current version is not a performance shoe and it simply does not deliver enough value at this price point, 119 € in Spain. Not to mention $179 in the USA.
Some of us, just runners, will forgive any “mixed inspiration” design like the HOKA-inspired Low Budget or the SALOMON trail shoes they have been selling.
But Mr Coca, please, give us some really good weapons to shut some mouths that question that Zara can make good running shoes. (at a good price)