Your browser is not supported or outdated so some features of the site might not be available.
We've just launched Running Shoes! Dive into our R&D article to discover how we measure energy return and cushioning. We're just getting warmed up, so stay tuned as we continue to improve our testing.
- Table of Contents
- Top
- Main Differences
- Design
- Performance
- Comments
Brooks Hyperion 2 vs adidas Adizero Evo SL
Side-by-Side Comparison
Products
Brooks Hyperion 2
adidas Adizero Evo SL
Tested using Methodology v0.8
Updated Apr 01, 2025 09:21 PM
SEE PRICE
Amazon.comTested using Methodology v0.8
Updated Apr 01, 2025 08:10 PM
SEE PRICE
Amazon.com
Heel-To-Toe Drop8.7 mm
PlateNone
Heel-To-Toe Drop6.7 mm
PlatePlastic Shank
Variants
- Hyperion 2 (Men - US 9) (Illusion/Coral/Black)
- Adizero Evo SL (Men - US 9) (Black/White/Black)
Our Verdict
Brooks Hyperion 2
adidas Adizero Evo SL
The adidas Adizero Evo SL is better overall than the Brooks Hyperion 2, offering more versatility for different kinds of runs. It delivers significantly better energy return, making for a more responsive ride when picking up the pace, and its more cushioned midsole makes it a better fit for longer efforts as well.
Check Price
Main Differences for
Threshold
Marathon Racing
5.9
7.3
Forefoot Energy Return
5.8
8.4
Heel Energy Return
4.2
8.3
Plate
None
Plastic Shank
Forefoot Cushioning
4.8
8.0
Weight
8.2
7.5
Full Comparison
Design
Weight
8.2
7.5
Right Shoe Weight Photo
Left Shoe Weight Photo
Weight
200.4 g (7.07 oz)
220.0 g (7.76 oz)
Stack Heights
Stack Height Photo
Heel Stack Height
33.5 mm
36.9 mm
Forefoot Stack Height
24.8 mm
30.2 mm
Heel-To-Toe Drop
8.7 mm
6.7 mm
Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
8.0 mm
6.0 mm
External Shape
3D Model Full Shoe
Outsole Heel Width
78 mm (3.1")
84 mm (3.3")
Outsole Arch Width
70 mm (2.8")
64 mm (2.5")
Outsole Forefoot Width
109 mm (4.3")
114 mm (4.5")
Internal Shape
3D Model Internal
Internal Length
272 mm (10.7")
276 mm (10.8")
Internal Heel Width
61 mm (2.4")
61 mm (2.4")
Internal Forefoot Width
92 mm (3.6")
94 mm (3.7")
Other Features
Other Features Photo
Tongue Gusset Type
Semi-gusseted (medial)
Non-gusseted
Plate
None
Plastic Shank
Performance
Heel Energy Return
4.2
8.3
Heel Compression Video
Heel Energy Return
Heel Energy Return
75.6%
87.3%
Forefoot Energy Return
5.8
8.4
Forefoot Compression Video
Forefoot Energy Return
Forefoot Energy Return
77.6%
87.9%
Heel Cushioning
6.4
7.7
Heel Cushioning Picture
Heel Cushioning
Energy Absorbed At 300N
0.87 J
1.12 J
Energy Absorbed At 600N
3.28 J
3.89 J
Energy Absorbed At 900N
6.19 J
7.03 J
Forefoot Cushioning
4.8
8.0
Forefoot Cushioning Picture
Forefoot Cushioning
Energy Absorbed At 300N
0.79 J
0.98 J
Energy Absorbed At 600N
2.32 J
3.11 J
Energy Absorbed At 900N
4.11 J
5.43 J
Heel Firmness
6.9
5.6
Heel Firmness
Average Firmness 0 To 300N
49.8 N/mm
39.0 N/mm
Average Firmness 300 To 600N
55.8 N/mm
48.3 N/mm
Average Firmness 600 To 900N
77.5 N/mm
71.3 N/mm
Forefoot Firmness
9.2
7.9
Forefoot Firmness
Average Firmness 0 To 300N
54.1 N/mm
44.2 N/mm
Average Firmness 300 To 600N
87.3 N/mm
63.1 N/mm
Average Firmness 600 To 900N
126.8 N/mm
96.3 N/mm
Check Price
You have 10/10 free reviews left
To access
and
Become an Insider
unlimited full product reviews,
product prices
other exclusive site features
Brooks Hyperion 2
adidas Adizero Evo SL
Comments
Brooks Hyperion 2 vs adidas Adizero Evo SL: Main Discussion
What do you think of these products? Let us know below.
Looking for a personalized buying advice from the RTINGS.com experts? Insiders have direct access to buying advice on our insider forum.