I have used Brooks Burn shoes almost exclusively for the past six years, not only for training but hundreds of races including 32 marathons. Since Brooks discontinued the Burn, I've searched for a replacement. I need a cushioned shoe, average width, little more. So far I've stuck to Brooks shoes, because I like the fit. Today I tried out their newest shoe for neutral biomechanically-efficient runners, the Summon.
I found them for $60 on Amazon.com, though it seems the price has since gone up a lot. Today I tested them for a few laps, on an indoor track to keep them new in case I needed to return them, comparing them with a pair of Brooks Burns and a pair of Brooks Ghosts, all size 11 1/2. I ran laps in each model of shoe, and more laps with one model on one foot and another model on the other. Here are some results:
- Weight: All three pairs are within an ounce of the same weight, 24 to 25 ounces for both shoes.
- Size: The Summon is about the same as the Burn, and larger than the Ghost, which for some reason is undersized.
- Fit: This is why I want to stick with Brooks - I have almost no blisters or other fit problems with the Burns. When I put on the Summons, I could feel the heel sliding up and down a bit. So I threaded the laces into the very last holes, as I do with the Burns, and the heel felt properly snug.
- Shape:
- Toe Box: Not as wide as the Burn, or so it appears, and certainly not as wide as the Ghost. But it didn't bother my foot in this short run.
- Heel: The heel is long! It comes a full inch farther forward, toward the arch, than does the heel of the Burn. Perhaps this replaces the Burn's "lateral arch pod," absent on the Summon and the Ghost.
- Sole: Like the Burn, the sole of the Summon curves gently toward the toe to allow a smooth transition.
- Width: Fine.
- Tread: Very aggressive, as if the shoe was designed for the track, or maybe for trail running! It also has hundreds of small crevices that will collect tiny rocks which I will no doubt track into the house. Or they will drop from one shoe into the other as I run. That's just dumb design. The first Burns were like that too, but the tread design improved as the original Burn went to Burn II and Burn III.
- Color: Black, white, lime. Who cares.
- Cushioning: Well cushioned according to my feet and the finger-poke test. At least as responsive as the Burns too, though to be fair these Burns have 187 miles on them and the Summons have none.
- Ride: Very smooth. Unlike the Ghosts, they make very little slapping noise on the track, and they certainly aren't even broken in yet. The transition from heel-strike to toe-off seems very smooth, as good as the Burn.
- Manufacture: Made in China like everything else.
- The shoe treads with little crevices that pick up small stones don't do any good and can be simpler and less expensive;
- The descriptions of the shoes are so generic (e.g. "built for the neutral, biomechanically efficient runner who wants to go fast") that they provide little guidance. Is that for a mid-foot striker? Heel striker? Marathoner? Occasional runner? High-mileage? What neutral runner doesn't want to go fast?
- The Ghost turns out to be a half-inch shorter than the Burn or the Summon. What's that? Surely they can make shoes the right size. Did they do that so that the shoes would seem just a little lighter when compared size-for-size? Anyway the Summon appears to be sized correctly.
By the way, I wrote to Brooks to get more guidance and was told that the Summon would not be similar to the Burn at all. I was encouraged to wait for the Launch, another new model to be introduced in July. But since the Launch isn't here, I bought the Summons anyway.
So far I've run less than a mile in them. I'll probably post a little more when I have some real miles on them, but that will be a few weeks at least.
If you have a question or an opinion about these shoes, please do leave a comment. Thank you.
