More Durable? Kobe IV's vs Foamposite Lite

91
10
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Alright, I've been thinking about this for a while and was wanting to get some opinions. From what I've heard, I could be wrong, but it seems that theKobe IV and Foamposite Lite have very similar technology in them. I've read that both have Lunarlite Foam in the forefoot and each have Zoom in the heel.On eastbay it says that the Lunarlite Foam is 5 mm thick and I was wondering if the Kobe IV is more reliant on the use of Lunarfoam and has more of it in itscomposition. I know that the Lunarlite Foam is susceptible to 'bottoming out' and can give way after a dozen uses. So for an extra $35, will theFoamposite Lite be more durable and last me longer on the court or will the Kobe IV perform equally well and be worth the money. I usually like to have Fulllength Zoom in my shoes, but I want to play in a lighter shoe and see how it performs. I just don't want a shoe thats gonna full apart quickly. So whichone is going to last me the longest and be worth the money? Thanks
 
the foamposite lites dont have lunar foam in the forefoot. only zoom in the heel. the 5mm foam in the product description is talking about the foam making theupper is only 5mm thick to reduce weight so they could add additional cushioning.

the kobe 4 is supposed to be a super lightweight shoe that utilizes lunar foam and flywire, nikes two newest gimmicks. lunar foam is awesome at first but ithas major bottoming out issues. the flywire doesn't seem to actually do much on a synthetic leather shoe.

with that said, foam based shoes are widely known as incredibly durable shoes. the foam uppers last pretty much forever. the foam lites also have an xdr soleon them which is a tennis sole that is very very durable and is made for outdoor play. the whole shoe screams durable. i havent bought them yet because i was alittle disappointed that for 155 they couldnt throw a full-length zoom unit or at least a forefoot zoom unit.
 
Back
Top Bottom