EDITOR REVIEW
PRICE COMPARISON
COMMENTS (4)
 

Scott Race Rocker General Info

The Scott Race Rocker is a light, nimble, and comfortable minimalist shoe that provides a fantastic ride with cushioning and grip right where it’s needed. The shoe sports an attractive and functional design, providing plenty of toe room, an unobtrusive heel, and a breathable upper. Better known perhaps for its footprint in the cycling world, the Race Rocker provides an exceptional experience devoid of the gimmicky design commonly seen within the minimalist market. Though perhaps not the racing flat it claims to be, the Race Rocker provides a comfortable, dependable, and reliable run that allow your feet some freedom along with a touch of support.

Scott Race Rocker Impressions

I was unfamiliar with Scott, so I came into the testing period with no expectations of the shoe. Upon unboxing, I marveled at the attractive color scheme (a rarity in the world of running shoes), the sleek design of the upper, the thin midsole, and the minimalist outsole tread. Though I may not have heard of the Race Rocker before, I was impressed with what I saw.

Thankfully, wearing the shoes provided similar impressions—the Race Rocker provided a light and comfortable run with just enough cushioning. Featuring a slim 5 millimeter heel-to-toe drop, the shoe’s heel was at just the right height without getting in the way of my gait. The toe box was roomy without being too wide, another feature that is not always easy to come by in the minimalist market. Lastly, the upper was breathable and light, helping the shoe weigh a scant 6.5 ounces. All told, the shoes were great to run in by virtue of being conservatively designed—no hyperbolic list of features or gimmicky materials. Simply put, Scott made a great shoe by focusing on the basics—cushioning where it’s needed, reduced materials where it’s feasible, and a well-picked color scheme to seal the deal.

Scott Race Rocker Sole Unit

The Race Rocker’s sole unit features AeroFoam material, which Scott reports is 25% lighter than the traditional EVA foam found in most running shoes. The midsole was supportive without being overly-cushioned: though it felt like it could be overly cushioned for a racing flat, the midsole was still relatively stiff and allowed me to feel the road while running.

The outsole shines on the Race Rocker, providing a slim yet responsive grip on dirt, gravel, and road surfaces. Keeping true to its minimal, racing flat ethos, the outsole has treads at the forefoot and nuanced grooves everywhere else. By not creating an outsole with overly-technical treads, the Race Rocker provides grip where necessary, and little where it isn’t. This element was a welcome sight as few minimalist shoes need the amount of outsole tread they’re usually sporting.

Scott Race Rocker Upper Unit

The Race Rocker’s upper is fairly nondescript in the absolute best ways possible—light, comfortable, and roomy in all the right places. The upper consists of a mesh material that is nearly translucent in the toe box—allowing feet to breathe comfortably no matter the weather or duration of the run. The upper is moderately cushioned for a minimalist shoe, inasmuch as it’s comfortable without being overbearing. It took me no time to break in the shoes, and they were comfortable from the first wear onwards.

Scott Race Rocker Opinion

Breaking into the US market once again, Scott offers a great minimalist shoe in the Race Rocker. A lightweight shoe which still holds onto better components of conventional running shoe design, the Race Rocker is a comfortable and responsive model for short runs, speedwork, or middle-distance racing. It’s important to remember that Scott shoes fit to size, so runners are encouraged to get a half-size smaller than they may usually buy.

 

price comparison

Sorry - Product not found. Please try Holabird Sports to check in their assortment.

Written by

Brian is a writer/editor focusing on running, fitness, and sports medicine. With experience in Sports Medicine, Orthopedics, and Nutrition, Brian's interests include research on running and endurance activity-related injuries, rehabilitative medicine, and the role of footwear in orthopedics. Brian is a longtime contributor to RunningShoesGuru.com, focusing on the minimalist shoe market along with technological advances within shoe design.

 

4 Responses

  • kaminari says:

    nice effort from scott.

  • Runnergirl  says:

    First off, I’m a female runner using these unisex shoes. Sizing was great. I typically wear a 10-10.5 in women’s running shoes. Wear a size 42 in these (9.5 I think) I’ve used these for about 8 months and love them. Put about 120 miles on them. They got me into minimalist running and I haven’t looked back. Previously in Nimbus 13s. Started out 2-3 miles at a time and built up to 8 mile runs. Love them. The rocker sole is really nice to encourage a mid foot strike. the cushioning is great. Great to rotate with my Kinvara 2s as the Scotts provide more cushion and more support. The bottom grips any platform which is nice. Really fast. I went with just Kinvaras for a while all summer when I went more minimal but anytime I just want to go for a run of most distances under 10 miles, easy going, these are amazing. Put in 5 miles this morning and it’s just great. Only down side, there’s a slapping sound to them no matter how soft your strike is- I’m silent in my Kinvaras. But it’s great to pay attention to cadence.

    Bonus- great for travel as they are great looking in jeans and the colors aren’t typical of running shoes so they look just like casual shoes. Buy them now, they are awesome.

    • Brian says:

      Couldn’t agree with you more. I too run mostly in the Kinvara 3, and found the Scott to be a great shoe to throw in my rotation when not testing out pairs for the site. It has just enough cushioning to give my feet a bit of a break, while having similar contours and features of my go-to shoes.

  • Jake says:

    How would you compare these to the Saucony Mirage?

Leave a Reply

Name Required:

Email Required:

Website Optional

My Rating

Comment Required:

EDITOR REVIEW
PRICE COMPARISON
COMMENTS (4)