Comments: Nike is and always been inconnsistent in reference to the structure triax. I have the first and second installation of the shoes. They were launched in 1996/97. They replaced the air aneodyne. Why do they monkey with the shoes. Asics is always on the mark with their 2000 series. Nike is a fashion company, they are sellouts to the masses. Bowerman is rolling in his grave. Knight what did you do?
From: Gerard. August 22nd 2014
Comments: i love my structure 17s just bought a second pair, wore the first pair out.
From: Matt, Rochester, NY, USA. May 12th 2014
Comments: Great trainer. Was really surprised with this one, as I only prefer Nike flats for racing. Well cushioned, reasonable weight and supportive for lots of miles.
From: Brian, Fremont, Ca, USA. April 15th 2014
Comments: I found this shoe to be quite nice as it's protective and still allows quick running. The support is good without being overbearing and it still comes in less flashy colours.
From: Anonymous, April 13th 2014
Comments: Structure 16 was the worst shoe I've run in over the last 3 years, 17 looks like the same design. Narrow midfoot, cushioning like running on set custard. Not even a particulary attractive shoe which is unlike Nike.
From: Rob, Sydney, Australia. April 10th 2014
Comments: This is not the Structure 15 as you remember it. This 16th version of the shoe, is a radical change, and lead me to a soleus injury. New Balance makes the old Structure 15. I think it is their 870.
From: KPA, Acton, MA USA. 1/29/14
Comments: The forefoot is narrower and has little flexibility. It may provide a fast toe-off but the feel of the shoe is way too stiff and hard for my liking. Bring back the structure 15.
From: JGG, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Comments: I haven't tried these yet, but I am happy to see the Structures back on RW. I just picked up a pair of Structure 16 Breathes. I like them so far.
From: Vence, Houston, TX, USA