Nike Metcon 7 Vs Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 | Key Differences

The Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 are both designed to excel for serious cross-training. When considering the Metcon 7 versus the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, there are countless construction differences to note between these two shoes.

For example, despite both working for CrossFit, one of these models is a much stronger performer in that setting than the other. Additionally, each model has construction features that will make it better for certain workout settings than the other.

An example of this in practice is how the Nike Metcon 7 is one of the better shoes on the market for rope climbing, while the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 delivers a strong performance for sprints and athletic-focused training but falls short for rope climbs, and the differences go on.

Nike Metcon 7 Vs Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 Performance

To break down and discuss the performance of the Nike Metcon 7 versus the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, I’m going to talk about each model performs in different training settings.

This way you can better assess which of these Nike workout shoes matches your performance wants and needs best.

Nike Metcon 7 Vs Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 for Lifting and CrossFit

For lifting, the Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 are both strong performers. Both models provide plenty of stability so if you plan to use these for training heavy, then you should be set in either model.

The Nike Metcon 7 provides a more “traditional” training shoe feel when lifting and when working up to 505 lbs in deadlifts, I didn’t have any compression issues with this model’s midsole. The Hyperlift insert in the heel also gives this shoe a stable feel for squats and cleans.

You also get a good amount of stability in the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, too, and when working with 500 lbs this model did a good job at locking down the foot. This shoe’s stability and versatility come from the Nike React foam insole which blends these two together pretty well.

That being said, I think both of these models will work well for recreational lifters. The Nike Metcon 7 provides a more traditional training shoe feel while the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 has a bit more mobility and articulation due to the split outsole construction.

For CrossFit, the performance of these models is equal up to a point. In regard to versatility and stability for tackling exercises like heavy cleans, squats, box jumps, and double-unders, both of these shoes perform exceptionally well.

The Nike React foam in each model gives you a nice “bounce” while also promoting overall stability when moving weight. Now, as you get more niche with your CrossFit training one model starts to excel more than the other and that model is the Nike Metcon 7.

The Nike Metcon 7 takes the edge for CrossFit because it’s a superior model for rope climbing and meeting the durability demands of CrossFit-style workouts. The reworked midfoot grip on the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 does a slightly better job for rope climbing which was a pain point for the Nike React Metcon Turbo.

What I noticed about the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 is that if you rope climb with a j-wrap, then the midfoot’s rope wrap will give you more bite and it actually feels better after a session or two. If you s-wrap your rope climbs, then then this model’s rope climbing performance still falls a little short.

Winner: For recreational lifting, both shoes are strong. Go Metcon 7 for a more “traditional” training shoe feel and opt for the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 if you want more mobility through your shoe’s sole.

For CrossFit, go for the Nike Metcon 7. They’ll be a stronger performer for long-term upper durability.

Nike Metcon 7 Vs Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2  for HIIT, Plyometrics, and Agility Workouts

In regard to versatile and more athletic-style training, both shoes perform well and have their own respective lists of pros and cons. I think if you’re someone who likes to blend lifting with a little versatile training on a weekly basis, then both shoes will work well.

For athletic-style training, the Nike Metcon 7 gives you a nice level of forefoot articulation while the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 gives you more full foot articulation. If you want shoes that give you more maneuverability, then the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 is a good option to explore.

The split outsole in the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 gives this shoe a “cleat-like” feel. I’d compare its fit to the Nike Metcon 4, which was a very low-profile and athletic-fitting shoe. This feature makes the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 a great versatile training shoe for others who love this fit and feel style.

For example, if I’m doing agility or playing sports, like pickleball, spike ball, and basically any activity that requires a lot of multi-directional activity, then I’m reaching for the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2.

The Nike React foam in both models works well for responsiveness, but you do get a little more in the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 since this model doesn’t feature the same level of blockiness through the heel as the Metcon 7 does.

My only gripes about both models are that the Nike Metcon 7’s outsole can break down at the forefoot with a lot of outdoor training while the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2’s upper around the toe box can be sub-par for preventing stress rips.

Winner: I think if you’re primarily doing HIIT workouts and more athletic-style training on a regular basis and blending in a little lifting, then the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 will be a strong model to explore and look into.

Nike Metcon 7 Vs Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 for Running, Walking, and Standing

For running, both of these models are sub-par, and I’d pass them on if you’re looking for a training shoe that can accommodate longer runs. If you’re running about a mile or less, then you can get away using both models but their stability makes them pretty uncomfortable for longer runs.

If you want a shoe for sprint work and lifting but don’t plan to run long distances, the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 will be the better model. This model articulates really well and gives you a higher level of ground feedback when sprinting.

For standing and walking, both of these shoes are okay. Both models will work for walking with the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 being slightly better for this ask. Personally, I don’t like either model for all-day wear and find them to get uncomfortable after a few hours.

I think with their somewhat lower upper volumes, stability, and neutral widths, both shoes are not the best for comfort. Granted, some have reported really liking the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 for daily wear, so I think it really depends on your fit preferences here.

Winner: Both are okay for runs less than 1-mile in length. Go for the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 if you want to add in sprint training, and go for the Nike Metcon 7 if your running primarily comes from CrossFit workouts.

Nike Metcon 7 Vs Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 Construction

To compare the Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Metcon Metcon Turbo 2’s construction, I’m going to break this section into different parts that cover particular areas on each shoe.

This will hopefully make this section more digestible and easy to understand when cross-referencing each shoe’s construction and performance differences.

Outsole

The outsole construction of both of these models varies pretty greatly. The Nike Metcon 7 features a full rubber outsole with forefoot grooves, a different midfoot wrap and materials, and a cutout on the heel where you can see the Hyperlift insert.

The Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 features the split outsole that was also introduced and presented in the Nike React Metcon Turbo. There are two areas of rubber that cover the forefoot and heel on the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 with a “rope wrap” material around the midfoot.

On the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, the midfoot outsole material on the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 feels like a blend of rubber and TPU. On the forefoot, there’s a sticky rubber and on the heel, there’s a slightly harder and more dense rubber.

Despite the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 calling this a rope wrap, the midfoot construction, and wraps on the Nike Metcon 7 provide much more bite for rope climbing. Between the two, it’s really no contest for rope climbing performance and how the outsole assists here.

Midsole

The midsole construction is another major difference between the Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2. The Metcon 7 features a more traditional midsole construction built with Nike React foam.

In the forefoot of the Metcon 7, the Nike React foam is the main component that contributes to this model’s forefoot flexibility and responsiveness. At the heel, you have Nike React foam layered with the added Hyerlift insert which gives the heel a much more “dense and stable” feel.

The Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 does not feature a traditional midsole. The cushion, stability, and responsiveness that you get in this model come from the Nike React foam and Zoom Air packet on this shoe’s insole.

If you remove the insole in the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, then you’re left with pretty much no cushion between the foot and the outsole materials which include the rubber covering the forefoot and heel and rope wrap that’s around the midfoot. 

Upper

The upper materials are very different between both models and vary in regard to their durability. In the Nike Metcon 7, you get a chain-link mesh around the forefoot and midfoot with additional synthetic layers covering the toe box and areas of the midfoot.

There’s a medial rubber rope guard that covers the entirety of this model’s midfoot and there’s a rubber outsole wrap that extends fairly far up the lateral midfoot. The heel has a structured feel and features layered materials for additional support.

The Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 has a mesh upper covering the forefoot and midfoot with an additional breathable midfoot cage to provide additional security. My main gripe with this construction is that the mesh can show signs of stress rips which I’ll discuss in the durability section below.

The heel of the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 has a slightly more rigid construction than the React Metcon Turbo and extends further up the ankle which can cause some rub under the malleolus, and like the durability point, I’ll discuss this more in the sizing section.

Laces and Tongue

Both models feature five core eyelets for the laces. The Nike Metcon 7 utilizes Nike Flywire for the three lateral eyelets and the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2’s eyelets are internal on the midfoot cage which gives this shoe a snug and locked-down fit.

The Metcon 7’s tongue features a lace-lock mechanism so you can tuck and lock down your laces to prevent them from coming undone while training. The tongue itself is a slightly thicker mesh.

In the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, you get a thin and perforated mesh tongue that has a v-like shape. With thin tongues like this, be careful when pulling them on and adjust them using two hands if you can to avoid them ripping.

Insole

The insole construction of both shoes is very different and this construction detail is what makes the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 so unique. In the Nike Metcon 7, you get a standard removable foam insole.

In the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, the insole is composed of Nike React foam and it features a Zoom Air packet under the forefoot. The insole is what gives the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 its proprietary fit and feel.

If you plan to use your own insoles, then I’d suggest not going for the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 since the insole in this model is what provides it with its stability and versatility.

Nike Metcon 7 Vs Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 Sizing

In both the Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Zoom Mecon Turbo 2, most lifters and athletes should be safe going true to size. The length in both models fits true and they have a neutral width.

In both models, the upper volume is pretty low. I don’t think either model will be a great fit for those with wide feet than need more room through the forefoot and midfoot. You can size up in both shoes, but then you run the risk of potential heel slip.

If you have a neutral or narrow-width foot, then I think these shoes will both align really well for your anatomical needs. Slightly wider feet can get away with the Nike Metcon 7 sometimes and I’d say pass on the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 if you have wide feet.

• Nike Metcon 7 Sizing Thoughts: True to size.
• Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 Sizing Thoughts: True to size for narrow and neutral width feet. If you have wide feet, go up a half size.

In regard to the break-in process, both models take about 1-2 weeks to fully break in and this can vary depending on your frequency of use.

One difference that I noticed between each model and their break-in process is that Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2’s boot comes up higher than the React Metcon Turbo and I was getting a little rub under my lateral malleolus.

If you’re prone to experiencing similar areas of rub in your training shoes, then you may want to wear long socks when breaking this model in. I also think this will impact athletes who have a pronation bias when training.

Nike Metcon 7 Vs Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 Durability

In the context of durability for the Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, both models have areas where they excel and areas where they fall short.

I think in most situations for recreational athletes and lifters, the durability of each model should be okay for the most part. For example, if you’re more casual with your training and take care of your shoes, then I think you’ll get a lot out of each model’s durability.

As you get more niche with your training, that’s when the durability pros and cons start to present themselves. For CrossFit, the Nike Metcon 7 will be a much better bet due to its upper construction better feeding into this training style and its demands.

Where the Metcon 7 falls short is with outdoor training and for those who plan to do a lot of lateral explosive work. The outsole layer right around the forefoot where the lower groove is can be prone to lipping with excessive friction and use. I noticed this happening around month six of training in the Metcon 7s.

In the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, the durability downfall is with this model’s toe box. The mesh upper and lacking toe guard can leave this shoe prone to stress rips if you’re doing a low of forward explosive work where the toes are hitting the end of the toe box.

Both of the durability issues noted above can be hit or miss for these models. Some athletes experience them while others don’t. In regard to the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, I’m interested to see how they fair once we all have more time testing and training in them.

Price Comparison

In regard to price, you can expect a $20 USD difference between the Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2. For the Nike Metcon 7, you can expect to pay $130 USD and for the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, the price point sits at $150 USD.

If you plan to use your model primarily for lifting and CrossFit, then I think the price point is fair for the Nike Metcon 7. For $150 USD, I do wish the long-term durability was better on the Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2.

Despite the potential durability issues with the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, I could see this price point being worth it for athletes that want a model primarily for athletic-style training that also has a very snug and form-fitting fit to it.

Takeaway Thoughts

The Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 are both strong performers in the gym and for slightly different reasons. I think if you’re looking for a shoe primarily for lifting and CrossFit, then the Metcon 7 is the stronger model.

For athletic-style training, sprints, and HIIT training, the Zoom Metcon Turbo 2 is a good shoe to look into.

There are a couple of drawbacks to each shoe as you get more niche with your training and these drawbacks could help suggest which shoe will be best for your training needs.

If you have additional questions on the Nike Metcon 7 and Nike Zoom Metcon Turbo 2, drop a comment below or reach out to me personally via Instagram (@jake_boly and @that_fit_friend).