Nike Flyknit Lunar 2 review


Color: Volt/White-Blue glow-Night factor

Intended use: All runs except trail and in rains/snow.

Surfaces tested on: Road, synthetic track 21° C/70° F

Upper:  Knit upper made of synthetic threads.

Midsole: Lunarlon foam, injection molded EVA (Phylon in Nikespeak). 11 mm heel to toe drop.

Outsole:  Carbon rubber (BRS 1000), injection molded EVA, blown rubber in forefoot (Duralon)

Weight: 272 gms/9.59 Oz for a half pair of US11.

US Retail: $ 150 at

The 2014 Flyknit Lunar 2 gets a brand new outsole, 80% new upper with improvements which enhance the functionality of the shoe. At  the same time, things we liked in 2013 remain intact - like adequate levels of cushioning and its unmistakable neutral running character. And yes, the dreaded tongue slide is gone with Flyknit Lunar 2 featuring a integrated, knitted tongue. Weighs 10 gram heavier than Flyknit One, but also $10 lighter on the pocket.

Saucony Kinvara 5, Brooks Pure Flow 3, Brooks Pure Connect 3, Asics Gel Electro 33


Novelty is a fickle thing. What was exciting yesterday is not quite so today, and enduring product appeal is only ensured by a winning combination of function, form and price. The 2012 Flyknit Racer whipped up all things footwear to a state of frenzied excitement, and close on its heels the Nike Flyknit Lunar 1 was thrown in. It put on a spectacular show by bringing together two of Nike’s newest and brightest – Flyknit and Lunar. It was commercially a (shoe) box office hit, setting great expectations for the follow-on. The shoe had winning elements of technical brilliance, like a conforming fit and carpeted ride but also came with undesirables like tongue slide.

It has been more than a year since the 2013 Flyknit Lunar’s release, and most of the initial glitz and glamor has worn off. What really matters now is the state of evolution – how is the newest version better than the last? Nike’s history of footwear evolution has been anything but linear. At times, the brand blows everyone’s socks off with never before tried innovation which delivers. And there are days when the so called new model is a sad retrograde, devoid of any innovative aggression. We’d like to call out the latest Vomero 9 as one such example.


The 2014 Flyknit Lunar 2 gets a brand new sole unit.

Yet, somewhere between these two extremities is a third approach, where Nike tackles evolution in a conventional, straight forward way. Which is – following the familiar recipe of the last shoe, without changing much of its character which made the earlier version a success. The 2014 Nike Flyknit Lunar 2 is one such instance, where revisions are small, yet noticeable improvements. What’s surprising though, is the magnitude of big changes the shoe went under to deliver these seemingly minor upgrades. In what is a departure from Nike’s evolution rulebook, the 2014 Flyknit Lunar 2 sees an outsole change plus upper tweaks. For those familiar with Nike, it is common knowledge (and observation) that their outsole design changes only once every two years. The high cost of metal molds being the primary reason, so Nike tries to make the most of a new sole design, extending their lifespan for two years for a particular model. What brought about this act of untimely benevolence? Not sure, but could have something to do with at least three of Nike’s 2014 shoes – the Lunareclipse 4, Flyknit Lunar 2 and upcoming Lunarglide 6 featuring  similar design language for the outsole.

So this is a moment to savour, this pleasant deviation of Nike’s evolution cadence. With sweeping changes, the Flyknit Lunar 2 carries over only a few of previous year parts, and while doing so stays true to first generation Lunar One’s functional goals.

Design and construction updates:


In retrospect, the design advancements seem to suggest the brief for the 2014 Nike Flyknit Lunar 2 – improve overall fit, better the ride and get rid of tongue slide. It does so with aplomb, and fixes areas in which the 2013 instance was found wanting, but in the process sheds some of its original sexiness. Styling is subjective, of course, and we seldom comment on it. But last year’s Lunar 1 looked faster, with the swoosh right on centre panels, its sharp end giving the shoe a streamlined aesthetic. In 2014, emphasis is on form resulting from brute function – five inverted funnels rise from base of mid foot to the top, its tubular ridges shrouding Flywire cables. What good do these converging, knitted tubes do? These ensconce the thin Flywire cords, insulating the sides of the foot from unwanted friction caused by the latter. We’ve seen in non-Flyknit models like the Free 5.0 and Lunarglide 5 that Flywire cords can be irritating if only separated by a thin layer, so this structural change is welcome. But the design looks uninspiring and it fails to move us the way the original Flyknit One did.


With tongue knitted to the upper, tongue slide is now so 2013.


One major update on the 2014 Flyknit Lunar 2 is the new tongue. It is knitted into the upper, which results in a sock like feel – and puts an end to the tongue slide which was so irritating in the 2013 Flyknit One. It is also stretchy and perforated, which reminds us of the Nike Free Flyknit upper. Besides fixing the tongue slide, fit level around mid foot is vastly improved; the elastic component spans across the top taut, keeping the foot locked down. Laces change to traditional ones from the ribbon type, giving the tongue top a raised profile. An extra eyelet is added just before the collar area, giving runners an option of adjusting lacing pressure.


Seamless and breathable interior.


Larger pores on top allow better ventilation and movement; dense knitted sides lend structural support.

Ventilation has been cranked up by way of integrated Flyknit panels featuring larger pores on the sides, a much helpful addition to help the shoe see through warmer climes of late spring and summer. The upper sidewalls also firm up, by use of hard triangular inserts inside the funnel shapes – an addition not there in the original Flyknit One. Reminds us of collar stays used in dress shirts – hard but pliable.

The toe box area stays more or less untouched, save for the Flywire cord going right unto the front, in an effort to create a snugger forefoot fit.


The firm collar area is an exact fitment from last year’s Lunar One. The heel counter is hard, with internal stiffener sandwiched between the lining and Flyknit mesh. While padded with foam, the collar walls are high with a noticeable inward lean towards the Achilles – the effects of which we’ll cover in our ride experience breakout later in the review.

Midsole/outsole design:


The 2014 Flyknit Lunar 2’s outsole inspired by pressure map data – according to Nike.

In an unexpected move, the 2014 Flyknit Lunar 2 gets a completely new sole design. Not that anything was wrong with the 2013 outsole, which did decent underfoot duties on Flyknit One, and later the Lunar Flash. It was perhaps the urgency to get all fresh 2014 introductions on to the new ‘pressure mapped’ outsole design – a distinct pattern featuring concentric loops of rubber under the forefoot. Look past that, and the basic set-up has a lot in common with the Flyknit One – the softer Lunarlon foam sitting interlocked with a firmer midsole base.


The midsole sides look all sinewy.

While on topic, the flanks look finely sculpted with angular sinews molded into lower sidewalls. This is a digression from accordion ridges look on the Flyknit one, and the new design lends the Flyknit Lunar 2 midsole a more muscular look, for lack of a better analogy. The contrasting speckles, which we so liked in the 2013 version, returns on the new midsole.


The Ortholite Sockliner is the same as the one before. Memory foam like compression and a friction-free top cloth gets the job done nicely.

The heel area rubber is split into more pieces, increasing the number units from three to four. There are also spread apart further from one another and with realigned positioning. A bigger rubber chunk sits right at the edge of  heel center, and flanked by two smaller pieces. The fourth rubber piece extends alongside outer midsole, stopping just short underneath the arch area.


No Nike+ cavity anymore, but the imprint remains.

Do keep in mind that the Flyknit Lunar 2 drops the ‘+’ suffix, with no cavity to drop in the first generation Nike+Apple transmitter. The reason being, iPods and iPhone of late have been featuring inbuilt pedometers  the last few years so dependence on the transmitter+receiver set-up should have waned. At least that seems to be the logic, but if you haven’t moved up from your 2010 iPod, you’d want to reconsider spending money on the Lunar 2. Or buy an aftermarket sleeve which affixes the transmitter on your laces.

The 2014 Nike Flyknit Lunar 2: The Experience


Despite all the new bits, Nike hasn’t rocked the boat with Flyknit Lunar 2. The upper is more or less made of same materials, so first entry into the shoe feels familiar. But as soon as you start running in them, the differences make their presence felt. The integrated Flyknit tongue doesn’t slide sideways anymore and works together with the upper to result in a snugger fit than the 2013 Flyknit One. Forefoot space feels much tighter than last year, caused by: a) Flywire cords extending right unto the last eyelet and wrapping around the sides, b) A slight change in Flyknit weave which is tightly packed around the forefoot area and c) hard triangular inserts in the medial mid-foot panels.

If you compare brand new Flyknit One to a just-out-of-the-box Flyknit Lunar 2, the forefoot space will feel similar. But the Flyknit One upper loosens up considerably after a few months of usage, so we felt a marked contrast in fit after wearing this year’s Lunar 2. And with the forefoot area structurally beefed up, it seems unlikely that the Flyknit Lunar 2 will loosen up the way its predecessor did.


The Flyknit Lunar 2 (right) has a similar heel design to the older version on left. Pull tab with reflective accents, and a hard molded heel counter.

The collar area hasn’t changed at all, and structural inequality between front and rear of the shoe is glaring. The forefoot and mid-foot is pliable Flyknit, but the rear has multiple layers of fabric and an extremely rigid internal stiffener. The padded collar has a prominent lean inwards, gripping the foot with tenacity. That takes care of foot slip, but the whole area feels very obtrusive. We wish the area was a tad more minimal.

The sole unit has a good level of cushioning, very much so like the Flyknit One. The rear comes across as more cushioned because of revised under-heel placement of rubber pods. Since they are spread apart from each other, they press into the softer midsole foam on impact and delivers a superior sensation of compression. In comparison, rear-foot strike on the Flyknit One felt flat. In the forefoot is where big changes happen. From the oft used rectangular waffle configuration, the area now has an array of concentric rubber loops, with the smallest piece affixed right under the forefoot center.

With that, underfoot cushioning seems to radiate outwards from the centre – Nike says that this design is inspired by insights from foot pressure map data recorded during running. This new pattern will spread across different 2014 models – apart from Flyknit Lunar 2, the LunarEclipse 4 has it, and to be followed by the Lunarglide 6 in June 2014. Logically outsole durability should be higher the 2013 Flyknit One because of the ample use of rubber. If there’s a trade off, it is a slight loss of forefoot flexibility caused by the unbroken loops of rubber. Weight too, with a half pair gaining 10 grams over the 2013 version.

The Flyknit Lunar 2 is decidedly a neutral running shoe, with none of the motion control tricks of the Lunarglide or Eclipse. It is also not to be mis-classified as a minimal shoe. It’s got a 11 mm heel to toe drop, with deep cushioning and bulked up collar area.

Things which could be better:

Dislike is a pretty strong word, and we’d have to hate something really bad to describe it as such. But we won’t use it here. In Flyknit Lunar 2’s case, we think that there are a few places which can be improved, but as such, these aren’t deal breakers. We’d like to line-up these for you.


A) The Flywire cords: The length of loops passing through the Flyknit upper is inconsistent. Two cords on the right shoe were shorter than the rest, pulling the laces lower than necessary. Not only does it shorten the available length of  laces, but also makes the eyelets useless. Correct position should be the end of the lace loops aligning with the eyelets of the upper so that lacing pressure is on both Flywire and the upper. This is not so much a design flaw as it is a manufacturing one. But the fact that our shoe was faulty suggests that other Lunar 2 pairs might be prone to this issue.

B) Stiff collar: For a shoe which features a minimal Flyknit upper, the collar area feels like a retrofit from a trail running shoe. The walls are high, the heel section curves in on the Achilles. Does not cause any rash or discomfort, but just feels like too much build for a lightweight running shoe.

C) Decreased flexibility: The evolved outsole design decreases exposed midsole foam in the forefoot, and the shoe is stiffer than the Flyknit One. And adds some weight too – 10 grams heavier for a half pair of US 11.

D) Goofy tongue: 80% of the tongue is knitted to the upper and does away with tongue slide, and that’s great. But the remaining 20% is free of bondage and has a mind of its own, sometimes sliding to one side and on other occasions, crumpling up under the laces. Much like a droopy ear of a Chihuahua, and never stays centered. We believe the reason to be the fused tongue label on the top which is quite thick – that prevents the flap from having any grip on the foot top.


D) Painted-on swoosh: A purely aesthetic element, but it looked tacky in the 2013 Flyknit Lunar one, and it does here too. Hope Nike finds a better way to get their logo on Flyknit uppers.


The 2014 Nike Flyknit Lunar 2 incorporates a slew of revisions compared to last year’s Flyknit One, while keeping the latter’s fundamentals intact. With the redesigned sole unit, cushioning behavior changes a wee bit. The exasperating tongue slide has disappeared by use of an integrated upper. The forefoot feels narrower as an outcome of modified upper construction, and that might not be a bad thing since the 2013 Flyknit One had a tendency to slack up. The Flyknit One felt very snug just out of the box, but that was not a true reflection of long term fit. After 30 miles or so, it became much looser than what it was originally. In comparison, the Flyknit Lunar 2 fit feels consistent throughout, as more miles are put on it.

Overall, the shoe has improved in function when compared to last year’s avatar. Only if it didn’t look so dull, with its ungainly looking funnels pouring Flywire cords out.

2013 Flyknit One vs. 2014 Flyknit Lunar 2: Visual Summary




(Disclaimer: paid full US retail price for the shoe reviewed)

  • John K

    Great review !! thanks…

    • solereview

      Thank you for the compliment, and you’re very welcome! 🙂

  • Alexandar

    Great review, your site has become one of my favorite sites for reviews and comparisons, keep up the good work.

    As for the lunar flyknit 2, my experience is that is too much narrow! My outermost toe lays outside the sole, while in the glide boost is completely inside, readers should be warned about this. My feet run normal in wide terms thus this is truly a problem if you order online without trying first and therefore your statement:

    “The forefoot feels narrower as an outcome of modified upper construction, and that might not be a bad thing since the 2013 Flyknit One had a tendency to slack up.”

    is a little bit misleading.

    • solereview

      Thank you for the comment, and for highlighting the portion of text which you found misleading. Perhaps we should have been clearer, let us expand on that statement a bit:

      The Flyknit One felt very snug just out of the box, but that was not a true reflection of long term fit. After 30 miles or so, it became much looser than what it was originally. In comparison, the Flyknit Lunar 2 fit feels consistent throughout, as more miles are put on it.

      In that context, its fares better than Flyknit 1.

      Hope this helps, and we have updated the review with this additional information!

  • Daniel

    Good review! Thanks

  • Ethan

    I’ve read from many reviewers, that with the Lunarlon cushioning and with the new pressure map outsole, the ride is natural. But with an 11mm heel-to-toe offset, I find this hard to believe…Did you find it hard to run with a fore/mid foot strike or was the heel in the way?

    • Sorry, for some strange reason, we missed reading this comment. The ride isn’t minimal, this shoe is better suited for heel strikers. And that’s what we called out during our review too. Thank you for the question.

  • Sonar

    Great review..kindly suggest between adidas energy boost 2.0 esm , adidas adistar boost esm and flyknit lunar 2, or mention differences..My preferences were good breathability, comfort and for jogging. Arch type- medium

    • That would narrow it down to the Energy Boost 2 ESM and Flyknit Lunar 2. If we had to choose, it would be the Boost – though you have to watch for the tight midfoot.

      The Adistar Boost is overpriced and doesn’t offer any extra value for the premium.

  • Kestrel

    Just got these shoes and I have to say that the flywire eyelits on your shoe are definitely defective. Mine are perfectly even in length

    • Yes, more an assembly fault than an intended design error.

  • Slingy23

    I’m wondering which one is a better choice flyknit lunar 2 or pegasus 31 for running about 6 miles a week in concrete.

  • Kwang

    Hi there . I have just watched you guys shoe review recently and it makes me feel delighted 😀 and I’ve been saving my money to buy a pair of shoe . And I’m confused by Nike flyknit lunar 2 and Adidas RG3 boost shoe . May I have your opinion on which is better ? Do you have any recommend on the fit and sizing of the FL2 ? I’m highly appreciate your help ^_^
    P.s : I’m from Vietnam

    • The RG3 Boost and Flyknit Lunar 2 are two very different shoes – one for basketball, another for running.

      Assuming that you are looking for a comfortable, casual shoe which also looks good, that decision is purely based on your own taste – not much we can help you with .

      • kwang

        OMG , what you said were definitely true . Thanks for the great review 😀

  • Icy Runner

    Hi there,

    I may be a bit late to the conversation.

    I am looking for a bit of advice to see if this shoe may be for me.

    I am looking for a shoe for running races(primarily half marathons) and doing some speed work.

    I have been running in the Vomero and Pegasus series, as I was heavier runner and have lost a bunch of weight, I was running in those primarily for the cushioning of my large body. I do have high arches and supinate quite badly, but have custom orthotics to take care of that.

    Would these be a shoe I should consider? Or is there something else I should be looking at?


  • Aden Chon


    Would a size 8 in the Pegasus 31 be an 8 for this? Also, is the Lunarlon durable? (I have heard that it compresses and does not spring back.)


    • Yes, same sizing. Lunarlon is pretty durable – we had plenty of miles on the Flyknit Lunar 1 (pictured above), and did not notice compression loss.

  • hayday

    hi , what would you choose between flyknit lunar 2 and lunarglide 6 flash ? and why ? thanks alot .

    • Hi, we would need more specifics to run with – these are two very different shoes. What is the intended use, what weather, etc.

      • hayday

        casual wear and about 20miles a week . in terms of durability and in a comperative environment ( mainly concrete ) .it rain alot here, very humid. And do you have any advice on the sizing ? i usually wear 10.5 but my feet is very wide :((( thanks

        • It might be a good idea to look at the Pegasus 31 flash instead of LG6 flash as there’s more forefoot room and better outsole durability.

          Worth noting that a ‘flash’ upper will make the shoe water resistant in rains, but humid weather will make the already warm upper even more so. You would need to prioritize one of the two.

  • Owewil3225

    I was wondering if you could give me your input. I’m considering the flyknit lunar 2 or speedform apollo. Mostly for casual daily wear (being on my feet for a few hours a day). I’m a bigger guy looking for some heel cushion and I have wide feet. I’ve heard great things about micro G cushion.Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

    • Sorry for the delay in reply. We’d choose the Flyknit Lunar 2, for a couple of reasons:

      a) The forefoot fit is more accommodating due to the use of Flyknit mesh.

      b) Speedform Apollo feels a bit flat in comparison – the Lunar is definitely more cushioned.

      Also consider the Pegasus 30.

  • Hannah Robie

    Hi what would you choose between a Nike flyknit lunar 2 or a Nike zoom structure18? I run a lot and need some new shoes! Also, why would you pick one over the other?

    • Hi Hannah – we would need more details to run with. What exactly are your running shoe needs (cushioning, upper fit, support, durability etc), and which models have worked for you in the past?

  • Jay

    Nike Flyknit Lunar 2 or Zoom Pegasus 31 (or anything else)? I do a lot of speed work and short distance runs, while most of my workout is weightlifting. Thanks.

  • tama

    Hi, great review there.
    I’ve been wearing flyknit lunar 2 for almost 1 year, about 300km of running and i’m looking for a replacement. kindly advice any some similar shoes with flyknit lunar 2?
    thank you 🙂

    • The Flyknit Lunar 3 is going to be launched in the next two weeks so that’s an option. If you can’t wait, then the Lunar Launch 🙂

  • Bradley

    Hi, I’ve been wearing the Lunarglide 4’s for a year now and plan to get a new running shoe. I jog 1.25 miles everyday to keep fit and lose weight. Should I get the Lunarglide 6 or the Flyknit Lunar 2? I’ve read up on both shoes and I’ve been quite interested in the Flyknit technology, which shoe do you think I should get?

    • The Flyknit Lunar 2 is closer to LG4 in cushioning than LG6, and for 1.25 miles these should do you ok.

      Don’t believe you need to change your size on the FL2, although they run a bit roomier than LG4.

      • Bradley

        Thanks alot! 🙂

  • Joe

    I’m on a high school track team and run distance. I’ve been looking into the flyknit lunar 2’s for a while now and wondering whether or not I should get them. The most mileage I get in a week is fifty and that is usually only at the very peak of the season. do you think would be okay to run up to 40 miles a week in them? And how long would they last?


    • Running 40 miles a week in the Flyknit Lunar 2 will be no issue, and they should last around 400 miles minimum – can last longer, but that depends on your running style, surface and weight.

  • hidayah

    Hi! I have been wearing Reebok ZigNano Fly 2 for quite some time. I went to gym almost every day (at least 1 hour per session), my routine involves running, cardio and weight lifting, I weigh 104pounds and I m looking for something that is comfortable. I m thinking of switching to Lunarglide 6 or Flykit Lunar 2. Or something else that suits me the best. Thanks in advance!

    • Look at something like the Nike Lunar Trainer 1 or Nike Free Trainer 5.0. These are not running shoes, but have extra stability which will help during weight training and Cardio exercises.You can most certainly do a bit of running in them too.

  • Tracee Lynn Yeager-Boyd

    I am looking for a shoe that involves the following: soft ride, roomy toebox, responsiveness, and lightweight, higher drops would be good, do you have any advice, thank you very much for your help. I have been pulling out my hair lately. I have run in the nike dual fusion st3 for a long time, (know it was not a serious running shoe-but it worked for me–somehow).

    • Isn’t the perfect mix of the things you want, but the New Balance 1080 V5 and Saucony Triumph ISO are worth checking out. The Nike Pegasus 30 was a good match, but that shoe’s a little to hard to come by these days.

      Will reserve our judgement on the Flyknit Lunar 3 (this year’s edition) till our review. That could be another potential option.

      • Tracee Lynn Yeager-Boyd

        Yes, my husband has the Pegasus 30, it seems to be a bit different than the 31. In the meantime, I had ordered a new balance 890v5. If that is not cush enough I will give the 1080 V5 a try. Ive already tried the triumph but I prefer the volmero 10 over it. The flyknit id have to look that one over, had a major ankle injury so im looking for traditional level of thickness in the structure of the upper for protection.

        • Let us know what you think of the 1080 V5 if you happen to order them after the 890 experience. By the way, we will be reviewing the 890 V5 soon as well.

      • Tracee Lynn Yeager-Boyd

        thank you very much.

  • Ziqah Junaidi

    Hi.I’d like to read your review on Nike flyknit lunar 3.Unfortunately,it’s not out yet.Currently i’m in dilemma between Nike Flyknit Lunar 3 and Asics Gel Kayano 21. I tend to have shin splints and knee pain so I would like to hear your suggestions. I need good shoes for my routine jog that won’t hurt my knees and feet.

    • Our review of the Flyknit Lunar 3 is in process, should be completed with a couple of weeks. Then would be able to answer your question in context to Kayano 21.

  • Champ

    Hi Solereview
    I just bought flyknit lunar 2. At first it had a bouncy feeling but after wearing it for one day the feeling dissappear. Is that normal?

    • It is normal to get accustomed to the shoe over. Most shoes have a strong first impression, and that gradually tapers off as you put in new miles. We think that is more psychological than the shoe itself. We’d say it is nothing to worry about 🙂

  • LG

    Hi Solerview,

    I would like to ask:
    Flyknit Airmax, Flyknit Lunar 1, Flyknit Lunar 2, Flyknit Lunar 3

    I am kind of looking for shoe for tennis, if i pick Airmax or Lunar 1 series, will it be ok?

    • Alex

      I’m sorry to interfere but I think that all 4 shoes are not for tennis. Lunar 1,2,3 are running shoes [all 3 models are different] and you could wear them in everyday activity, flyknit Air Max is not even for a training imo, they say that this shoes are for running but no one run or training in them because they are bad for this, flyknit Air Max are casual shoes for everyday walk. I hope that I help you somehow 🙂

    • Alex is correct in his comment below – none of these shoes are meant for tennis. They simply do not have the support feature for side to side movement.

      Unless you meant ‘tennis shoes’, which is US slang for casual shoes (and not literally Tennis), then we’d pick the Flyknit Lunar 3 out of the lot.

  • David

    Hi SR, I hope you can help.
    I’ve been running in Lunaracer 3’s for years and love them but it’s starting to get difficult to get them for a good price (in the UK) now and these seem a good alternative. How would you compare the two – are one or the other more ‘racey’? I have minor sesamoid issues however and the LR3 is great as it has a wide sole in the forefoot – any idea how these compare? This has been my issue when trying to run in Adios Boosts and Nike zoom streaks as alternatives. Many thanks! I run HM in approx 1.20 for reference.

    • Hello David,

      Before getting into a comparison with the Flyknit Lunar 2, we’d want to ask you whether you have tried the Nike Lunar Tempo, and if you have, what do you think of them? If you haven’t, that is the first shoe to check if you liked the snappy feel of the Lunaracer 3.

      • David

        Never tried the Lunar Tempobut – will have a look, thanks for the tip off!

  • zalagol

    Hi solereview!!
    I was wondering, between the flyknit lunar 2 and the

    Lunaracer +3 wich would you recommend for high intense workout in gym and road.
    Hope you can help!!(sorry for my english)

    • The Lunaracer 3 makes more sense. The firmer and flatter base makes it more suitable than the Flyknit Lunar 2 for gym workouts.

  • Ash

    Just bought the nike FL2 (womens),im usually a 5.5/6 UK.I found them just a little snug in the UK5.5 but store sales assistant said the knit stretches after some wear.From your knowledge is this true or should i return for the bigger size?i have found in some shoes that my toe eventually almost breaks thru the top!In these tho it is the widest part of my foot that is being compromised a little & i use them for some running,mainly gym cardio & weights work.Thanks!

    • Yes, the Flyknit Lunar 2 upper opens out a bit, around 10% more, if we had to put a number to it.