The one edge that the Project Rock 4 has over the PR3 is its fit. I noticed that running more than 4 miles in these shoes can be a bit uncomfortable, and in this context, you’d likely be better off investing in a more running-focused shoe. Since both models feature similar outsoles, midsoles, and heel-to-toe drops of 8mm, they should work for most casual lifters who like to run before or after their workouts. They can feel a tad clunky for sprints, but that tends to be a standard when using thicker training shoes like the Project Rock shoes. In the context of shorter runs, both of these models will support runs up to about 4 miles and they’re decent for tempo running. Better upper construction for durability and fit for overall performance. The one difference though is that the PR4 fit much better across the board and the PR3 ran small so the toes often felt jammed in the toe box when training with this shoe in this context. I have some lace durability concerns with this model and the TPU wrap, but from a performance point of view, I do enjoy this new addition.īoth models feature a heel counter tab to prevent heel slip which is also a perk for versatile training. In addition, I like the mid-foot TPU wrap for providing the foot with a nice “locked-down” feeling in this model. The mesh in the forefoot breathes better than the PR3 and shows better signs of longevity with prolonged use. Personally, I think the UA Project Rock 4’s upper is far better for more versatile-style training. The one key difference between both of these models is their upper constructions. The HOVR midsole is responsive for plyometrics and fairly forgiving for landing phases. The UA Project Rock 3 and 4’s midsole and outsole being so parallel provide a nice level of consistency with this form of training. Both models will support up to 425 lbs with limited compression.įor HIIT, agility, and plyometrics workouts, both models perform similarly as well. This construction feature provides a nice base to fully grip the floor with the foot with. The TriBase outsole on each model also does a good job at promoting stability when working on machines like leg presses or doing unilateral lower body exercises like lunges. Neither model will be overly great for the die-hard strength athlete, but it’s important to recognize that these models are not built for this demographic and type of athlete. Once you surpass this load, you’ll start to notice a little more compression and that’s due to the HOVR midsole and higher stack heights in each model.įor most recreational lifters who regularly train with dumbbells, machines, and barbells casually, I think the stability in each model will be just fine for their lifting needs. In both of these models, I’ve trained up to 425 lbs with things like trap bar deadlift and barbell deadlifts and their stability was okay across the board. These construction traits provide a nice blend of stability and versatility in lifting settings. They both feature Under Armour’s HOVR midsole technology and have TriBase outsoles. The UA Project Rock 3 and 4 both perform similarly in regard to promoting stability under various loads.
UA Project Rock 3 Vs UA Project Rock 4 Performanceįor my performance-focused friends, I’m going to break down how the UA Project Rock 3 and Project Rock 4 compare in multiple training settings below. This article will help you choose the best model per your performance needs and asks. If you’re interested in new cross-training shoes, make sure you check out my Best Cross-Training Shoe Round-Up. UA Project Rock 3 Vs UA Project Rock 4 Sizing.UA Project Rock 3 Vs UA Project Rock 4 Durability.UA Project Rock 3 Vs UA Project Rock 4 Construction.UA Project Rock 3 Vs UA Project Rock 4 Performance.
0 kommentar(er)
