Running Shoe
Products
In The Lab
Community
New
Deals
New
Join now
Best
Running Shoes For Men Women Nike Brooks Marathon For Beginners Long Distance ASICS New Balance Stability HOKA adidas Cheap Cushioned Heavy Runners On Most Comfortable Saucony 5K And 10K
Tools
Compare 3D Compare Results Table Tool Review List Review Index Graph Review Pipeline Vote Custom Ratings
Popular
Li-Ning Red Hare 9 Ultra Dynafish Xiaonian ASICS MEGABLAST ASICS HYPER SPEED 6 adidas Adizero Evo SL Li-Ning Feidian 6 Elite Saucony Hurricane 26 ASICS NOVABLAST 6 ASICS SUPERBLAST 3 adidas Adizero Adios Pro 5 HOKA Bondi 9 adidas Adizero Pacer Li-Ning Red Hare 9 Pro 361 Flame 5 adidas Zenboost Saucony Endorphin Azura adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4 Nike Vomero Plus Nike Pegasus Plus 2 ASICS GT-2000 15
308 Running Shoes bought and tested
Supported by you via membership, and when you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission.
  1. Home
  2. Running Shoe
  3. Test Bench 1.0

Test Bench 1.0  

Test Bench 1.0

Changelog

 0
By Redd GlassUpdated Oct 26, 2026 at 11:55 am

Our running shoe Test Bench 1.0 expands our coverage with new tests for traction and outsole durability.

We've added a forefoot grip test to show how securely each shoe holds onto different surfaces. We test the forefoot across dry concrete, wet concrete, wet aluminum, gravel, and mud, applying varying loads to the shoe while pulling each surface underneath it at a constant speed. Each test includes a video and a force-over-time graph, along with sliding force and coefficient-of-friction measurements showing when the shoe begins to slide and how much grip it provides. These results should give you a much better idea of how confidently a shoe will hold the ground in different conditions (or where it might struggle).

We've also introduced new outsole durability testing to show how it withstands repeated wear. We decided to use a slow-moving, sandpaper-covered wheel applied to the outsole under a specified load rather than high-speed rotary tools like a Dremel (primarily used for cutting, grinding, and carving), as these tools generate significant frictional heat that can soften or even melt rubber rather than replicating how an outsole wears during running. When you land, push off, or slip, the outsole wears away through friction against the ground rather than melting. Our slower wheel more closely replicates this interaction, avoiding temperatures that can melt rubber and allowing us to measure abrasion rather than heat damage. We subjectively assign separate scores to the heel and forefoot based on the depth and length of the abrasion marks, as well as whether any exposed foam is affected. We've also added a video of the test and zoomable outsole photos showing wear in both areas. This should give you a clearer idea of which parts of the outsole wear fastest and how well it holds up over time.

What's Changed

Test Group Description
Performance | Dry Concrete Grip
  • New test measuring how securely the forefoot grips dry concrete.
  • Applies a 26 kg load to the shoe while pulling the concrete surface underneath it at a constant speed.
  • Records the force required to make the shoe slide and calculates its coefficient of friction.
  • The score indicates how much grip the shoe provides on dry roads and pavement (a higher score means the shoe has better grip).
Performance | Wet Concrete Grip
  • Uses the same grip test on wet concrete to measure how securely the outsole holds when the ground is wet.
  • Uses the same 26 kg load and testing procedure as the dry concrete test, but with a wet surface.
  • Records sliding force and coefficient of friction.
  • The score indicates how well the shoe grips wet roads and pavement.
Performance | Wet Aluminum Grip
  • Tests the forefoot's grip on wet aluminum, simulating smooth metal surfaces such as drain covers you may encounter on roads and sidewalks.
  • Applies a 17 kg load while pulling the wet aluminum surface underneath the shoe at a constant speed.
  • Records sliding force and coefficient of friction.
  • The score indicates how securely the shoe grips on slippery metal surfaces.
Performance | Gravel Grip
  • Measures how securely the forefoot grips loose gravel.
  • Applies a 17 kg load while pulling the gravel surface underneath the shoe at a constant speed.
  • Records sliding force and coefficient of friction.
  • The score helps indicate how well the shoe handles loose surfaces, such as gravel paths.
Performance | Mud Grip
  • Measures the forefoot's grip on mud.
  • Applies a 17 kg load while pulling the muddy surface underneath the shoe at a constant speed.
  • Records sliding force and coefficient of friction.
  • The score indicates how much traction the shoe provides on muddy surfaces, such as trails.
Performance | Outsole Abrasion Wear
  • New test measuring how well the outsole withstands repeated abrasion.
  • We use a sandpaper-covered wheel to abrade the outsole at the heel and forefoot, then assign subjective scores based on the depth and length of the wear marks and whether any exposed foam is affected.
  • The results help show which parts of the outsole are more susceptible to wear.
Performance | Exposed Foam
  • New measurement of how much foam is exposed on the underside of the shoe.
  • Measures exposed foam separately at the heel and forefoot.
  • The results show how much of the outsole will come into contact with the ground, with more exposed foam generally indicating poorer durability. 

These tests give us a more complete picture of how running shoes perform on different surfaces and how well their outsoles resist wear.

Verdicts and Usages

We've used the results of our new tests to introduce two new performance usages: Traction and Outsole Durability. These combine the results to help you compare how securely shoes grip different surfaces and how well their outsoles resist wear.

The Traction score places the greatest emphasis on dry concrete, while still accounting for how well a shoe grips wet and loose surfaces. This helps you identify shoes that provide dependable grip on regular roads and those that may struggle in less favorable conditions.

The Outsole Durability score places most of its emphasis on abrasion resistance. Exposed foam accounts for the remaining portion, helping identify areas with less protective outsole coverage that will wear down faster.

Performance Usage Description Weighting
Traction Measures how much grip the forefoot provides across different surfaces and conditions. It combines dry-road grip with performance on wet and loose surfaces, such as trails.

Traction score calculated using:

  • Dry Concrete Grip (45%)
  • Wet Concrete Grip (20%)
  • Wet Aluminum Grip (15%)
  • Gravel Grip (10%)
  • Mud Grip (10%)
Outsole Durability Measures how well the outsole resists wear, considering both its resistance to abrasion and the amount of exposed foam underfoot. This helps indicate how well the outsole is likely to hold up over time, particularly in areas that experience repeated contact with the ground.

Outsole Durability score calculated using:

  • Outsole Abrasion Wear (80%)
  • Exposed Foam (20%)

How We Developed Our Traction Test

To conduct our traction tests, we designed and built our own testing machine. This gave us full control over the surfaces being tested, how quickly they move, and how frequently we measure the forces involved, particularly when a shoe first begins to slide.

Running shoe outsole traction test using a wooden sled weighted with a kettlebell, pulled by a hand holding a digital force gauge to measure friction, with running shoes on shelves behind.
Our first iteration of the traction testing machine, which we used to develop and refine our approach to measuring outsole grip.

The machine uses a linear actuator and a load cell to measure grip. We apply a load to the shoe, compressing the outsole tread to better simulate its interaction with the ground during running. The actuator then pulls the test surface beneath the shoe at a constant speed, while the load cell measures the resistance in real time.

We currently record these measurements at 100Hz (meaning 100 readings per second) to track how grip changes as the shoe begins to slide. We also tested higher sampling rates of around 200Hz, but these produced less reliable recordings without improving our results.

Aluminum shoe traction testing rig with stacked weight plates on a vertical guide rod, a linear actuator and load cell, a touchscreen control panel, an emergency stop button, and a tray of gravel on a wooden workbench.
The final iteration of our custom-built traction testing machine, designed to control surface movement and measure grip continuously as the outsole begins to slide.
Shoe traction test rig pressing a weighted foot onto a running shoe outsole on a dry concrete slab, with a tablet displaying 283.0 N of friction force.

To further standardize our testing, we even sieve the rock dust used in our gravel tests, keeping particle sizes consistent across tests.

What We've Learned So Far

Developing the machine has also presented some interesting challenges. We initially expected to see a distinct peak in static friction before the outsole began sliding, but we haven't consistently observed one. We're still investigating whether this is due to the outsole's interaction with the surface or to our measurement frequency needing to be increased.

We're also working to improve consistency, as our measurements currently show a variation of approximately ±15 N.

Some of the results have also surprised us. The PUMA Fast-R NITRO Elite 3, for example, performs better on wet concrete than dry concrete, something we're still trying to understand. The rubber outsole on the adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 has also impressed us with its grip on wet concrete. Despite its smooth design, it grips the wet surface much better than we initially expected.

These findings are a good reminder that outsole appearance alone doesn't necessarily tell you how well a shoe will grip different surfaces, which is why we wanted to introduce standardized traction testing.

How We Developed Our Outsole Durability Test

Our goal with outsole durability testing was to develop a consistent way to compare how different shoes resist abrasion, without trying to replicate the exact wear a shoe would experience after a certain number of miles. We also needed to wear down the outsole without generating enough heat to soften or melt the rubber.

Off-the-shelf workshop tools weren't suitable, as they typically operate at very high speeds or can't accommodate a mounted shoe. Instead, we built our own testing jig using a low-speed, high-torque motor paired with an abrasive wheel, giving us control over the wheel's size and speed.

Abrasion wheel wrapped in sandpaper grinding a cut running shoe outsole held down by a bar clamp, mounted on a weighted aluminum frame for durability testing.
Our first iteration of the outsole durability testing machine, which we used to experiment with different wheel sizes and speeds.

Throughout development, we tested different combinations of wheel sizes and speeds while monitoring temperature and abrasion. We eventually settled on a 120 mm wheel rotating at approximately 54 rpm, giving us a surface speed of around 0.34 m/s.

Outsole durability test rig with a motorized sandpaper abrasion wheel, a 3D-printed shoe sole mold on a sliding rail, and an LED light panel, with running shoes on shelves behind.
The final version of our custom-built outsole durability jig. It's designed to abrade the rubber at a controlled speed without generating excessive heat.

Our final setup allows us to abrade each outsole under the same controlled conditions, without excessive heat affecting how the rubber wears. It gives us a consistent way to compare outsole durability across different running shoes.

Conclusion

Overall, these new tests give you a clearer picture of how securely a shoe grips the ground under different conditions and how well its outsole holds up over time, helping you choose the right shoe for where you run and how much wear you can expect from the outsole.

By measuring grip on five different surfaces and testing abrasion resistance at both the heel and forefoot, we can now provide more detailed comparisons between shoes that may perform similarly in other areas but differ considerably in traction or durability.

This also marks the first time we've tested the outsole's performance, meaning our running shoe testing now covers all three main components of a shoe: the upper, midsole, and outsole.

Let Us Know What You Think

With this update, we've expanded our running shoe testing methodology to include two important performance aspects we hadn't previously measured. We plan to continue refining our tests as we evaluate more shoes, and we'd like to hear whether these new results reflect your experience running in different conditions.

If there are other surfaces you'd like us to test or aspects of outsole durability you'd like to see covered (or even other tests or performance uses), feel free to comment on any page or reach out at feedback@rtings.com. Your feedback helps us improve our testing methodology and identify areas for future development.

20 Running Shoes Updated So Far

We are retesting popular models first. So far, the test results for the following models have been converted to the new testing methodology. However, the text might be inconsistent with the new results.

238 Running Shoes Planned To Be Updated

We are also planning to retest the following products over the course of the next few weeks:

We make money directly from you via Membership (which gives you access to extra features), when you buy RTINGS.com Merch, and when you buy a product after clicking a link to a retailer. Learn more about how we work.
We buy our own products, just like you, mostly from the United States. When a product is discontinued or no longer popular, we sell the review units locally. See what products we currently have for sale.
© 2026 9298-5266 Quebec Inc. All Rights Reserved.