Products
Tested using Methodology v0.11
Updated May 12, 2026 01:32 PM
SEE PRICE
Amazon
Tested using Methodology v0.10
Updated May 19, 2026 06:37 PM
SEE PRICE
Adidas.com
Weight
265.3 g (9.36 oz)
Heel-To-Toe Drop
7.7 mm
Plate
Fiberglass Rods
Weight
220.0 g (7.76 oz)
Heel-To-Toe Drop
6.7 mm
Plate
Plastic Shank
Our Verdict
adidas Adizero Boston 12
adidas Adizero Evo SL
The adidas Adizero Boston 12 and the adidas Adizero Evo SL are two versatile options from the German giant, but despite the Boston 12 being named after a major marathon, you're probably better off racing one in the Evo SL. This is thanks to the Evo SL's superior cushioning, lighter build, and more responsive midsole. The Boston, however, remains the better choice if you highly value stability and prefer its full-length ENERGYRODS.
Variants
- Adizero Boston 12 (Black/White/Carbon - (Men - US 9))
- Adizero Boston 12 (Black/Zero Metallic/Spark - (Men - US 9))
- Adizero Evo SL (Carbon/Lucid Red/Solar Slime - (Men - US 9))
- Adizero Evo SL (Cloud White/Core Black/Cloud White - (Men - US 9))
Main Differences for
Marathon Racing
Marathon Racing
Threshold
Marathon Racing
6.8
7.7
Weight
5.8
7.5
Heel Compression Energy Return
4.2
8.1
Plate
Fiberglass Rods
Plastic Shank
Forefoot Compression Energy Return
7.2
8.4
Forefoot Stack Height
28.9 mm
30.2 mm
Full Comparison
Design
Weight
5.8
7.5
Right Shoe Weight Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Left Shoe Weight Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Weight
265.3 g (9.36 oz)
220.0 g (7.76 oz)
Stack Heights
Stack Height Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Stack Height
36.6 mm
36.9 mm
Forefoot Stack Height
28.9 mm
30.2 mm
Heel-To-Toe Drop
7.7 mm
6.7 mm
Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
7.0 mm
6.0 mm
External Shape
3D Model Full Shoe
Preview 3D
Preview 3D
Outsole Heel Width
83 mm (3.2")
84 mm (3.3")
Outsole Arch Width
68 mm (2.7")
64 mm (2.5")
Outsole Forefoot Width
114 mm (4.5")
114 mm (4.5")
Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
2.26
2.27
Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
3.94
3.77
Internal Shape
3D Model Internal
Preview 3D
Preview 3D
Internal Length
272 mm (10.7")
276 mm (10.8")
Internal Heel Width
61 mm (2.4")
61 mm (2.4")
Internal Forefoot Width
93 mm (3.7")
94 mm (3.7")
Wide Sizing Available
Yes
No
Forefoot Fit: Width
7.1
7.6
Forefoot Width Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation
9.3 mm (0.365")
-2.2 mm (-0.085")
Toe TTS Deviation
-0.4 mm (-0.015")
-6.4 mm (-0.253")
Forefoot Fit: Height
7.2
8.5
Forefoot Height Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Toe TTS Deviation
-3.3 mm (-0.131")
-2.1 mm (-0.081")
Arch Fit: Width
7.6
8.5
Arch Fit Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Arch Width TTS Deviation
-3.9 mm (-0.152")
-2.6 mm (-0.103")
Length Fit
10
10
Toe Clearance Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Rocker Geometry
7.2
Heel Rocker Photo
Heel Spring
22 mm (0.9")
Heel Apex Position
23.3%
Heel Rocker Angle
17.4°
Forefoot Rocker Geometry
6.8
Forefoot Rocker Photo
Toe Spring
47 mm (1.9")
Toe Apex Position
65.0%
Forefoot Rocker Angle
24.1°
Other Features
Other Features Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Tongue Gusset Type
Semi-gusseted
Non-gusseted
Plate
Fiberglass Rods
Plastic Shank
Performance
Heel Compression Energy Return
4.2
8.1
Heel Compression Video
Heel Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Heel Energy Return
70.8%
81.4%
Forefoot Compression Energy Return
7.2
8.4
Forefoot Compression Video
Forefoot Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Forefoot Energy Return
76.8%
83.3%
Heel Cushioning
6.1
8.0
Heel Cushioning Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 550N
2.70 J
3.46 J
Energy Absorbed At 1100N
7.81 J
10.03 J
Energy Absorbed At 1900N
13.87 J
17.07 J
Forefoot Cushioning
6.7
8.1
Forefoot Cushioning Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Forefoot Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 800N
3.95 J
5.16 J
Energy Absorbed At 1300N
7.26 J
8.87 J
Energy Absorbed At 2050N
11.02 J
12.68 J
Heel Firmness
6.4
5.0
Heel Firmness
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Firmness At 550N
64.5 N/mm
47.8 N/mm
Firmness At 1100N
123.6 N/mm
98.2 N/mm
Firmness At 1900N
257.1 N/mm
234.4 N/mm
Forefoot Firmness
8.2
8.0
Forefoot Firmness
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Firmness At 800N
113.4 N/mm
96.4 N/mm
Firmness At 1300N
217.7 N/mm
209.8 N/mm
Firmness At 2050N
427.8 N/mm
459.6 N/mm
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
6.3
7.6
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 10km
6.88 J
8.31 J
Energy Absorbed At 20km
6.71 J
8.17 J
Energy Absorbed At 30km
6.61 J
8.07 J
Energy Absorbed At 40km
6.52 J
7.99 J
Rocker Stiffness
7.5
Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Video
Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Graph
Preview Graph
Force To Flatten The Rocker
101 N
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
7.2
Forefoot Bending Video
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
Preview Graph
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
66.3%
Forefoot Bending Stiffness
8.2
Forefoot Bending Resistance Picture
Forefoot Bending Resistance
Preview Graph
Forefoot Bending Stiffness
16.9 N/mm
Forefoot Bending Force
405 N
To access
Become a member
unlimited full product reviews,
product prices, and
other exclusive site features
adidas Adizero Boston 12
adidas Adizero Evo SL
Comments
adidas Adizero Boston 12 vs adidas Adizero Evo SL: Main Discussion
What do you think of these products? Let us know below.
Looking for a personalized buying advice from the RTINGS.com experts? Members have direct access to buying advice on our member forum.