On Cloudmonster 2

RunRepeat’s Carlos Sánchez praises the On Cloudmonster 2 as a striking, durable maximalist trainer that’s especially well-suited to wide-footed runners and long distances. He’s enthused about premium materials, a roomier upper than the original, improved stability from a TPU Speedboard, and excellent durability across toebox and outsole tests, calling it a fun, reliable daily shoe despite its high price. Sánchez tempers enthusiasm with clear criticisms: the shoe is heavier than rivals, offers only modest energy return compared with ZoomX- or PEBA-based foams, and its breathability and tongue padding are underwhelming. Measured lab data (stack, SA, energy-return percentages, durometer results) and side-by-side comparisons with ASICS and Nike lend authority, leading to a largely positive but measured verdict: an excellent option for wide-foot marathoners and midfoot strikers, not the top choice for runners prioritizing lightness or springy responsiveness.

Nathaniel Bailey from OutdoorGearLab finds the On Cloudmonster 2 to be a well-made, distinctive max‑cushioned runner that ultimately falls short of its lofty goals. He praises the premium upper, secure lacing, unique CloudTec/Helion midsole construction, and solid performance on easy, long runs, but emphasizes an unexpectedly firm ride—especially at faster paces—excess weight (11.2 oz in a US M 10.5), and limited stability on uneven terrain. Bailey calls the shoe hyper‑niche: comfortable and competent for relaxed mileage but hampered by bulk, a lack of midsole energy for pace changes, and rock-catching outsole grooves. He recommends most runners look elsewhere for better versatility and value, pointing to Asics Superblast 2 or the lighter, more responsive Novablast 5 as preferable alternatives. Overall the tone is measured and slightly disappointed rather than enthusiastic.

RunRepeat’s Carlos Sánchez praises the On Cloudmonster 2 as a striking, durable maximalist trainer that’s especially well-suited to wide-footed runners and long distances. He’s enthused about premium materials, a roomier upper than the original, improved stability from a TPU Speedboard, and excellent durability across toebox and outsole tests, calling it a fun, reliable daily shoe despite its high price. Sánchez tempers enthusiasm with clear criticisms: the shoe is heavier than rivals, offers only modest energy return compared with ZoomX- or PEBA-based foams, and its breathability and tongue padding are underwhelming. Measured lab data (stack, SA, energy-return percentages, durometer results) and side-by-side comparisons with ASICS and Nike lend authority, leading to a largely positive but measured verdict: an excellent option for wide-foot marathoners and midfoot strikers, not the top choice for runners prioritizing lightness or springy responsiveness.

Nathaniel Bailey from OutdoorGearLab finds the On Cloudmonster 2 to be a well-made, distinctive max‑cushioned runner that ultimately falls short of its lofty goals. He praises the premium upper, secure lacing, unique CloudTec/Helion midsole construction, and solid performance on easy, long runs, but emphasizes an unexpectedly firm ride—especially at faster paces—excess weight (11.2 oz in a US M 10.5), and limited stability on uneven terrain. Bailey calls the shoe hyper‑niche: comfortable and competent for relaxed mileage but hampered by bulk, a lack of midsole energy for pace changes, and rock-catching outsole grooves. He recommends most runners look elsewhere for better versatility and value, pointing to Asics Superblast 2 or the lighter, more responsive Novablast 5 as preferable alternatives. Overall the tone is measured and slightly disappointed rather than enthusiastic.

RunRepeat’s Carlos Sánchez praises the On Cloudmonster 2 as a striking, durable maximalist trainer that’s especially well-suited to wide-footed runners and long distances. He’s enthused about premium materials, a roomier upper than the original, improved stability from a TPU Speedboard, and excellent durability across toebox and outsole tests, calling it a fun, reliable daily shoe despite its high price. Sánchez tempers enthusiasm with clear criticisms: the shoe is heavier than rivals, offers only modest energy return compared with ZoomX- or PEBA-based foams, and its breathability and tongue padding are underwhelming. Measured lab data (stack, SA, energy-return percentages, durometer results) and side-by-side comparisons with ASICS and Nike lend authority, leading to a largely positive but measured verdict: an excellent option for wide-foot marathoners and midfoot strikers, not the top choice for runners prioritizing lightness or springy responsiveness.

Nathaniel Bailey from OutdoorGearLab finds the On Cloudmonster 2 to be a well-made, distinctive max‑cushioned runner that ultimately falls short of its lofty goals. He praises the premium upper, secure lacing, unique CloudTec/Helion midsole construction, and solid performance on easy, long runs, but emphasizes an unexpectedly firm ride—especially at faster paces—excess weight (11.2 oz in a US M 10.5), and limited stability on uneven terrain. Bailey calls the shoe hyper‑niche: comfortable and competent for relaxed mileage but hampered by bulk, a lack of midsole energy for pace changes, and rock-catching outsole grooves. He recommends most runners look elsewhere for better versatility and value, pointing to Asics Superblast 2 or the lighter, more responsive Novablast 5 as preferable alternatives. Overall the tone is measured and slightly disappointed rather than enthusiastic.

RunRepeat’s Carlos Sánchez praises the On Cloudmonster 2 as a striking, durable maximalist trainer that’s especially well-suited to wide-footed runners and long distances. He’s enthused about premium materials, a roomier upper than the original, improved stability from a TPU Speedboard, and excellent durability across toebox and outsole tests, calling it a fun, reliable daily shoe despite its high price. Sánchez tempers enthusiasm with clear criticisms: the shoe is heavier than rivals, offers only modest energy return compared with ZoomX- or PEBA-based foams, and its breathability and tongue padding are underwhelming. Measured lab data (stack, SA, energy-return percentages, durometer results) and side-by-side comparisons with ASICS and Nike lend authority, leading to a largely positive but measured verdict: an excellent option for wide-foot marathoners and midfoot strikers, not the top choice for runners prioritizing lightness or springy responsiveness.

Nathaniel Bailey from OutdoorGearLab finds the On Cloudmonster 2 to be a well-made, distinctive max‑cushioned runner that ultimately falls short of its lofty goals. He praises the premium upper, secure lacing, unique CloudTec/Helion midsole construction, and solid performance on easy, long runs, but emphasizes an unexpectedly firm ride—especially at faster paces—excess weight (11.2 oz in a US M 10.5), and limited stability on uneven terrain. Bailey calls the shoe hyper‑niche: comfortable and competent for relaxed mileage but hampered by bulk, a lack of midsole energy for pace changes, and rock-catching outsole grooves. He recommends most runners look elsewhere for better versatility and value, pointing to Asics Superblast 2 or the lighter, more responsive Novablast 5 as preferable alternatives. Overall the tone is measured and slightly disappointed rather than enthusiastic.

RunRepeat’s Carlos Sánchez praises the On Cloudmonster 2 as a striking, durable maximalist trainer that’s especially well-suited to wide-footed runners and long distances. He’s enthused about premium materials, a roomier upper than the original, improved stability from a TPU Speedboard, and excellent durability across toebox and outsole tests, calling it a fun, reliable daily shoe despite its high price. Sánchez tempers enthusiasm with clear criticisms: the shoe is heavier than rivals, offers only modest energy return compared with ZoomX- or PEBA-based foams, and its breathability and tongue padding are underwhelming. Measured lab data (stack, SA, energy-return percentages, durometer results) and side-by-side comparisons with ASICS and Nike lend authority, leading to a largely positive but measured verdict: an excellent option for wide-foot marathoners and midfoot strikers, not the top choice for runners prioritizing lightness or springy responsiveness.

Nathaniel Bailey from OutdoorGearLab finds the On Cloudmonster 2 to be a well-made, distinctive max‑cushioned runner that ultimately falls short of its lofty goals. He praises the premium upper, secure lacing, unique CloudTec/Helion midsole construction, and solid performance on easy, long runs, but emphasizes an unexpectedly firm ride—especially at faster paces—excess weight (11.2 oz in a US M 10.5), and limited stability on uneven terrain. Bailey calls the shoe hyper‑niche: comfortable and competent for relaxed mileage but hampered by bulk, a lack of midsole energy for pace changes, and rock-catching outsole grooves. He recommends most runners look elsewhere for better versatility and value, pointing to Asics Superblast 2 or the lighter, more responsive Novablast 5 as preferable alternatives. Overall the tone is measured and slightly disappointed rather than enthusiastic.