The Nike Five Zoom T7/Nike 5 Zoom T-7 trainers comes in two distinct flavours; the CS version (black and green with lugs on the base for Astro/3G turf) and the FS or ‘Futsol’ version (green and red with gum sole for indoor courts).
This review deals with the FS version although they are all but identical to the CS version with the exception of the sole material and colour.
The Nike Five trainer range goes up in increments (T-3, T-5, T-7 etc) with additional features added each time. The T-7 is Nike’s top of the line indoor shoe for 2009. Features listed include Zoom air units, Poron cushioning, toe punt shoe box and offset medial lacing. All these features can also be found in the T-5 trainer, however the T-7 also adds Kangaroo leather for increased comfort.
So how are they? You can tell by looking at my earlier posts ‘Nike/Adidas, make some trainers for the over 30 crowd‘ and ‘The pursuit of the perfect indoor football trainers‘ that I’m a bit of a geek when it comes to finding something comfy to play indoor football in. If you’re light on your feet, have perfectly functioning knees and are not prone to over pronation of the foot, many of my criticisms of this shoe will seem unfounded. With those caveats firmly in place let’s take a look.
First the good. These trainers look the part, bright lime green and soft supple leather. Furthermore, the grey interior around the heel area is leather, not fabric, so is likely to wear well over time. They fit a slim foot well (as per usual Nike fitting) and don’t have any unnecessary bulk – allowing good touch and control of the ball. They are also extremely light, weighing in at around 320g per shoe.
The Nike Five T-7 trainers have been expressly designed to be keep the foot close to the ground, subsequently the cushioning is minimal. The ‘Zoom air unit’ is merely a 3-4mm thick blob of air stuck to the bottom of the insole, not built into the actual trainer. The ‘Poron cushioning’ is similarly integrated: merely stuck to the bottom of the insole. This lack of substantial cushioning is likely to be less of an issue when playing on Astro/3G (which by its nature provides greater underfoot comfort) but if you are used to harder indoor courts (typically constructed by laying a wooden surface over a concrete base) it should be a consideration. And if you’re over thirty and usually suffer sore knees the day after playing – forget it!
The other area that these trainers fall completely shor
t is for players suffering any degree of over pronation of the foot (flat feet). The T-7 offer absolutely no arch support, visibly sinking in that area when worn by users with flatter feet.
The Nike T-7 are a fine and well thought out trainer but for a specific subset of players: young, slim players with a good arch in their foot will love them. However, for players hoping to retain the use of their knees in advancing years or suffering any degree of over pronation of the foot these trainers simply can’t be recommended.
For this latter group of players, I would recommend the Asics indoor court range. Despite being targeted at Squash players, the ‘Asics Gel Sensei’ (2008) and ‘Asics Gel Blast 2‘ (2008/2009) trainers, at the expense of a little ball control, provide a level of comfort and durability for indoor football simply not offered by the mainstream manufacturers.
About The Author
Ben Frain is a technology writer and web developer living in Cheshire, UK. His book, 'Responsive web design with HTML5 & CSS3' is available now. You can follow him on Twitter @benfrain.
19 Responses to “REVIEW: Nike Five Zoom T-7 football trainers”
Leave a Reply
Hey great review! I’m trying to make up my mind between the T7′s and the Nike Total90 Strike II L-TF (http://www.soccer.com/IWCatProductPage.process?Merchant_Id=1&Ne=646&N=4294960675+572+4294959028&Product_Id=491260)
I honestly can’t make up my mind. I’m also in the same situation as you, my feet are prone to injury and my knees suffer every time I play!
Have you ever played with the Total90?
Hi Carlos, I used to have a pair of Total 90 AIR trainers. They weren’t bad but those ones you have linked to don’t have any air cushioning or shox at the heel so given the fact your knees already hurt I think you’re knees are still likely to suffer with them. Truth is, I just don’t think the big manufacturers (Nike, Adidas, Puma etc) consider this when coming up with the designs. Have you thought about trying court shoes (e.g. ones made for Squash)? If you’re playing indoor I’m now convinced these offer the best performance if you get a good pair like the Asics Gel Sensei or Gel Blast 2. They don’t have nice features like the offset lacing etc but it means you can walk sensibly the next day and play more times a week – for me that’s a fair trade!
really like the read, a really good review that actually had the important factors that you need to take into consideration when buying a pair of footy trainers – keep up the good work!
Thanks for the kind words. Glad it was useful.
http://www.asicsamerica.com/products/product.aspx?PRODUCT_ID=240012285&TITLE_CATEGORY_ID=250002693&PARENT_CATEGORY_ID=250001583
Heads up on the best 5-a-side trainers ive ever played in, there made by asics and there for volleyball but they have excellent shock absorption and cushioning for indoor courts!
Kaysir – yes, they’re really similar to the Asics Gel Sensei shoes we get here in the UK (Squash variants) and detailed here. Heaps better than the ‘proper’ football trainers from Nike, Adidas and Puma etc
Nice review..you may want to check out Dalponte trainers..the brazillian national futsal team uses them…
Would not recommend the total90 unless you buy top, top of the line K leather. Total 90 feel like you are playing in workboots. I can honestly say my play dropped trying to use the T90 Strike’s. Was like playing with big plastic wellies (rain boots). Looking at the nike5′s and the T-7′s in Kangaroo leather. right now i switched to some lowend Puma for indoor and what a difference. I have flat feet and the low profile, min. material are ideal for playmaking/passing on turf. Depending on the surface, i find the T90′s have too many small studs and you get tripped up by the “carpet monster”. just my opinion. you’ll see them on Ebay soon, size 10 USA for sale (the T90). : )
How does the t-5′s compare to the t-7′s? Is it worth an upgrade?
Personally I find them both poor. However, if you like the T5 and find it suitable for your needs it’s perhaps worth getting the T7 simply for the nice leather upper. However don’t expect it to be a major upgrade because it isn’t.
Keep up the good review mate I also Play futsal in Indonesia, right now I am getting used to fit my new Nike 5 T3 and T7 (Both FS) from the oldiest Nike 5 AZC II FS.
Important Note: If you are using the oldiest AZC Series shoes take a 0.5 cm longer for the T series when you buy it
Hi Benfrain
Thanks for the review. I was attracted to these because I have slim feet and I play quite a bit of indoor football. I have recently started getting pains in my heels (the back of them), to the point it is difficult the day after. The whole zoom technology had me convinced my heels would be better off with these.
So..1) whats your advice with regards to this? 2) What would the indoor ones be like on astro-turf? 3) the astro-turf version, according to reviews don’t have long enough spikes apparently. Don’t suppose you got to try them out?
Thanks, Kash
Hi Kash,
I suppose it depends on just how much impact you are causing in your heel. For me, zoom technology just didn’t cut it – it made next to no difference. If you’re starting to get pains in the back of your heels it’s likely that the zoom based trainers aren’t going to alleviate the problem.
I’d look to manufacturers that have built their store around cushioning e.g. Asics and the like. If you need boots for astroturf, don’t limit yourself to ones made explicitly for football. For example, there may be a Asics Rugby/Lacrosse astroturf shoe that would be perfectly acceptable as a football shoe. The difference in quality and comfort between a Nike and Asics shoe will astound you if you’ve not had Asics before.
I never tested the astroturf versions, I’ve had a good look at a pair and I think they look very poor to be honest but that’s because I’m at a point where I need the comfort more than looking good and they just don’t offer any real support for your arch, heel or forefoot.
Let me know how you get on, especially if you get a pair you’re really happy with!
[...] writing my review of the Nike T7 zoom, and posting previous articles about indoor football trainers, I’ve had a few emails from [...]
i’ve got exactly the same problems as you (over 30, dodgy joints, over-pronation) and have struggled for ages to find a decent pair of indoor football boots. i checked out the asics you rave about but was a bit concerned about their durability. More specifically, I thought they would be rather poor in protecting the feet (and, in particular, the toes) from stray kicks etc – have you had any problems with this?
cheers
michael
Hi Michael, no problems whatsoever with the Asics regarding durability. They have been, by far, the longest lasting trainers I have used for indoor footy. The toe box is actually studier on these than actual football trainers which some see as a negative (less feel on the ball etc) but in your case, this sounds like a positive.
Hey there, I’m glad to see that someone other than myself
has taken things such as correction for overpronation into
consideration. I was wondering if you had looked into the Nike 5
lunar gato’s at all?? I’ve been looking at them for a while- I’m
couldn’t find a place that had them in stock until today,so I
haven’t been able to even try a pair on yet. Is there any chance
that you’ve tried them out?? Given that they SEEM to use the same
technology as the Nike lunar light/glide/etc. running shoes, I
assumed that they would be just fine. But that is after all just an
assumption. If you’ve had the opportunity to try them out, it would
be great to hear what you think. As far as Asics go aswell, I
haven’t tried them out myself either, but it appears that asics has
developed their own indoor line of indoor shoes. They appear to
lack many of what I consider to be the most crucial aspects of a
good shoe; but it might be something to check out as well. Best,
Javier
Hi Javier, I’ve written a few times about the Asics indoor range. I think they are excellent shoes for indoor football/futsol. Just do a search for ‘asics’ in the search box above and you’ll find plenty more info.
I tried some Nike Gato’s a couple of years ago. I was drawn to the look but they offer no better support/cushioning that the T5/T7 we are discussing. So, again, sadly, whilst I’m a big fan of Nike, I can’t personally recommend the Nike Gato’s.
Thank you for your input. I’ve been doing a bit more reading however- a fan of barefooted football, i started thinking about the possible future of shoes like the vibram five finger shoe in a game like football. Currently I’d imagine that they would be quite terrible in an indoor match as they wouldn’t offer the same protection as a full shoe nor the same flexibility and control; but still, it’s interesting to think about. The other isuue is the force o impact between the shoe and a hard wooden surface such as the indoor court i practice on or even worse in some cases cement. Although I’ve never had a problem (except for broken toes and toenails) playing barefoot on a field, on the court we get back to the issue that this article discusses. Which is the point at which I return to my other reading and investigation. While lookingfor research on the needs of an over-pronator in a game like indoor footy or basketball (where I imiagined the most research would have been done- wrong: the only developments are different types of orhtodics) I stumbled upon this link: http://www.runblogger.com/2010/08/on-overpronation-and-neutral-running.html IT discusses the possible role of shoes themselves in an activity like running. Having been an avid runner I always took the word of other runners, that running shoes with added support and orthodics are made to protect us from over-pronation. However, I failed to understand that a certain level of pronation is natural(although “experts” disagree on the normal level). One hypothesis in this article is that in fact these shoes and the orthodics we are often prescribed to use may be a creation in place to protect us from shoes them-selves, a structure which (looking at their base) looks nothing like the bottom of my foot and in fact changes the way i run and walk. As a final point the guest writer on Mr. Larson’s Blog introduces the concept that maybe some people’s bodies are structured so that they can handle greater levels of pronation and some so that they cannot. Which leads me to think about the fact that my VERY neutral Joma’s didn’t really ever bother me before I took a very long break (when my core, limbs and tendons were very strong). So, thinking of it as a matter of strengthening and kind of just hoping that things go well for me I’ve gone ahead and purchased the lunar gatos- the insole is in fact similar to the lunar lights I once ran in (although a bit more stiff) and I am really focusing on doing strengthening exercises. My hypothesis, that maybe football (being completely different from straight running) doesn’t necessitate all sorts of additional support, maybe I just need to strengthen and use shoes that place my running gait in them somewhere near my natural bare footed running gait. I don’t own a highspeed camera like MR. Torger in the Blog article to view and compare my gait with and w/o shoes; but I brought along a friend with god eyes and took a leap of faith. I’ll let you know how it goes, and if the shoes are a pain I’ll give it a go with the inserts and maybe eventually vibrams lets hope for the best. Also apologies if this comment is convoluted and confusing – I wrote it in one go and in a bit of a rush.