That’s more like it UA
Here is a link to my Clutchfit Drive 2 Mid Review since this is basically the same shoe aside from the upper: Clutchfit Drive 2 Review
I thought the CFD 2 was a very good performer but it didn’t do anything any better than the CFD 1 and it barely had any Clutchfit material (plus it’s generic as sh*t looking)
The Low wasn’t really on my radar because I didn’t like the color blocking but then I saw how much more Clutchfit material they had versus the Mid (that and the $25 off Visa Checkout deal on UA.com). I also liked the Veteran’s Day colorway so what the hell, why not.
I saw Eastbay had the Mudiay black orange for $99 plus available coupons (so $80 )
Pros: Fit, traction, cushioning, containment, easily better then the Curry One Low, nice build quality, no excess glue spots (I’m looking at you Curry Two)
Cons: not as stable underfoot at midfoot and heel vs original CFD low, still like Micro G better, Curry Two traction is better (nitpicking really)
Sizing: true to size or go up half a size for very wide footers
One ounce heavier than last year’s. Heavier than the Curry Two by half an ounce.
Same pattern as the CFD 2 Mid = same performance as the CFD 1 Mid and low. I have had no issues with the traction but the Curry Two does have the CFD beat.
Full length Charged which is the same set up as the CFD 2 Mid which is essentially the same as the Curry Two.
Below: Micro G vs Charged
The insole is Ortholite not Micro G as stated on the website.
Below: left CFD 2 right CFD 1
Below: you can see how thick Ortholite is but it compresses very easily
I wrote in detail how Charged feels vs Micro G in my CFD 2 Mid review but in summary Charged is firmer, denser and less bouncy feeling than Micro G. I still like how Micro G feels compared to Charged but Charged is a pretty good sub. The CFD 1 plays slighter lower than the 2.
Verdict: CFD 1
Just like the CFD 2 and Curry 2, UA tightened up the toe box so there is a little less room up front. It’s about 1/4 size smaller so depending on your preference, you can stay true to size or go up half a size. I stayed true to size with sz 11 and the fit was fantastic. No deadspace side to side or on top. Shoe really just hugged the foot just like the original.
My biggest concern about going from a mid to a low is heel slippage. I have had several shoes that worked great as mids but sucked as lows because the heel slip was bad. Thankfully UA made the ankle collar thicker and more padded as well as making a deeper notch to secure the heel . This is one area the CFD 2 improved upon versus the original low . The original CFD low needed some break in time but these were good from the get go.
As I stated earlier the fit is excellent and conforms to the foot due to the use of Clutchfit. Two thirds of the shoe is composed of Clutchfit this time, not just two little window panes like the mids. No weird flexing at all due to the materials and the proper placement of synthetic reinforcement.
Clutchfit is different this time around versus last year’s and versus every other implementation (prodigy, lightning, highlight etc)because it is slimmer and less rubbery and the Clutchfit interlocking designs are larger.
Hard to tell from the pic but it’s a thin mesh overlay on top of Clutchfit and just this fabric on the inside
Above: you can see how thin the CF (red part). There is synthetic and an extra layer of fabric sandwiching the CF.
The shoe couldn’t be made totally like this so UA used synthetic overlays to give it strength where needed (similar to the Kobe V)
Here you can see how much smaller the interlockings are and how much thicker last year’s upper was
The changes they made allow the shoe to be a little more flexible and a little more breathable without sacrificing strength or support. Well done !
Verdict: CFD 2 thanks to extra padding in the ankle collar and no break in required
Support and Stability
Support and stability are two of the strong points of the CFD 2 Low. A firmer cushioning set up, outrigger and heel counter all help keep the foot stable and secure.
Like the Curry One Low, the CFD 2 feels protective and stable underfoot mostly due to the wide base and firmer cushioning. I do feel that the CFD 1 low sits slightly lower and feels less “tippy” from the midfoot and back versus the 2, but the 2 just feels more protective overall. Both shoes passed my heel test.
Verdict: CFD 2 more supportive CFD 1 more stable
Why can’t all shoe companies do this ??
I’m not sure what to call this so I’ll just say it’s a containment rand? It is at least twice as thick as any portion of synthetic on the shoe. Couple they with the synthetic overlay and my foot was kept in the footbed on the hardest of cuts. Well done UA!
The CFD 1 also had excellent containment but used Clutchfit and a foot stay to keep my foot contained.
Under Armour did an excellent job with the CFD 2 Low. They made it more protective and improved the heel fit right out of the box while keeping the same traction performance. I do wish they kept Micro G but full length Charged is a good alternative and is much better than the Curry One Mid and low set ups. Will this replace my CFD 1 Low ? If this shoe had Micro G or if traction outperformed the CFD 1 low then it definitely would but unfortunately it doesn’t. I do like Charged so it will definitely be in the low top rotation at 2 or 3 (CFD 1 and Kobe IV still ahead slightly). If you missed out on the CFD 1 Low, this is a fantastic substitute and can be had for $80 in various colorways on Eastbay.
Well,that is a nice review/comparison,good job sir!!
So to clarify Clutchfit is the webbing material not the rubbery /vynl material that was on the Clutchfit 1? When I got my clutchfit 2s i was upset that it seemed to be a thin mesh over the top of that framework or lattice work, that I guess is clutchfit and underneath that was a fabric. I preferred the rubber/ vynl material with the clutchfit enclosed within.
Yea it’s the rubbery material . That’s why the cfd 2 is sad bc it barely has any Clutchfit material. Cfd 3 looks to fix that (get mine this week!)
Great, thanks. Looking forward to the D Rose 7 and Clutchfit 3 review.
LikeLiked by 1 person
CFD2 Low vs Curry 2? Which one is better, and by how big of a margin?
Curry 2 still better bc of traction and stability . Easily better in those two categories.everything else is pretty equal.
Planning on buying one,is it durable? Cos I played outdoors on cement court lol
I’d imagine they are durable bc there is a lot of synthetic on the upper. Outsole would be average in terms of longevity
This might be a dumb question, but I’m considering purchasing but I was wondering if there was any ventilation coming from the side panels and toe area, bc although theres clutchfit, it looks breathable. So to reiterate, I’m wondering if there is ventilation from the upper besides the tongue?
No ventilation other than the tongue (I’m not big on ventilation )
Hi schwollo. Nice review as always. Just wanna ask ur opinion. In ur opinion, curry 2 low or cfd2 low?
Curry two low has way too much heel slip for me so as much as I wanted to like them I couldn’t. If you can find a CFd 1 low of get those but the cfd 2 is better overall vs the curry 2.
thanks man. appreciate it!
No problem !
Hi man. In ur opinion, cfd2 low or drose 6 is a better shoe? Both shoes are on specials at a local store and i hv a hard time deciding which one to get. I hv always been a nike guy and i am looking for a overall good basketball shoes for guards
I like the Rose 6 better. Much Better cushioning and traction about the same.
Thanks again my man schwollo!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Alright schwollo, I just commented on the hyperrev 2016 review but I feel like I might give low tops a chance again after having played in my kobe IVs which are way worn out. I know this is a stretch question but any thoughts on comparison with the hyperrev 2016 vs this shoe?
I’ve also never tried UA shoes only Nike, I wear 10.5 Kobe IVs would you suggest the same for this?
Kobe iv is one of my top 10. Traction is slightly better on the hr. Cushioning slightly better bc of forefoot zoom vs lunarfoam. Fit isn’t as good as the Kobe iv though . Its still locked in but less foam in the ankle collar doesn’t allow that same lockdown. For UA, I think you’ll be ok same size.
How about purely between the HR16 and CLD2 low? I’m at a budget and Eastbay has both for at about 60 as a specially marked 20% off. Is there anything much more outstanding about one shoe than the other that should sway my decision?
Fit is better on cfd 2 low but cushioning and traction are better on hr. Might want to check Marshall’s and Ross if you’re in the US. Seen the CFD2 mids for 35 bucks there .