Saucony Guide 17 Review – Stable, Cushioned Daily Trainer

Fit/ Tech

First up you’ll notice more cushioning. The PWRRUN foam is now 35mm in height in the heel with a reduced drop of 6mm (down from 8mm in the Guide 16) to the 29mm deep forefoot.

A straighter last, particularly on the medial side of the shoe creates the brand’s new CenterPath technology.

This is essentially a new geometry to the overall shape of the midsole with a broader base, higher sidewalls and an asymmetric profile. It removes the need for a medial post and makes the shoe a little lighter and more natural to run in.

The flared geometry of the midsole (again slightly more focussed on the medial side) creates a wider platform and adds stability.

The foot sits deep within the midsole cushioning. Although there’s nothing called out to this effect, the upper surface of the midsole sits up, around the base of the foot. The foot similarly sits within the cushioning, similar to shoes featuring ‘Guide rail’ type support systems.

A soft, PWRRUN+ sock liner provides a welcoming step-in feel and compliments the new stack height for a soft, cushioned feeling, more in line with neutral cushioned shoes rather than support models.

The upper is an engineered mesh type construction, nothing too different from other Saucony models, but it fits well and has good levels of padding around the heel, Achilles and tongue.

Performance

Pulling on the Guide 17 for the first time, the most noticeable feature is in fact the lack of a feature; no medial posting of any kind!

In the previous model, support came from a small plastic ‘clip’ positioned on the medial wall of the midsole cushioning. This provided the support, reducing pronation by creating a firmer section in the midsole to prevent it from deforming as the foot overpronated.

The new geometry of the midsole in the Guide 17 uses a broader base as well as other elements to reduce overpronation.

The lateral side of the cushioning in the heel is flared gently, this ‘catches’ the foot on heel strike and in conjunction with a straighter lasted medial aspect to the midsole, it reduces the rate of overpronation effectively.

The increased stack height of the midsole cushioning is noticeable, as is the slight reduction in the drop from the heel into the forefoot. This said, the shoe feels natural and not unusual. It is only a 2mm reduction in heel drop after all.

The shoe instantly feels stable and I think this comes from the geometry as well as the deep sidewalls of the midsole.

There’s no callout to this feature, but the foot sits a little lower ‘within’ the overall cushioning and this certainly makes my feet feel like they are held securely within the overall stack of cushioning. 

It’s a good feeling, it’s natural and even before my first run, I’m pretty confident that the stability aspect of the shoe will hold up well.

On my first outing, the Guide 17 feels light and stable. It’s an easy run day, just 40 minutes at a steady pace and the shoe seems to instantly disappear on my feet, always a good sign.

Trotting along at a steady pace, the stability is evident as is the cushioning and I’m simply covering the miles without any issues at all. I vary the pace a little on runs like this.

I can start at around 8 minutes per mile and depending on the route I take include stretches at much closer to a 6-minute mile pace.

 In a new shoe, I like to include a few ‘strides’ to get a good feel of it. I find myself able to pick up the pace easily and without effort, the shoe all the time feeling stable and with a good level of cushioning.

A longer steady run followed a couple of days later and the experience of the Guide 17 was similar. It dealt with my weekly long run with ease and I covered 15 miles at an average of 7 minutes 30 seconds per mile without any issues from the shoes.

Once again, they just disappeared around my feet leaving me to do the work. The PWRRUN midsole and PWRRUN+ innersole combination provide a soft, smooth and relatively plush ride with the stability proving effective without really noticing it.

Comparison

The first comparison should be with the previous model, the Guide 16. I’ve covered the differences earlier and while they mainly focus on the difference in support, the Guide 17 has a slightly higher stack, slightly softer feel and slightly lower drop.

All these differences make for an improved ride over what was already a very accomplished support category shoe.

Competitor brand models offering similar support and cushioning to the Guide 17 are the New Balance 860v14, Brooks Adrenaline GTS 23 and HOKA Arahi.

The New Balance provides a very similar level of support and cushioning, although the main point of difference is the higher, 12mm drop of the New Balance. The New Balance also relies on a medial post for its support. Both models offer effective control for overpronators.

The Brooks Adrenaline is one of the most popular shoes in this category and thanks to its GuideRail technology it also does without a firmer medial post. Like the New Balance, the Brooks has a higher, 12mm drop compared to the 6mm of the Saucony. Which you’ll prefer will simply come down to fit and feel.

The HOKA Arahi has a similar heel drop to the Saucony Guide 17 and also removes the traditional medial post in favour of its J-Frame support system. This firmer J-shaped section surrounds the rear of the foot to create a ‘cradle’ in which the heel is held neutral.

The system is effective if perhaps only offering very mild control due to the soft, easily compressed nature of the CM-EVA midsole. It’s this midsole that lacks some of the more responsive feel of the PWRRUN found in the Saucony which will give it the edge here.

My Verdict

The Saucony Guide 17 proves to be a good update over the previous model. It moves things on a touch and takes advantage of new research in stability and control, effectively removing the medial post in favour of its new geometry.

The control works well and the shoe feels stable, relatively plush and nicely balanced. On the move, the shoe gets on with its job and I certainly hardly noticed I was wearing it, such was its comfort and effectiveness in both cushioning and control.

We’ll no doubt see more and more shoes move away from medial posts in favour of improved geometry in the coming months and years and hopefully they’ll all be as effective as this first attempt from Saucony.