I have the Edge, Sky, and Ray shoes. In a blind test I couldn’t tell the difference between the Sky and Edge shoes. I did a 2 mile treadmill test in both shoes and every single statistic was identical to less than 1%. For me those two shoes are the same. I don’t even bother to check which shoes I have on when I run in them now. I have run with a Sky on one foot and Edge on the other foot and it didn’t feel different at all. The Ray is the shoe that is completely different and so much better for me. The Ray is comically unstable but when you get it right on the sweet spot it really rewards you.

I'm team Edge! I find them more comfortable than the Sky, and if the performance is the same, comfort wins every time!

Got both of these and have been using them interchangeably for sessions. Sometimes I find it hard to know which one I have on. Perhaps a slight preference to the Edge. The Sky especially found works better for me when really going for it at 5K or faster effort. The plate right under your foot in the Sky started to feel a bit harsh to me in longer efforts although equally found the Edge quite stiff after a while as well. I don't tend to heel strike so whatever is at the back has little consequence. Can't argue with your excellent Loch Ness marathon in the Sky Tokyo but don't think either would be my shoe of choice for racing. Do you also see that Eilish McColgan seemed to use the Edge Tokyo in the recent Vitality 10K. She is about the most "obvious" stride runner I can think of. So much for the cadence/stride thing. When I looked at my stats I would probably say I am neither definitely one of the other which perhaps explains why little in it for me.

Through different iterations I’ve tried both and have had great results in both!  I don’t think  you can go too far wrong with either, both are top drawer.

I’m really glad a heeded your advice. I liked the Edge Tokyo even more than the Sky Tokyo, despite asics definition predicting the Sky for me. Like you very precisely explained, both my cadence and stride length increases as I pick up the pace. It’s just that my stride length increases proportionally more than my cadence, thus, on paper, I’d be a Sky runner. I naturally land dead center on my foot, which would in theory give a slight edge to the sky. However, when I tried the Sky vs edge on a treadmill, I absolutely loved the Sky, but loved the edge even more. I ran and raced the Sky Paris up to HM distance, so I was not going in completely blind. I noticed that with the Sky, I tended to want to land on the ball of my foot, instead of my natural center mid foot landing. With the Sky Paris this has led to foot fatigue around mile 4, but adjusted my form to my more natural landing zone making the fatigue go away. Thus landing further forward is not a red flag per se, but it was something I was aware of. Basically, I became more aware of my form with the Sky Tokyo and had to visualize my form shifting to its natural landing zone and then settling into it. I finish testing the edge and thought, no way I’m going to like the edge more. When it tested the edge, at the same target MP, the shoe simply disappeared on my feet. I didn’t have to think about it. The edge felt more natural to me and slightly more comfortable.

What I think might be happening is that based on asics definition, I’m a stride runner, but in practical terms I’m still a cadence runner. The only reason my stride increases more is because my cadence is really high no matter what pace I’m in. I’m easily hitting 170-180spm even on easy recovery runs. However, my old man shuffle means that my stride is still very short relative to my height at my MP. For context my MP in training would put me around a 3:25 marathon. Perhaps if I ever build up to a sub 3 marathon in the future, the Sky could transition to be my preferred shoe, but right now, for this particular race I’m training for, the edge pretty clearly suits me better.

I prefer the Edge Paris and I’m a low cadence/stride runner. Maybe we should get the one that helps us with our weak point - for me that’s maintaining high turnover…

I've tried both the Paris and Tokyo versions of the Sky and the Paris version of the Edge. I'm a forefoot striking stride runner and definitely prefer the Sky. The Edge felt better at faster efforts, but only when I was feeling good. Once I started getting tired in that workout, it started to feel like a disadvantage. The Sky felt consistent throughout my workouts although I do remember the forefoot being a bit sloppy in the Paris when running some fast 200s at the end.

I want one of these for next marathon. Ive tried both on but not committed yet. The sky felt much softer at the back, i think it would be brilliant at my faster paces but feel the slightly firmer heel would make the edge a better marathon shoe.

I ran my first half marathon in the Sky Paris and it was a great shoe but felt it didn't line with my foot right because I am a cadence runner (heel striker). Now I have the Edge Tokyo and notice the difference!

I am chasing pb @ Berlin marathon, my current time is 03:34 should I get these or the edge? I average around 160 cadence

Between Edge and SC Elite V5, which is better overall for runners weighing up to 70kg, aiming for a half marathon time of 1:15 and a marathon time of 2:40?

Why do you think the Edge Tokyo is more slappy? Hard heel makes for faster transition? Don't you feel like you get very low drop in the Sky Tokyo as a heel striker?

So would suggest the edge may be better for an Ironman marathon with running on tired legs? With them been the softer of the 2?

I have all the Metaspeed line up to Tokyo. Got them all in the Sky and Edge. For me up to the Tokyo I much prefer the Edge over the sky. Did do one short run out Sky Tokyo and was not overwhelmed. I will try to get the Edge Tokyo. For some reason all the shops have the Sky Tokyo but not the Edge..

Is there a difference between Edge and Sky in the toe box?

Prefer the edge paris because its more stable.