PUMA has launches a new series, the FUTURE Z 1.1 which is a series of football shoes. The series, with the outstanding appearances and the brand’s reputation, has attracted the attention of many football fans. And here let’s take a closer look at the MG and the Pro Cage of this series and figure out what is the difference between the internal structure of these two shoes.
(The PUMA FUTURE Z 1.1 MG)
(The PUMA FUTURE Z 1.1 PRO CAGE)
Looking at the two shoes from the above, you may be bewildered and may not be able to tell one from the other for they are just so similar in the vamp. In fact, on the left is the PUMA FUTURE Z 1.1 MG while the other is the PUMA FUTURE Z 1.1 PRO CAGE.
In terms of the toe parts, the strip of the MG that is used to increase friction is placed on the Grip Control Pro hot-melt film vamp while the same setup of the PRO CAGE protrudes on the hot-melt film vamp.
As for the inside of the vamp, both adopt the EVOKNIT PRO woven material with the toe part reinforced to protect our toes. For the inner side of the vamp of MG, it is added with a layer of foam and then with white reinforcement layer in the toe, which is very comfortable for us. And for that of the PRO CAGE, the inner side is first covered with a layer of gray film and then with a white reinforcement layer and finally with the lining of the same color with the outer side of the vamp, which is why I felt the vamp a bit hard when I first wore them.
In the picture above is the comparison between MG and PC. The upper one is the MG and the other the PC.
When it comes to the heels of the shoes, we can find that there are actually great differences between the two. Although both adopt the adaptive compression strap in the heel, the techs used are quite different. Printed on the heel of the MG(the left one) is the FUZIONFIT+ whereas that printed on the PC is the FUZIONFIT.
There are also differences between MG(above) and PC(below) in the texture of the adaptive compression straps. But from my point of view, the FUZIONFIT+ is much softer and more comfortable and hugs my feet very nice as well.
The inner lining of the MG(the left) in the arch is designed with air holes as so to improved air permeability. However, when it comes to the PG, I felt a bit disappointed for there is no similar design in the inner lining of the arch, resulting in quite an average breathability performance.
Each of the shoes has a perforated heel lining that is similar to suede and can improve comfort and anti-slipping.
For the insoles, MG uses the NANOGRIP TECHNOLOGY on the surface while PC adopts the woven material.
And then looking at the back side of the insoles, MG’s (left) is made of black material, and the yellow perforated foam is relatively dark while the PC’s is comprised of red material and the yellow perforated foam is brighter.
(The model of the insole mold is TS042-1. )
With respect to the soles, MG is designed with a midsole without any foams and with a triangular hollow at the heel and flannel covering other areas. For the PC, the sole is comprised of flannelette-made midsole cloth, foam-made midsole and the TPU in the arch.
The TPU stabilizer of MG is placed in the arch to enhance the shoes’ supporting performance while the triangular hollow design is adopted in the heel to reduce the shoes’ weight.
PC uses the half-foot foam midsole with a TPU stabilizer in the arch to improve the overall stability.
Besides, the front-foot of PC is also adopted with large groove design, which can not only improve the overall flexibility, but also bring good cushioning.
Here are also some data of the two shoes. The front-foot of MG of size 42 is about 11.13mm thick and the heel is 14.86mm thick.
And for PC of the same size, its front-foot is about 12.39mm thick while the heel is about 19.34mm thick.
For the shoes’ weight, a single shoe of MG is 245.4g while a single one of PC is 271.9g.
To summarize, MG can be used in a variety of courts; PC has also been significantly improved in the vamp and can as well offer us a nice experience. But however good they are, it is only you yourself who knows whether they are suitable. So you might as well have a try.