Nike Mercurial vs adidas F50

Let's review the differences between the two new versions of the fastest silos from each brand.

14 October 2024 - Written by Laura Arriero
Historically, this is a duel that we see in practically every match, as many of the best players wear adidas F50 or Nike Mercurial. On this occasion, we will be focusing on several key aspects of each boot to determine which one is better for each type of player. 

Upper 

The upper has more influence over boot design than most people give it credit for, since it directly impacts both comfort and ball contact. This time, we are working with synthetic materials on both silos. 

post-mercurial-vs-f50-mercs-totaljpg2.webp

Nike Mercurial goes for the gripknit, a woven material that provides a supreme fit with a grippy touch in the front and really recreates that sock-like feeling that we enjoy so much - under certain circumstances, of course. 

post-mercurial-vs-f50-zero-redjpg3.webp


On the other hand, the German brand opts for a synthetic upper that feels a bit hard at the beginning but then gets softer and softer as the boot is used, which results in a comfortable boot adapted to the player's foot. 

That's why, during the first few times wearing these boots, we will feel a more comfortable upper and more grip from Mercurial, while we will find a more minimalist and robust upper on the adidas boot. We think Mercurial might have narrowly won this round for having a softer, adaptable upper since minute one.

Fit and comfort 


This is a tricky aspect to judge, mostly because it is often a very personal choice that also depends on each and everyone's feet. In this case, both boots provide a close and snug fit. 

post-mercurial-vs-f50-mercs-punterajpg4.webp


If we focus on the Mercurial boot, we have a slightly tighter fit to the foot as the knit gives us that comfortable but tight fit. This new material in use is a bit softer than previous generations' and allows us to enjoy the Mercurial even if we have a wider foot. 

post-mercurial-vs-f50-adidas-f5ojpg5.webp

They are manufactured a bit wider as a standard practice and the midlayer gives us a great boot-foot combination by presenting a looser fit for the forefoot and a more snug one in general. 

post-mercurial-vs-f50-adidas-lightjpg12.webp


A first glance we might expect the Nike silo to be a bit more manageable, but if you have a wider foot you might be more comfortable wearing the F50 since they have more space in the front due to the shape of the boot. Again, my friends, this is a very personal choice. As a bonus point for adidas, we have to consider that the brand offers other versions of this boot that can adapt to different types of feet. Aside from the standard one we have been revieweing, we can choose between a laceless option with lightstrike technology and another one without; that makes three top-range alternatives. 

Sole

Now we dive straight into what is perhaps the most important feature of a speed football boot: the outsole. Both have a very aggressive traction as they seek to lend us the maximum speed possible out of each of the steps we take. However, both brands interpret this concept differently. 

post-mercurial-vs-f50-adidas-soleplatejpg10.webp

adidas produces an outsole with somewhat short studs arranged in a triad (which are nice to use on different types of pitches), several grip points and very, very good reactivity with stabilising arches

post-mercurial-vs-f50-mercs-airrzzjpg11.webp

On Nike's side we find a plate with Airzoom, a technology that comes directly from other models of the american brand and provides players with that rebound in each step, which also makes for great responsiveness. The studs in the FG version are fairly aggressive, as you can feel them ‘scratching’ with every step. 

To sum up, if we are looking for a very, very aggressive traction, Mercurial is the right choice. Meanwhile, adidas' F50 has a more versatile outsole both regarding width, stud distribution and height. 


And so concludes this comparison of the two fastest boots from Nike and adidas. Perhaps Nike has a bolder concept on speedy boots, with a very tough plate and a tight and glued adjustment. adidas, on the other hand, gives its boot that minimalist touch of old-school models, with a more versatile plate and a soft and elegant touch. Choosing between one of them is not as easy as it seems. We've had some good times with both of them, but which one would you choose?

Related content

Nike Mercurial Dream Speed 009

Nike Mercurial Dream Speed 009

The latest version of the Nike Mercurial Dream Speed features a look full of momentum - and we'll be exploring it in detail. Let's get started. 
27 November 2024
Skechers releases the Ignite pack

Skechers releases the Ignite pack

A new pack from our friends at Skechers bringing us fresh and electric colours for their two silos. Let's take a look!
14 November 2024
New adidas Predator David Beckham

New adidas Predator David Beckham

We have a new special adidas Predator model, fully dedicated to the combination of the original adidas and the legacy of the English player. Let's take a more in-depth look. 
14 November 2024
New Puma Future Special Edition Orlinski

New Puma Future Special Edition Orlinski

A new special boots from the german brand arrives with a boot fully customized by French artist Richard Orlinski. Let’s take a look at it.

11 November 2024

Questions & comments

Register or enter your account and participate actively in our large community of footballers
Be the first to leave a comment
    View all stores
    • Charitable Project Fútbol Everywhere
    • Careers
    • Compliance
    • Member community
    •   @futbolemotionen
    •   @FutbolEmotionEN
    • Fútbol Emotion
    •   futbolemotion
    Best sport e-commerce award More information...