My philosophy is that if the shoe is the right match for your support needs, there should be very little (or even no), break-in time. The only thing you should ever have to 'break in' is the insert so that your foot is locked in better. I just got a pair of Huaka and Conquest 2 yesterday. Ran 40 in the Huaka last night and 50 in the Conquest 2 today and had zero issues. Had either of them been faster runs, I would have taken the stock insert from my Conquest (first version) and slapped them in to prevent blistering.

Maybe the Clifton is not the right shoe for you. It's not for many.

I had a lot of shin pain when I first started with hoka's. So much that I put them in a drawer for a year. Tried them again, still had shin pain, but powered through it until I didn't. After that, my old wave alchemy shoes felt like they had no cushin. I then Came to like, not love, the hoka's. I didn't have that experience where I put them on and never had knee pain again, like many claim. I'm a heal striker, and would have thought that a mid foot striker would have liked them better. To me it feels like the mid foot is the thickest part of the shoe, and that it takes extra energy to roll through the mid foot to push off.

Is there a drop difference between the two sets of shoes? Are the Hokas less heel to toe?

I wonder what exactly causes shim pain? I do know it's related to force on the front of the foot, possibly torsion (or twist). I was at a roundtable of docs, they were treating track injuries and shin splints were an issue,ie no remedy.

---

Training Tweets: https://twitter.com/Jagersport_com
FM Sports: http://fluidmotionsports.com

Took me about 100 feet to get used to them. I have run in nothing else for over two years.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

I had the same problem. I borrowed a friend's Clifton and didn't like them

I would compare them to an old skool mountain bike. Cushioned and then bang when you bottomed out.
They were beating me up.

I put it down to my weight and foot strike.
As I lose weight I go more mid foot strike and reckon they might suit me better

To me it just highlighted that unlike Lord of the Rings there is no one shoe to rule them all.

Shame.. I really really wanted to love them, but for now I am happier with my reduced but controlled cushioning of my current shoes

Milkey, you probably should try the Mafate Speed, available for half price

http://www.runningwarehouse.com/...Ujvdn6wR6BoCg9Dw_wcB

They're Hoka's most cushioned shoe. I have a pair waiting to be tried out. My Stinsens just seem to last forever.

---

---------------------------
''Sweeney - you can both crush your AG *and* cruise in dead last!! 😂 '' Murphy's Law

Yeah.. I haven't given up on Hokas yet.. I will probably revisit them in six months and look at some of the other shoes in the range

Since I first put the on in September 2012, I've not run in anything else. My first run was about 30 mins and then the next day I went for a 15 miler with no issues.

I have worn Hoka's straight out of the box with zero adjustment period. They just may not be the right shoe for you IMHO.

---

Patti in NJ

I agree with most other people. The right pair of shoes requires zero adjustment. When I put on my first pair of Brooks Adrenaline, I could instantly tell that they were magical. I'm currently test driving Bondi 3's, and they felt great right out of the box.