dyarab wrote:
Out of curiosity, what do you feel Hoka is doing wrong?
I no longer run in them as their toe box... is well, their toe box. But do I ever miss the cushioning... no other shoe I've ever run in comes close to the feel of Hokas.
Dan is right here, it is remarkable how the 'other' brands reacted, or better said, not reacted on the succescof Hoka. Or they reacted with models that were just normal models with thicker soles and without something like the metarocker hoka is using in its different designs.
Over the last 2 years i've tried the hoka-ish asics 3 m which is not a succes although really wide fit so for some it might be an alternative on hoka's. Same for the hoka-ish pearl izumi's, just make the midsole thicker does not create the same hoka-ish feeling and gait. Zoot tried it as well, no succes. The problem with hoka is first availability, at least here in eu,and the constant changing of fit and firmness in midsole in the next iteration of a model. And they need to be carefull not to make the same mistake as newton and not over-model their collection. There is way too much over lap in a lot of the models.
I'm now testing an 361 shoe that is giving an interesting amount of cushioning, but no hoka. The same of the saucony freedom iso which actually come close to the hoka clifton in feeling of cushioning but still closer to the ground. This freedom iso might be one of the best, unitended, tri shoes on the market. Put in elastics laces and you a sock-like upper, no firm heel cup, soft as a babyskin on the inside and soft but still reactive feeling.
Salming i tried 3 years ago, liked them, although they lost their initial 'springy' cushioning quite fast but they are ' just' another brand like many others. I am curious how they will come along in the next few years, but i will get one of those Enroute models to see how they go.
Owner at TRIPRO, The Netherlands
