I am relatively new to the running world, and trying to get my feet wet. Here is the situation. I find that when I run with the Hoka shoe, I seem to have more calf, shin discomfort than with the Nike Free. I am wondering if there is a learning curve with the Hoka, are the shoes significantly different?
I am trying to build toward a run/walk marathon in the fall, and most reading I have come across points toward the Nike Free not being used for longer distances.
Also, if it matters, I am older and slowly trying to take up running.
Thanks for the anticipated help.
Disclaimer: I work for Nike
The Nike Free is not generally regarded as a “long distance” shoe because it doesn’t offer the support of your standard trainer (whether that’s a stable, neutral, etc shoe). That lack of support is something that most people can’t get by with while putting in longer miles - myself included.
That said, if your body and running style can handle it, there is no reason not to run in the Free for a marathon walk/jog. My concern would how long you’ve been running in the Frees and how many miles you’ve been putting on them. You’re about to up your training a bit for this race, and I’d caution you to take it easy and make sure it’s the right shoe for you. Just being honest, there is a good chance it’s not.
I can’t speak to the Hokas as I’ve never run in them. My suggestion is to go to a reputable Running Store that will help fit you in the right shoe for you. It may not be Nike or Hoka, but they’ll be able to give you a few options that fit the kind of running you do. I’d start there.
Best of luck!
Drew
I’ve been a runner for over 40 years (I’m 60 now). For the past 15 or so years I was running in the Asics Gt series of shoes with very good success. A few years ago I started have Achilles issues that began to escalate to a point where I could not do long runs without needing to take days off afterwards due to sever Achilles soreness.
After research and much reading I decided to switch to Hokas ( I got the Conquest). For the first week I too had shin and calf issues (more calf than shin). I am now 3 weeks into running with the Hokas and the shin and calf issues are gone. Better than that my Achilles feel better than they have for a few years.
So, I think it’s just a matter of adjusting to the Hokas.
Good lick.
I run in nike frees 3.0, and did my first two half ironmans in them. I weighed 210. It can be done, but you will suffer. I still wear them, but limit them to runs less than 6 miles. Running in New Balance 1400s now for all miles greater than 6.
Even when I used the nike frees in my races, training runs greater than 6 miles were reserved for Newtons. I have replaced them with the NB 1400s above.
Interesting comments Forge as I weigh 200, and my longest run has not exceeded 6 miles. Sounds like I should explore the NB 1400.
They are not a zero offset or minimalist shoe. They are considered by some to be racing flats, but have decent cushioning. Runblogger did a review on them.
ok thanks, but you find them a decent shoe for longer runs? do you have any other ideas for a shoe similar to the Free that may be more appropriate for longer runs?
The issue with the free, was the thinner sole, there is no way around that, especially with people our size. You could probably try a higher number free. But beyond that, the free is an EVA foam surface. Virtually no carbon rubber. So the soles don’t last. I have managed to keep my two pair going strong for more than a year by rotating and putting shoe goo on the sole before it wore.
But to answer your other question, when I was shopping for something after the newtons no longer were comfortable, the kinvara kept coming up, but I couldn’t aesthetically get into them. I did the Pure Flow, and I seemed to like them, but my rhythm was never right. I still use them, but only if I do 6 plus mileage more than once a week. But the 1400s were on sale for 20 bucks at an outlet so I tried them. Amazingly, they offset does not pose an obstacle for landing on your forefoot, which I do.
I think runners are a bit like bike fit. You find the right one(s) for you.
I was continually told by lots of running stores to wear stability shoes. My physio, who I got to know quite well, told me to switch to neutral. I did and all the issues drifted away. I run in Nike 3.0 for mid distance, Brooks Pure Flow for longer runs (more cushion) and Inov-8 233 (or 255 … the 3mm drop versions) Road X for intervals and short races. I think going neutral helped but the reduced drop seemed to make me a little more stable.
I am 180lbs and regularly run 20 - 26km in the Nikes (24km straight out of the box initially) with no issues and they still feel comfy at the end. The Inov-8’s might be pushing it a bit for ma at that distance but I still run 15 - 16km in those. The Pure Flows are pretty much ‘run all day’ shoes. I find really hard intervals work well with the Inov8’s as there is not much cushion so you get a very solid landing and better feedback.
All of those provide a bit less ankle angle as Hoka’s (I think) are zero drop aren’t they?
Regardless, I like the Nikes. If the 3.0 is too firm, and you like the shoe, try the 4.0 or the 5.0.
I love Nike Frees for general walking around but not some much for running. I am someone who regularly runs 20km barefoot on the beach so I do like the minimalist approach, but Nike Frees are not cushioned enough for me for longer distance runs on the road or trail when starting to build up to a decent amount of miles per week. I like Nike lunarglides for virtually all my training runs as they are quite light yet well cushioned and last ages - even if the sole has no tread left they still run well.