Which Hoka shoes would you recommend coming off a stability shoe (Brooks Adrenaline).
I am easing back from a hamstring injury…while reviews seem to indicate these shoes soften the road, would they be easier on a hamstring…
They’re all very stable. I’d say on par with any straight lasted shoe from NB or Brooks. You cannot flex them at all in the mid-foot and even thru the forefoot they’re quite stiff. All Hoka’s have a wide stance that adds stability; furthermore, its almost impossible to pronate excessively in them. I’m on my third pair. I fractured my 5th metatarsal in June and need a very soft and stable shoe and these are prefect.
Pattie, how many pair of Hoka’s have you bought since June? And how many miles per pair?
Not Pattie, but I am on my 3rd pair. I got just over 1000 miles between the first 2 pairs (combined distance). The first pair went 600 the second only about 475. I did insert a shim in the 2nd pair to help with the way I was wearing down the left rear outsole. Shim was plastic and ran length of shoe. The left midfoot wore much quicker on the second pair. The right side did not wear as hard. Love the shoes. For reference I weigh 215 at 6’3.
The most stable one they make is the Mafate2, its a trail running shoe, billed as their “technical” shoe. It has a wider tread, super stable. I have the stinson EVO and the Mafate. Definitely prefer the Mafate when running technical single track, but the EVO is great for packed trails and fire roads.
I tried the Mafate and it was not stable enough. I’d say it is less stable than a Asics Nimbus.
The lack of midsole shank in the Hokas gives me the sensation of my foot working harder.
Pattie, how many pair of Hoka’s have you bought since June? And how many miles per pair?
I’ve purchased two pair since June. The Evo’s I got just before fracturing my foot (on June 8) and have only started running again in mid-August. I have about 200 miles on them and I think I’ll get another 200 miles. I also just received a pair the Bondi B Speeds. Zero miles on these. I plan to wear them at NYC in November. This is my second pair of Bondi’s. The first pair wore out very quickly because the outsole on the Bondi’s lack rubber in the mid-foot. Hoka’s rocker profile promotes mid-foot strike - right where the outsole is lacking rubber (just bare eva foam) so they (the Bondi’s) wore out very fast (around 200 miles). The only reason why I purchased a second pair is because (1) right now my healing foot only likes Hoka’s and (2) the Bondi’s are the lightest shoe Hoka makes - a full oz lighter than the Evo or Evo Tarmac.
Dave in VA
Dave,
I’ve been running in the 2011 Stinson B for the past 3 months and just got the 2012 Bondi Bs. I’ve noticed that the sole of the Bondi is narrower than the old Stinsons. I pulled out the insoles and compared them and they seem to be identical in size, so the inside of the shoes appear to have the same volume, but the weight reduction on the Bondis is likely due to the smaller “footprint” they have meaning less foam in the sole.
The few things I’ve read about these shoes is that their supposed to get many more miles than a ‘regular’ shoe. I was thinking north of 600 miles at a minimum is what folks were getting with them.
Maybe. I’ve had the same pair of Stinson Bs since May. I’ve put easily 500-600 miles on them. The outsole is showing some wear, but still PLENTY of cushioning. Just did a 50K trail race in them yesterday.
Maybe. I’ve had the same pair of Stinson Bs since May. I’ve put easily 500-600 miles on them. The outsole is showing some wear, but still PLENTY of cushioning. Just did a 50K trail race in them yesterday.
Same here… If you go by just sole wear on these shoes you are doing it wrong. There is not a lot of rubber on the Bondi’s but they still have a ton of cushion after well over 5-600 miles…
I used to run in Adrenalines, and am now on my second pair of Bondi’s. The first was the original Bondi (not the Bondi B), the second is the Bondi Speed. I’m a light-heel to midfoot striker, and moderate overpronater, but asymmetrically pronate more on the right side due to an old ankle injury on that foot.
Pros:
1 - Despite being in the M45-49 AG and believing that my lifetime PR’s were behind me, I’ve run my two fastest ever Oly tri 10Ks in the Hokas.
2 - They have a ton of cushioning.
3 - Because of the cushioning, you can really fly on the downhills.
Cons:
1 - They are heavier than any other shoe I’ve run in – Adrenalines, Nike Lunar Flys, Newtons, Saucony something-or-other, etc.
2 - Despite being advertised as lighter than the original Bondi, my “Speed” measured slightly heavier (Size 11.5)
3 - I don’t see how some people are getting 500+ miles out of these. After only 250 miles, the tread on my original Bondis was shot in places. (I usually get 500 miles on my other shoes.)
4 - More importantly, after 250 miles, the medial midsole had compressed on my right shoe to the point that I couldn’t run in them any longer. Comparing my original Bondis with the new Speeds revealed that both the left and right midsoles had undergone some medial compression after 250 miles, but the right shoe was much worse. Looking at the shoe from the rear shows it dramatically leaning to the left. Despite their straight lasted construction and other posters’ comments to the contrary, I found them to have woefully insufficient stability.
5- Despite cons 3 and 4, above, I liked the cushioning and speed enough to order the Speed recently. After only 20 miles, the right shoe is already compressing again and leaning to the left.
6 - The “quick” lace system on the Speed shoe is a poor design. It is no quicker to fasten than regular laces as there is too much friction through the eyelets to cinch up the cord near the toes when you pull on the cordlock at the top.
And on top of all that, you guys get to look back on yourselves in a couple years time and cringe at the fact you bought these.
I’ve seen tri guys buying ludicrous things but you can see that there’s some method in their madness. These are just ridiculous and you have to laugh at someone moving from a stability shoe to something which would be more at home on the feet of a drag act.
More like- i’lll look back on you as I smoke you with these shoes. 
I’ve been in the speeds for about 300 miles now and they have completely changed my running for the better! After my long runs- currently 16-20 miles I feel like I did a 3 mile jog, I’ve seen my mid distance runs 9-12 miles pace drop 15-20 seconds to 6:30-45 pace while maintaining a sub 150 HR. I attribute this 100% to my new stride in the Hoka’s which actually took about 150 miles to get. FTR- I’m 6’2 176 at age 40. Knock on wood no ailments yet:)- just seen first hand how these shoes have,singlehandedly, alter the ultra running community and allowed the injured to run. Me, I just want to save my legs so I can push harder in my training while preserving longevity as well! Do not knock these until you try them! I’ve Asics and Nike are scrambling to put together prototypes. These shoes are game changers!! Well at least for me…
I’ve been running in the Bondis for the past 9 months trying to heal a knee and all I can say is that these shoes are the best. Even with my knee back up to a 95% recovery, I still run in them. They are super comfortable and I haven’t noticed any loss of performance. I’m 205lbs and 6’2" so I’ll take any help with keeping my run “soft.”