I am 6’3", 205lbs. I need a good, solid running shoe.
This last year, I wore the Saucony 3D Grid Hurricanes and liked them.
I am thinking of trying the Asics Gel Kayano X.
Anybody tried both of these shoes and like one more than the other?
I know that shoes are a personal thing (just like everything else)…just curious what other folks think.
im gonna say it. Go with the new fad on this forum and try a minimalist approach, racing flats.
i’m a one-shoe kind of guy…for training and racing…
Go with a lightweight trainer at the most i.e. the Asic DS Trainer… Remember less is better…
i second (or third is it) the racing flats minimalist approach but that is my idea for my body. i haven’t tried the sauconys but did use one pair of the kayanos. nice and comfy, kindof like running equivalent of la-z-boy, but a massive anti-pronation wedge on the inside arch which, as i am a neutral runner, actually caused me to suppinate a bit. so i’ll not go back to them. that said, i like the ds-trainer just fine.
I’m just curious about this.
What type of feet do you guys have? (apolack, rundown) Flat, Medium or high arches? Are any of you over 200 lbs? I’m still not convinced about the minimal shoe thing. Is there anyone out there that has flat feet and go with a minimal shoe? I’m still trying to gather info about it.
jaretj
my feet are flat as a pancake. i’m 170lbs, down from 210 at college graduation in 1996. i do have very neutral foot strike though - no pronation issues. i came from a rugby background - all power and no grace when it comes to running, so i had a lot to learn. i am a big believer in “studying” the game - be it rugby, triathlon, whatever. so when i got into tris and realized how hard my running sucked i went back to the drawing board and really focused on form. to me, intuitively, the idea of forefoot running on minimalist cushioning (i.e., barefoot approximation) “just made sense.” so i got the pose dvd (not really necessary) hung out on the pose forum, watched lots of video of olymic distance runners, and did my own video analysis. my running times aren’t steller (40min 10k) but i am happy with my form (until i get balls tired) and i have had no injury issues as of yet (averaging 25-45miles/week - all easy to moderate to tempo pace). do the search on this forum and google to find more thoughts, especially on risk of injury from trying to consciously force your running style to change and recruit new muscles (especially calf). also, check out runningbarefoot.org and abebe bikila story to put racing flat debate in perspective.
This is my exact height and weight.
If you read this forum a lot, there’s sort of a trend or movement now, to go away from cushioned and control shoes, and use a racing slick.
Having said that, I bought a pair of “Kayanos” last week, just to see what the fuss was, and to give my NB 1122s a break from the wear. Both the NB 1122 and the Kayano are the Rolls Royce running shoe for a heavier frame, in need of cushioning and support, and they are expensive, same for the Brook’s beast, and dyad.
For me, and I have a normal foot, the NB 1122 was much more tighter, supportive, and springier than the Kayano. Asics shoes, for my feet, are always, “loosey goosey,” in the front toe area, but firm around the heel and sides. Same for Brooks shoes. When push comes to shove, I like tighter around the forefoot running shoes. The NB1122 has a “roll bar” in the bottom of it, which you can feel, when you are pronating around for the push off. It gives you a spring. Its hard to explain. You would just have to try them.
Correction, I think I am talking about NB 1221s, its the dark blue, white and red $140 NB shoe.
I have a flat foot to small arch and 5’10" 175 pounds…
Dr. Dre recommended these to me. He swears by them. He says they suit his running style much better than all of those expensive shoes. He raced in them yesterday.
(www.rivendellbicycles.com) I hope that that is the right
site.
OOPS. That’s not it. I guess I deleted it. 'Dre, do you have that shoe site?
Asics Creed are a good shoe they fall between the Stability 2090’s and the Motion control Kayano
.
I am 6’3", 205lbs. I need a good, solid running shoe. This last year, I wore the Saucony 3D Grid Hurricanes and liked them. I am thinking of trying the Asics Gel Kayano X.
We sell a fair number of both shoes each week, so I’m pretty familiar with both.
First: support your local running store and go try both on, and try on the 1122 and also the Brooks Trance if you can find it. All those shoes are in the same category and same price range, yet will feel VASTLY different on your foot.
Second: The different companies use different “model” feet when designing their shoes. Asics is going to fit a narrow, straight foot fairly well where Saucony will fit someone with a wider forefoot and narrower heel fairly well. Some people don’t feel a difference, other people feel a dramatic difference. YMMV, so go try them on.
Third: The Hurricane is generally a more “stable” stability shoe than the Kayano. If you need the extra stability because you overpronate, the Hurricane might be better. On the other hand, the Hurricane is a much “firmer” shoe than the Kayano, which has a lot more heel cushioning. If you tend to land hard on your heels, the Kayano might do a better job absorbing that shock.
Fourth: Working on form is a good thing, because it allows you to build the strength you need to do the work that a stability shoe does for you. The more you can land on your forefoot, with your knee bent to take the impact in your quads, the less need you have for cushioning & stability. This is a whole long thread that will probably elicit a lot of religious postings, but the net is this: if you want to invest the time & energy in improving your running form you can get faster, be more efficient, and run in much lighter shoes. If you don’t want to make that investment, the shoes you described will do a good job preventing overpronation and will help keep you from getting injured.
Lee Silverman
JackRabbit Sports
Park Slope, Brooklyn
My bad! (to use the common jargon.) I went out way too hard on the bike, as I told you and it really cost me on the run. I was too pooped to lift yesterday evening, which I usually do after my races.
Thanks for the site. I think I erased that message.
I’m currently wearing NB831 (been using this series since 827). Noticed that NB900 are labeled as ‘lt. wt’ too. What’s the difference bet. 900 and 831 (or the current version 833)?
Asics is going to fit a narrow, straight foot fairly well where Saucony will fit someone with a wider forefoot and narrower heel fairly well.
Really?! This is odd, because I’ve always found Saucony to be too narrow (esp in the toe box) while Asics tend to fit me quite well. I’m still in the market for a TRUE flat in a wide width however, so if you know of a flat with minimal to no padding that’s available in EEE/EEEE or EE with a pure mesh top (so my bunions can just poke out) I’d love to hear about it.
For the record, I’m 5’6, 185 and have duck feet (flat, wide, & triangular) - I do run properly though, with a midfoot strike and high cadence. No devices or padding required (or desired)
I’m currently wearing NB831 (been using this series since 827). Noticed that NB900 are labeled as ‘lt. wt’ too. What’s the difference bet. 900 and 831 (or the current version 833)?
Both the 900 and the 833 are pretty lightweight, pretty neutral shoes. The same people would wear one or the other – the difference is mostly personal taste.
The feature difference is mainly in the upper: the 833 is all mesh and has a badass pattern/design that some people think looks pretty cool. The 900 is a little more “normal” looking and has New Balance’s “N-Lock” feature which is supposed to provide a little bit of side-to-side structural support. I don’t know off the top of my head if they’re both built on the same last, but the SL-1 last fits differently than the SL-2 last, so that would be a significant difference. The midsole of the 900 is also a lot more curved front to back (like a rocking horse) than the 833, so the toe-off is more energetic. The 900 also comes with these funky shoelaces that look like links of sausage.
Lee Silverman
JackRabbit Sports
Park Slope, Brooklyn
What Dr. 'Dre didn’t say was how good his shoes feel. He is a mid foot striker and does not wear out his heels, even though his have a higher density medial heel. He has corresponded with the company and they have two models with lower heel to toe differential. See his reference above.
Thanks, I thought that thread was going to go in a different direction.
I’ve been pondering going to minimalist shoes but am going to wait untill after my race in mid-June. I’m not having problems now but you never know what will happen in the future. I keep hearing people preach that about shoes but I don’t remember if they identified their foot type or types of problems they had before changing. In the back of my mind I was thinking that they were in a select group that it worked well for and recommended it to thier friends without much knowledge of who it is good for.
I’ve got a lot of nice grass around here to run on and will start to do it slowly in about a month.
Thanks for all of your input.
jaretj