DS Trainer Mileage



W

Wayne Conway

Guest
Going to give the DS trainer a try. What kind of mileage can I expect?
I'm 145lbs and will use this shoe for cushioned track work and hard
surface racing at mostly 5K to 15K distances. Maybe as much as a half
marathon if they work out. Yeah, this shoe would feel like an anchor to
some of you, but the lightest shoe I've worn to date is the 2xxx series
ASICS. Thanks.
--
Quality is a function of design, materials, and craftsmanship.
Inspection can only confirm quality or reveal deficiencies.
In no case, can quality be inspected into anything.
 
Wayne Conway wrote:
> Going to give the DS trainer a try. What kind of mileage can I expect?
> I'm 145lbs and will use this shoe for cushioned track work and hard
> surface racing at mostly 5K to 15K distances. Maybe as much as a half
> marathon if they work out. Yeah, this shoe would feel like an anchor to
> some of you, but the lightest shoe I've worn to date is the 2xxx series
> ASICS. Thanks.

The DS is a pretty decent trainer. I've had about three pairs, and it
works fine. You should do fine at your weight up to a marathon. I'm
currently loving the Saucony Fastwitch Endurance - lovely shoe.

Edward
 
[email protected] wrote:
> I'm currently loving the Saucony Fastwitch Endurance - lovely shoe.

Please tell me more, Edward. I'm a couple ticks under 145 lb, prefer a
light weight and low-ish heel, strike more or less midfoot, and can
deal with but don't believe I absolutely require just a bit of medial
posting. And my current 7.x oz Nike flats don't cushion well enough
beyond 10 or 15 km of road racing, though my prior 7.x oz Nike flats
did. Debating whether to run NYCM in my year old 325 mile Brooks Racer
ST, buy a fresh pair of 'em, or try something else.

(Although if the Fastwitch have exactly the same fit as [some of?]
Saucony's trainers, their other virtues will be a non-issue for me.)

Thanks.
 
Charlie Pendejo wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > I'm currently loving the Saucony Fastwitch Endurance - lovely shoe.
>
> Please tell me more, Edward. I'm a couple ticks under 145 lb, prefer a
> light weight and low-ish heel, strike more or less midfoot, and can
> deal with but don't believe I absolutely require just a bit of medial
> posting. And my current 7.x oz Nike flats don't cushion well enough
> beyond 10 or 15 km of road racing, though my prior 7.x oz Nike flats
> did. Debating whether to run NYCM in my year old 325 mile Brooks Racer
> ST, buy a fresh pair of 'em, or try something else.

Actually I do almost all my running these days in flats, except
off-road and x-country. I rotate the Fastwitch with Reebok Premier
Competition (absolutely fabulous shoes - really love 'em, but I think
they're the old style, and may not be available any more. I buy almost
all my shoes on-line in clearance sales), Nike Ekiden (only for very
short distances!), Adidas Adistar Competition (again, a lovely shoe,
very comfortable) and the Fastwitch. I don't know what any of the
weights of these are, but I'm less concerned with weight than not
having too much heel. The Saucony have a lovely quick ride, good
midfoot cushioning and (for me) a very good fit. But I've only owned
two other Saucony trainers - a Grid Jazz 5000 (?) years ago, that was
terrific, and one of their racing shoes (Grid Aya? Team Taya? Can't
remember!) which was also fine.

Edward
 
I ran the Strolling Jim 40 miler in TN w/ these shoes the whole way, and
worked great. I have 500+ miles on them and they are still holding up.

- Greg

"Wayne Conway" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:0XTZe.19453$Ix4.4599@okepread03...
> Going to give the DS trainer a try. What kind of mileage can I expect?
> I'm 145lbs and will use this shoe for cushioned track work and hard
> surface racing at mostly 5K to 15K distances. Maybe as much as a half
> marathon if they work out. Yeah, this shoe would feel like an anchor to
> some of you, but the lightest shoe I've worn to date is the 2xxx series
> ASICS. Thanks.
> --
> Quality is a function of design, materials, and craftsmanship.
> Inspection can only confirm quality or reveal deficiencies.
> In no case, can quality be inspected into anything.
 
Thanks Greg,
Good info. Bet I don't get 500 miles (my feet start talking to me), but
it sounds like the DS is tougher than I thought.

Greg Goodson wrote:
> I ran the Strolling Jim 40 miler in TN w/ these shoes the whole way, and
> worked great. I have 500+ miles on them and they are still holding up.

--
Quality is a function of design, materials, and craftsmanship.
Inspection can only confirm quality or reveal deficiencies.
In no case, can quality be inspected into anything.
 
to counter all the raves....the DS series went down hill after the VII
and lost lots of followers. the VIII was radically different and a
real piece of ****. 1) enormous amounts of "felt" or whatever that blue
**** was on the side of the shoe, 2) elastic banded tongue?..why???.
The flipped the shoe completely and disappointed lots of people.

they tried to make a comeback with the IX, reduced significantly the
felt siding, got ride of the elastic banded tongue...but the shoe imo
still sucked. Why? "duotech / SPEVA"...call it what you want....it
doesn't matter...the sole sucks.

It's overly rigid, brittle, and hard. I don't believe it absorbs a
damn thing and simply transfer shock/impact to the runner's
foot/knee/leg. I've owned VII, VIII & IX models and the X seems like
it's basically a prettier version of the IX.

IX only felt good for me when I was running 100%, ball striking. I
feel the new DS series delivers a "jarring" ride. I ran a marathon in
the VII and loved it. Hence I bought the XIII, hated it...and prayed
the IX improved....and it did marginally..it's still a piece of ****
relative to it's cost and the options out there in LW trainer shoes. I
will say this on a positive note. The shoe grips like a MF'er. You
can midsole strike on a hill, incline or decline, on a street with rain
and road oil on the surface...the DS trainer is going to STAB the road
and grip....ubelievable grip with the shoe/tread.

Hence I am using the DS T IX as my "rain shoe". I can't speak for the
X model....but as long as it's centered on DUOTECH/SPEVA...I am sure
the shoe sucks and is a vibrator transfering every pebble in the road
to your knees. Durability?...5 STARS....it will last a long time as it
transfer the impact to your knees....now those things...your knees are
what won't last too long running in DS Trainers.

Ya know a shoe will talk to you. A shoe that wears down aggressively
like my beloved New Balance 900 series?....I go through 1 pair a month.
But that shoe is taking bullets for me. That shoe is absorbing all the
****....and not transfering much to my knees.

Saucony Fast shoe? LOVE IT. It's similar in profile, but a completely
different ride than the DS T shoe. It's sole is "butter"....my god is
it a fantastic & special flat. Why? The profile of a lightweight
trainer, as built up of a sole, mid and heal as you can expect in a
flat...yet very much the feel of a flat. The shoe has plenty-o-cush
appeal....something DUOTECH/SPEVA knows nothing about. If you want
bounce in a flat in the midsole, you can't ask for more than what the
SaucFast will give you. The shoe breathes...solid
ventilation...manages water well...the shoe drains...comfy
toebox...tolerates/accomodate swelling...etc.

Most of my flats are thin minimalist shoes....but this
SaucFast.....it's different. I like the shoe a lot. I've ran 1 1/2M
and a 5 Miler in mine...and I am not sure if I have the speed or the
endurance model. They've discontinued the model I have...with the red
logo....but you can still find them around.

Back to the Asics shoe. Asics...stability, cushion, motion
control...OK. But their flats suck, and their light weight trainer
sucks. It's almost the very opposite of Nike.
 
Funny how we tend to keep going back to things that, maybe once in the
past, worked for us. I do the same thing with the 2xxx series ASICS. The
2060 and 2080 worked well for me, but I have had trouble with all others
in the series (I can still get my beloved 2080's at Roadrunner). But you
know, I'll probably be in line for the next version that comes along.
Seems we are always trying to recapture that feeling of "the first
time". Kept a copy of your impassioned reply-good report Lance.

[email protected] wrote:
> to counter all the raves....the DS series went down hill after the VII
> and lost lots of followers. the VIII was radically different and a
> real piece of ****. 1) enormous amounts of "felt" or whatever that blue
> **** was on the side of the shoe, 2) elastic banded tongue?..why???.
> The flipped the shoe completely and disappointed lots of people.
>
> they tried to make a comeback with the IX, reduced significantly the
> felt siding, got ride of the elastic banded tongue...but the shoe imo
> still sucked. Why? "duotech / SPEVA"...call it what you want....it
> doesn't matter...the sole sucks.
>
> It's overly rigid, brittle, and hard. I don't believe it absorbs a
> damn thing and simply transfer shock/impact to the runner's
> foot/knee/leg. I've owned VII, VIII & IX models and the X seems like
> it's basically a prettier version of the IX.
>
> IX only felt good for me when I was running 100%, ball striking. I
> feel the new DS series delivers a "jarring" ride. I ran a marathon in
> the VII and loved it. Hence I bought the XIII, hated it...and prayed
> the IX improved....and it did marginally..it's still a piece of ****
> relative to it's cost and the options out there in LW trainer shoes. I
> will say this on a positive note. The shoe grips like a MF'er. You
> can midsole strike on a hill, incline or decline, on a street with rain
> and road oil on the surface...the DS trainer is going to STAB the road
> and grip....ubelievable grip with the shoe/tread.
>
> Hence I am using the DS T IX as my "rain shoe". I can't speak for the
> X model....but as long as it's centered on DUOTECH/SPEVA...I am sure
> the shoe sucks and is a vibrator transfering every pebble in the road
> to your knees. Durability?...5 STARS....it will last a long time as it
> transfer the impact to your knees....now those things...your knees are
> what won't last too long running in DS Trainers.
>
> Ya know a shoe will talk to you. A shoe that wears down aggressively
> like my beloved New Balance 900 series?....I go through 1 pair a month.
> But that shoe is taking bullets for me. That shoe is absorbing all the
> ****....and not transfering much to my knees.
>
> Saucony Fast shoe? LOVE IT. It's similar in profile, but a completely
> different ride than the DS T shoe. It's sole is "butter"....my god is
> it a fantastic & special flat. Why? The profile of a lightweight
> trainer, as built up of a sole, mid and heal as you can expect in a
> flat...yet very much the feel of a flat. The shoe has plenty-o-cush
> appeal....something DUOTECH/SPEVA knows nothing about. If you want
> bounce in a flat in the midsole, you can't ask for more than what the
> SaucFast will give you. The shoe breathes...solid
> ventilation...manages water well...the shoe drains...comfy
> toebox...tolerates/accomodate swelling...etc.
>
> Most of my flats are thin minimalist shoes....but this
> SaucFast.....it's different. I like the shoe a lot. I've ran 1 1/2M
> and a 5 Miler in mine...and I am not sure if I have the speed or the
> endurance model. They've discontinued the model I have...with the red
> logo....but you can still find them around.
>
> Back to the Asics shoe. Asics...stability, cushion, motion
> control...OK. But their flats suck, and their light weight trainer
> sucks. It's almost the very opposite of Nike.
>

--
Quality is a function of design, materials, and craftsmanship.
Inspection can only confirm quality or reveal deficiencies.
In no case, can quality be inspected into anything.
 
[email protected] wrote:
> Back to the Asics shoe. Asics...stability, cushion, motion
> control...OK. But their flats suck, and their light weight trainer
> sucks. It's almost the very opposite of Nike.

I'd think a runner at your level would be well-served by the Shox, no?

Pendejo, ducking and running
 
On 27 Sep 2005 10:05:36 -0700, "Charlie Pendejo" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I'd think a runner at your level would be well-served by the Shox, no?
>
>Pendejo, ducking and running

You think it's a joke, but he was the first poster here to buy and
wear them.
 
TheBillRogers wrote:
> Charlie Pendejo wrote:
>
>> a runner at your level would be well-served by the Shox, no?
>
> You think it's a joke, but he was the first poster here to buy and
> wear them.

Your insane anti-Nike bias is a shame, Billy Boi, because AFAICT the
Shox are actually perfect for someone of your heft and pace.
 
>Your insane anti-Nike bias is a shame, Billy Boi, because AFAICT the
Shox are actually perfect for someone of your heft and pace.

So Bill is dead then? Why weren't we told? Dammit, I've been replying
to all those posts for nothing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back