I'm pretty new to running but I'm to the point where I really want to
invest in a good pair of running shoes. I'm a bit on the heavy side,
5'10" 200 lbs. Also I have low arches and I pronate a bit. I went to a
decent running store in my area and they had me try on a pair of New
Balance 856's. I liked the way they felt but I figured I should check
on what other people thought about them. So when I got home I started
doing some reading. Are these a good choice? Or should I be looking
hard at a pair of Adidas Supernova Control's, or maybe a pair of
Brook's Addiction's. I know that ultimately I'm going to just have to
try some shoes on, but from what I've heard about the 856's people
liked them when they put them on at the store but then had problems
with them. I'd really like to get a pair of durable shoes that I can
log a lot of miles on without injury or pain and if possible I'd like
to stay under $100.
General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion
Noob looking for good motion control shoes
Thread navigation
Jump through the discussion
Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.
Thread details
What we know about this thread
- Original section
- General fitness, health and nutrition
- Published
- 10 December 2004
- Last activity
- 12 December 2004
- Original author
- mckeowbc
- Posts
- 15
- Discussion status
- Public discussion
- Total views
- 270
- Views / 30 days
- 0
- Topics
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
-
-
mckeowbc said:
I'm pretty new to running but I'm to the point where I really want to
invest in a good pair of running shoes. I'm a bit on the heavy side,
5'10" 200 lbs. Also I have low arches and I pronate a bit. I went to a
decent running store in my area and they had me try on a pair of New
Balance 856's.It depends on how much pronation control you need. I have
collapsing arches, and need a lot. I wear the NB 1122s.
I also use an orthotic to help support the arches.Quoted message said:
I liked the way they felt but I figured I should check
on what other people thought about them. So when I got home I started
doing some reading. Are these a good choice? Or should I be looking
hard at a pair of Adidas Supernova Control's, or maybe a pair of
Brook's Addiction's.I don't think the brand makes too much difference.
brands are a matter of personal preference. I also
have/wear Asics motion shoes. I prefer the NB for
2 reasons: The NB are a more cushioned shoe (i.e.,
some motion shoes are like strapping 2x4s to your
feet) and my experience with NB as a company is
very positive. If you go to a running store and
they misfit you in the wrong shoe and you have
problems or injuries, NB will exchange it for a
correct pair for free. So that can help a bit if
you're not quite sure you have the right shoe after
a month or so.Quoted message said:
I know that ultimately I'm going to just have to
try some shoes on, but from what I've heard about the 856's people
liked them when they put them on at the store but then had problems
with them. I'd really like to get a pair of durable shoes that I can
log a lot of miles on without injury or pain and if possible I'd like
to stay under $100.If you need motion shoes my advice is to get the
shoes you need, not the shoes you can afford. Or
find the shoes you need and then look for bargins.Running shoes, BTW, are only as "durable" as the
running you do in them. 300-500 miles is usually
when they need replacing. Depends on how often and
much you run. I tend to waer mine a little longer
but the orthotics help. -
Tom Phillips said:
If you need motion shoes my advice is to get the
shoes you need, not the shoes you can afford. Or
find the shoes you need and then look for bargins.Oops, I was thinking of the 857NB. 856 is a
stability shoe. Still with low arches you may
need/want greater arch support.Sometimes the only way is trial and error..
-
Quoted message said:
I'm a bit on the heavy side,
5'10" 200 lbsAnother inch and a half and you'd be a god, like me.
Quoted message said:
Also I have low arches and I pronate a bit. I went to a
decent running store in my area and they had me try on a pair of New
Balance 856's. I liked the way they felt but I figured I should check
on what other people thought about them. So when I got home I started
doing some reading. Are these a good choice? Or should I be looking
hard at a pair of Adidas Supernova Control's, or maybe a pair of
Brook's Addiction's. I know that ultimately I'm going to just have to
try some shoes on, but from what I've heard about the 856's people
liked them when they put them on at the store but then had problems
with them. I'd really like to get a pair of durable shoes that I can
log a lot of miles on without injury or pain and if possible I'd like
to stay under $100.Try the Asics 1090, and 2090 series first, much better shoe at controling these
problems.
And don't ask US what shoes you need, only you can tell that by trying them on,
and trotting around in them a bit. -
Quoted message said:
I don't think the brand makes too much difference.
It sure does in price! A good example is nike, where you pay a third more for
the shoe compared to other brands, just for advertising the name. Brands can
make a big difference. A shoe comparable to a $90 Asics 2090 in the nike line,
would cost you $130 to $140 -
"FabulustRunner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I don't think the brand makes too much difference.
It sure does in price! A good example is nike, where you pay a third more
for
the shoe compared to other brands, just for advertising the name. Brands
can
make a big difference. A shoe comparable to a $90 Asics 2090 in the nike
line,
would cost you $130 to $140Not true. The comparable Nike shoes to the Asics 2090 (or new 2100) are the
Nike Structure Triax at $90 and the Nike Span at $85. If you compare all the
Nike Bowerman shoes to any other brand's line you'll see that their prices
are almost identical.Jim Johnson
-
You may also want to try Brooks Adrenaline - a good stability choice. I tried
various other brands including Nike & New Balance before settling on these some
years ago.Bert
-
"Bert Duplessis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:
You may also want to try Brooks Adrenaline - a good stability choice. I
tried
various other brands including Nike & New Balance before settling on these
some
years ago.Good suggestion. This shoe has put a serious hurtin' on the comparable Nike,
NB and Asics models in shops all over the country.Jim Johnson
-
Quoted message said:
Not true. The comparable Nike shoes to the Asics 2090 (or new 2100) are the
Nike Structure Triax at $90 and the Nike Span at $85. If you compare all the
Nike Bowerman shoes to any other brand's line you'll see that their prices
are almost identical.Jim Johnson
You are DEAD wrong! Those shoes are NOWHERE NEAR the Asics 2090 in quality.
Those pieces of [censored] wouldn't last half the time the Asics would. -
When I referred to durable I only meant that from what I heard the
856's have some durability problems. A couple people on the runners
world forums had complained that they wore out after "only" 250 miles.
I was hoping to get more like 400 out of them, which seems like a
reasonable number. -
I know, I realize that I'm the only one who can decide what feels right
on my foot, but I figured as a relative newbie it couldn't hurt to get
some general opinions to help me sort through my choices. Also from a
couple of the posts I read about the NB 856's people liked how they
felt at the store and on a short run, but after a few weeks started
getting blisters, knee pain, or other problems. So I wanted to avoid
this experience if possible, because I'm not experienced at buying
running shoes it would be very easy for me to pick something that feels
comfortable that doesn't actually hold up when I start running longer
distances. -
Thanks, I'll put those on my list to check out.
-
mckeowbc said:
When I referred to durable I only meant that from what I heard the
856's have some durability problems. A couple people on the runners
world forums had complained that they wore out after "only" 250 miles.
I was hoping to get more like 400 out of them, which seems like a
reasonable number.I have no experience with this particular shoe, but I've
never had NB shoes need replacing after only 250 miles.
Roadrunnersports.com describes the 856 as being a high
mileage shoe.What I'm suggesting is if you also have low/falling arches
you may want to look at an orthotic (like generic Superfeet,
just to see if it helps.) Given your weight combined with
arch issues you may need the extra support. Don't be in a
hurry. Go to stores with treadmills and experienced staff
and try on lots of shoes. Make sure they're at least a half
size larger and/or can accomodate inserts comfortably. -
Maybe the guy who made the post about them wearing out quickly just got
a bad pair. He had said that he had a pair of 855's that he put 500
miles on and then got the 856's and wore them out after only 250. But
maybe that hasn't happened to everyone. I've thought about getting an
orthotic. I wear arch supports in my tennis shoes, so I should
probably get some decent orthotics for my running shoes. -
mckeowbc said:
Maybe the guy who made the post about them wearing out quickly just got
a bad pair. He had said that he had a pair of 855's that he put 500
miles on and then got the 856's and wore them out after only 250. But
maybe that hasn't happened to everyone. I've thought about getting an
orthotic. I wear arch supports in my tennis shoes, so I should
probably get some decent orthotics for my running shoes.Just try your arch supports in your running shoes. Or
as I say try Superfeet (greens) for $30...
Active in the last 60 minutes
Active in this thread
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.