note I will be beginning the SEAL Warning Order workout then the 12-week to SEAL BUD/S workout prepared by Stew Smith
ASICS Gel-DS Trainer IX - $95
New Balance 900 - $95
Nike Air Pegasus 2004 - $70
all three are rated high in the various running magazines, just wondering if anyone has any personal exp. with them
The Pegasus is a mid-weight cushioning shoe, the other two are lightweight trainers with "stability" features.
I saw some unfavourable comments about the latest DS trainer-- it's gotten heavier apparently, and not everyone liked it. I went with the DS Verdict (lightweight cushioning) instead and liked it (see my review).
Like Top asked -- what sort of shoes do you wear now ? Do you wear flats for racing, and if so, which ones ?
I saw some unfavourable comments about the latest DS trainer--
I will add to them. I like the ASICS brand as a rule, but the last 2 incarnations of the DS-Trainer have departed from the original concept for the shoe. It now is a weirdly- muddled and, for me, an injury-risking, design. While still pretty spartan in overall design, it has a too-stiff-for-the-rest-of- it midsole stiffener, which prevents needed flexibility in the forefoot/midfoot transition area. For me, this puts undue stress on my achilles tendons. ASICS has other similar models that I would consider, but the newer DS-Trainers I own are retired as running shoes.
Probably 8 out of 10 of the Nike models are garbage IMHO, and even a cursory inspection of their Made-in-China "craftmanship" (e.g., ungrommetted laceholes crudely punched through the cloth; very roughly-cut insoles) will tell you this. On top of that, Nike has a penchant for frankly bizarre, misguided designs (e.g., the Shox) that should lead one to question the company's judgment as a whole. That being said, Nike still makes good competition shoes for track and cross-country, probably because these models are still derived from early Bowerman designs (?). Many runners do remain loyal to particular models (e.g., Pegasus, Skylon, Perseus) with a history.
top i agree the shylon was the 1st running shoe i ever owned and it was great , what do you think of the tailwind besides over priced?? plodzilla
TopCounsel said:
Quoted message said:
The Nikes are [censored]! DO NOT BUY THEM!
Probably 8 out of 10 of the Nike models are garbage IMHO, and even a cursory inspection of their Made-in-China "craftmanship" (e.g., ungrommetted laceholes crudely punched through the cloth; very roughly-cut insoles) will tell you this. On top of that, Nike has a penchant for frankly bizarre, misguided designs (e.g., the Shox) that should lead one to question the company's judgment as a whole. That being said, Nike still makes good competition shoes for track and cross-country, probably because these models are still derived from early Bowerman designs (?). Many runners do remain loyal to particular models (e.g., Pegasus, Skylon, Perseus) with a history.
"TopCounsel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
The Nikes are [censored]! DO NOT BUY THEM!
Probably 8 out of 10 of the Nike models are garbage IMHO, and even a
cursory
Quoted message said:
inspection of their Made-in-China "craftmanship" (e.g., ungrommetted
laceholes
Quoted message said:
crudely punched through the cloth; very roughly-cut insoles) will tell you this.
Where are the shoes that you consider having good craftsmanship made?
Quoted message said:
On top of that, Nike has a penchant for frankly bizarre, misguided designs (e.g., the Shox) that should lead one to question the company's judgment as a whole.
The only poor judgement Nike showed in relation to the Shox was not making enough of them. Asics/New Balance/Adidas/etc. would take Shox sales numbers in a heartbeat. I personally don't run in them and probably never will but that doesn't mean they're bad technology. No better or worse than EVA IMO, just different.
"TopCounsel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
The only poor judgement Nike showed in relation to the Shox was not
making
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
enough of them. Asics/New Balance/Adidas/etc. would take Shox sales
numbers in
Quoted message said:
a heartbeat.
By this logic, Ford should have made more Pintos (those are the ones that exploded). Who is buying the Shox, and who actually runs in them? I do
not
Quoted message said:
see them on folks I know who run regularly. In any event, from what I
know of
Quoted message said:
knees and running, such a design is pure foolishness and what one other
poster
Quoted message said:
to this NG referred to as "eye candy" for the uninformed.
I would agree with this, sales figures do not prove the worth of a shoe. But I see quite a few people running in the Shox and I always make it a point to ask them how they like their shoes since we sell them at our shop. I've never had one person say they disliked these shoes. Now granted, most of the people who buy them are under the age of 30 and are casual runners but they're still happy with the choice they made. I don't think the Shox is bad technology or dangerous just different. It basically does the same thing a Pegasus does just in a different package.