- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,660
- 3,228
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
Choo choo! All aboard the Complain Train!
- Thread starter Mister Mumbler
- Start date
Ah right, for some reason I assumed is was flat; not sure why. Leaks are annoying though!
I've been running long enough to finally accept that the larger sports brands (adidas, nike) largely make piece of shit products unless you're willing to pay a premium. That said, good Lord why do the "real" running shoe brands make their shoes look so fucking ugly? I don't really care what I look like while I run, but once the pair needs to be retired, I'd at least like to use it for walking or errands.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,660
- 3,228
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
Just give up and start wearing New Balance like a 45 year old dad.
Real talk though, I used to run track and cross country in high school and track in college (both a long time ago), and my favorite running shoes were always Asics. Doesn't matter if they're ugly when they feel so comfortable. Some of them do look decent, but you pay a premium for that. It's weird how running shoes go from ugly, to decent looking, to even uglier as the price goes up.
It's three tiers:
- You'll settle for anything
- You're just doing this to look good
- Performance is all you care about
You jest, but I've been seriously looking into some New Balance dad shoes to wear. I kinda hate myself for that.
One of the many fun things about living in a developing country is that decent running shoes are expensive as shit. I make good money for my age and experience, but any decent shoe from these brands would put a significant dent in my budget. And it hurts to spend so much on something you put on your feet to grind against pavement for hundreds of kilometers.
With adidas or Nike, they produce in such volume and have such high presence over here that their models inevitably go on sale. They might not perform very well, but they're at least durable and don't cost an arm and a leg.
That said, after I wear out my current adidas shoes, I plan to dedicate some savings just for a new pair from either Brooks or Hoka, or whatever "real" running shoe brand puts out the best value for money daily trainer.
Not gonna lie, Brooks Ghosts put a pretty big dent in my budget too -- certainly in my prepared-to-spend-this-money-on-a-shoe budget. I'll buy one new pair a year at most; I definitely wouldn't buy them if I didn't run (which right now I don't really). But they are good running shoes IMO.
Last time I went out to buy shoes, I was dismayed at how pricy they were. Then Addidas dropped Kanye, and when he showed up at Sketchers to sign a deal with them... they closed the door on him. There is a Sketchers outlet that I hadn't tried in my town, so I decided to give them a shot because... screw Ye. And the prices were really good, way better than I was seeing elsewhere. I bought a pair of shoes...
And they are the most awful, uncomfortable, and shoddy shoes I ever bought. After only a few months (whenever that story dropped) they are already completely worn out and falling apart. And after some ice and snow I can attest, they have the least amount of grip of any shoe I have ever worn outside of a bowling alley.
Longevity is my main trainer gripe. I have some New Rock boots that must be about 15 years old now and they still look almost spankingly new, though to be fair I only wear them for weddings, funerals and snow these days (they're reasonably respectable New Rocks, not the ones with flames on them, though I'd love a pair of those again).
It hurts way more to put a cheap thing between your bare foot and the pavement for hundreds of kilometres. Shoes are a bit like tyres in that respect.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,660
- 3,228
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
Only kind of. Honestly, New Balance makes a respectable running shoe. Not the best, but they are also significantly cheaper. I didn't used to go for them because I put a lot more wear and tear on my running shoes than the average person (8-10 miles a day, 3-5 miles of it being sprints will make any shoe fall apart pretty quickly), but now that I no longer run competitively and basically only do cardio as a warm-up I've tried some New Balance shoes and was pleasantly surprised. Depending on how much you're running they would probably suit your needs.
I hear you, I might not be from a developing country, but it felt really bad dropping $110 on a pair of shoes as a teenager in high school. And I needed 2 pairs of shoes (at least) and a pair of spikes, so typically about $300. Your shoes need about 24 hours to de-compress after every workout, so if you're running every day you have to have 2 pairs of shoes to swap between otherwise you end up wearing them out way faster and start getting shin splints and arch pain because of the lack of proper padding and support.
Fair, but "cheap" in this sense is relative. I'd never try to run in $30 shoes. Anything in that price range is obvious garbage. The shoes I buy (on sale) range from $60 to $80. They're not amazing, but they last long and don't actively hurt my feet. Shoes from real running shoes brands go from $150 to $200. I don't have any personal experience, but I've heard they make a huge difference. A more apt comparison I think would be consoles vs PCs.
I mostly meant New Balance for casual wear, but I have considered their running shoes as well. From what I can tell, they're at least better than adidas. But they're in the same situation as Asics/Brooks: hard to find and don't go on sale. Yet not quite on the same level of performance.
Yeah I'd agree on New Balance: they make perfectly good running shoes, but I wouldn't want to do a marathon in them. I have, as it goes, done a marathon in Asics (I couldn't tell you the model, but they were about £100 in 2007) and my feet and hips were still completely wrecked by the end.
Went to look at New Rocks out of curiousity. They have (a) doubled in price since I last bought a pair (more than a decade ago though); and (b) introduced a sub-category on the website of boots classified as 'wizard'. The subcategory is empty, but I am now desperate to know what boots had (or will be?) classified as such.