I've won a voucher in a race for the Hoka shoes of my choice.
They seem to be about the most expensive shoes around. But they are the opposite of the shoes I normally run in.
Should I get the shoes or let someone else use the voucher (seems to be allowed).
Hoka all have the thickest soles available. My Inov8 Road-X 233 have the thinnest soles available.
I'd like another Inov8 pair. But the 233 doesn't seem to be available. I already bought a similar version and don't like them.
My reasoning for thin soles are :
1) Feet are evolved to work without any padding. So adding any is likely to cause problems rather than prevent them.
2) It must be true that lighter is better. More so on your feet, because they are constantly being accelerated and decelerated. Padding is weight (half as heavy again).
3) Padding to absorb energy must absorb energy, some of which would otherwise bounce you back up again, saving you some of the energy doing it yourself. I've been tempted to cut up some superballs to try an extra bouncy sole. I think it might improve efficiency.
The only positive thing I can think about thick soles is that I believe long legs are an advantage and they add at least an inch.
I don't train. Don't warm up. Much prefer tarmac. I only ever run race speed - less than 10 miles.
Does anyone race in Hoka shoes or have any opinions ?
I find Hoka’s hard on knees due to the thick cushioning. There is a sort of unbalance that asks every time you come down for correction. For me after a second pair it is a no. But on the other side Inovs soles are thin. And there is not much (too little?) suspension in them. I like Inovs but take also a look at Raptors for trail running.
Asics DS-Racer for me on the road. Or if you have to stay with Hoka then the Clayton? For 5k runs. Also a no go for Sketchers go run. Terrible, but that is me. N=1. I have weak knees.
In reply to David Riley:
I'm completely undecided on Hoka. My knees are beat up from a lot of running and a few climbing injuries and I'd like to run more. These get some rave reviews and might be a solution. But in the past when I've used super cushioned shoes I've hated it, the lack of feeling, and the energy absorption making them feel like running in mud ( and not in a good way). Add to that the astounding cost and the reported lack of durability in some , I would need to find some significantly reduced.
For a couple of bur ups a week stick to what you know. I never liked super thin shoes either - sore feet screwed my running style.
In reply to wbo: Running in mud, horrible. I love jumping around rocks, but I'm feeble and all about efficiency, so dislike gravel or anything soft or loose.
I don't have any injuries. My feet, legs and knees are bombproof as long as I keep the distance down.
You are confirming my thoughts that I should stick with super thin shoes. They give me less ( no ) problems. Thank you.
I used to run (and still run) in thin soled shoes (Innov8 and Pearl Izumi). Last November I had a stress fracture and bought a pair of Clifton-2s to get back into form after the fracture. I absolutely (and unexpectedly!!) love them. They are very light and surprisingly responsive. Not so great off road as they don't torque very well but fantastic on trails and tarmac. Seriously, try it
havent run in them though they have a very good name in the ultra running crowd.
people do complain that they are narrow and then cut slits where the toes protude.
but ultra people are known to be weird (or hardcore..).
they are supposed to have the some of the best cushioning:weight ratio around.
The Clifton's are great as a cushioned shoe, but if too much cushioning for you then try the new Clayton. Even lighter than the Clifton 2 ( about same as original Clifton ), the heel still quite cushioned, but the forefoot more responsive for toe-off. My new marathon shoe
In reply to David Riley: any updates from long term users on how well do they wear? In particular if you only have one pair of these and use them day in, day out, how well do they recover?
I get about 20% less wear from cliftons (and their off-road siblings the challenger ATRs) than a more conventional road / trail shoe, but I expect that given they're so light relative to their cushioning.
Their more built up shoes like the Stinson are more robust and last just as long as you would expect from other shoes.
If I had to be critical, their main frailty does lie in their sole construction.
Podcast Mountain Air - 2. Zac Poulton, the Fell Top Assessor
Fri Night Vid Finding Focus - Life Behind The Lens of a Climbing Photographer
This week's Friday Night Video is a portrait of a prolific climbing photographer from Wedge Climbing. Sam Pratt is well known in both the outdoor and competition scene but if you haven't heard of him, you've likely seen...