Remember "retreading" ?

Lanceandrew <[email hidden]> wrote: .......

Quoted message said:

Is it still done? Is it still done widely and am I just not noticing it?....When was the last time
anyone had a retread done?

there was a guy on this group who used to glue new soles onto his shoes. apparently, they last him a
few thousand miles.

check this thread:

groups.google.comgroupsOpen ↗
8&group=rec.running&selm=bd6fd228.0212051700.688e0c79%40posting.google.com&rnum=3

jobs

Quoted message said:

there was a guy on this group who used to glue new soles onto his shoes. apparently, they last him
a few thousand miles.

In a world where 90% of everything is made in China at a relative pittance --

In a world where even cameras can be bought as "disposables" --

In a world where your running shoes may cost you $80 ($40 or less on clearance), but medical bills
for even the simplest injury diagnosis and treatment may cost $2,000 or more --

Wouldn't retreading your running shoes in this day and age be a "false economy?" "Penny-wise and
pound-foolish?"

TopCounsel said:

In a world where 90% of everything is made in China at a relative pittance --

Quoted message said:

In a world where even cameras can be bought as "disposables" --

Quoted message said:

In a world where your running shoes may cost you $80 ($40 or less on clearance), but medical bills
for even the simplest injury diagnosis and treatment may cost $2,000 or more --

Quoted message said:

Wouldn't retreading your running shoes in this day and age be a "false economy?" "Penny-wise and
pound-foolish?"

i don't know if this particular guy is doing it to create any kind of economy whatsoever. he
probably does it more out of passion.

somewhat like the passion that makes people run when instead they could drive or putt. forget
running. leave that to the kenyans and ethiopians. why create a "false economy" by catering to
runners when it can be done by others better and cheaper. ;-)

i don't think i understand your pound-foolish statement. are you implying that it's going to be
detrimental for him in the long run? if so, how?

jobs

counselor, retreading is exactly that and nothing more. i've lots of shoes
w/perfectly fine absorbtion technology....the treads are just shot/gone.

you take a $100 pair of shoes, i'm willing to bet before the technology breaks down, the treads
diminished to nill in key areas. just when that shoe is fitting your feet perfectly too!

ya know it could take 300-400 miles and countless hours to perfect the fit of a shoe.
couselor...look at that as what it is, an investment. retreading may allow one to retain an aspect
of value in an investment.

in fact when you think about it...perhaps the whole shoe industry is in a conspiracy to design a
shoe with only "so much" tread knowing the technology is good for 1K or 2K miles but the tread
for 500miles. And...then have the tread be the driver to induce another shoe purchase in some
months. People commonly look at the tread and decide they need to spend another $75 or whatever
when the technology is fine, fit perfect, and a $20 retreading to a pocket other than a shoe
manufacturer might be the viable option/answer. i am not saying this is so...just possible. but
what am i?...crazy. no, a shoe manufacturer would never employ a signaling mechanism into a shoe
(reduced tread life) to drive repeated sales...based on perception of the tread...of course not.
not these companies that change the design with the seasons discontinuing the model you just fell
in love with...

(Lanceandrew) said:

counselor, retreading is exactly that and nothing more. i've lots of shoes
w/perfectly fine absorbtion technology....the treads are just shot/gone.

you take a $100 pair of shoes, i'm willing to bet before the technology breaks down, the treads
diminished to nill in key areas. just when that shoe is fitting your feet perfectly too!

ya know it could take 300-400 miles and countless hours to perfect the fit of a shoe.
couselor...look at that as what it is, an investment. retreading may allow one to retain an aspect
of value in an investment.

in fact when you think about it...perhaps the whole shoe industry is in a conspiracy to design a
shoe with only "so much" tread knowing the technology is good for 1K or 2K miles but the tread for
500miles.

I'm wondering how many here agree with the above. I know in my case it's definately not true. I
almost always end up replacing shoes not because of "tread" failure but because of cushioning
failure. In my particular case, probably due to some flaw in my stride, I pound a hole right thru
the cushioning below the ball of my foot. Way before the tread wears out the cushion becomes compact
enough to not allow much springback.

~Matt

Quoted message said:

you take a $100 pair of shoes, i'm willing to bet before the technology breaks

down, the treads diminished to nill in key areas. just when that shoe is fitting your feet
perfectly too!

I share your frustration with having to shelve shoes you have grown to like running in. In my case
though, I generally have to give them up because the cushioning is shot, however. My treadwear tends
to be so even over the sole that I don't lose that aspect of the shoe first. This difference could
account for our different perspectives.

Quoted message said:

in fact when you think about it...perhaps the whole shoe industry is in a

conspiracy to design a shoe with only "so much" tread

"Planned obsolescence" is a real phenomenon, alright, but a conspiracy it is not. Do you think Nike
and Adidas (and ASICS, etc., ad nauseam) are more friends than enemies? They are very determined
competitors of each other.

So, incidentally, you didn't say why you didn't like those "Spira" shoes you tried on. What were
your reactions to them, other than to "pass" on them?

So, incidentally, you didn't say why you didn't like those "Spira" shoes you tried on. What were
your reactions to them, other than to "pass" on them
__

weight, the model w/springs in the forefoot and heel are like 15 or 16 oz., maybe more. i also felt
like i was going to be paying $120 to be a beta site. i think they should give hundreds of pairs to
runners for free, why not me? (i honestly tossed that out there). on the floor at their booth i told
the owner i'd be willing to wear them in the nyc marathon (which was 2 days later) if they gave me a
pair.... they laughed it off. i would never pay more than $60 or maybe $70 for a pair of shoes.

Lanceandrew said:

you take a $100 pair of shoes, i'm willing to bet before the technology breaks down, the treads
diminished to nill in key areas. just when that shoe is fitting your feet perfectly too!

I'm not in agreement with you on this. For me the midsole turns to mush long before treads wears
out. At least fore the Asics 20nn series. In fact when my shoes are cooked the tread still looks ok.
At 175 I'm not light on me feet.

No retreads for me. 🙂

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email hidden]

In article said:

On 05 Feb 2004 19:28:06 GMT, [email hidden] (Lanceandrew) wrote:

Quoted message said:

I'm wondering how many here agree with the above. I know in my case it's definately not true. I
almost always end up replacing shoes not because of "tread" failure but because of cushioning
failure. In my

I'm with you. One of my books (can't remember which one) asserts the cushioning is pretty much dead
before the tread is gone, and that's my experience. I've got almost 500 miles on my Asics Nimbus
shoes, and the tread is almost as-new on the heel, a little worn on the toe and forefoot -- but
there are those tell-tale midsole "lines" that indicate midsole wear, and I can tell when I'm using
them that these shoes are on their way down.

There are some people who wear out their outsoles really quickly though, especially if the outsole
material is soft.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

Donovan Rebbechi said:

In article said:

On 05 Feb 2004 19:28:06 GMT, [email hidden] (Lanceandrew) wrote:

Quoted message said:

I'm wondering how many here agree with the above. I know in my case it's definately not true. I
almost always end up replacing shoes not because of "tread" failure but because of cushioning
failure. In my

I'm with you. One of my books (can't remember which one) asserts the cushioning is pretty much dead
before the tread is gone, and that's my experience. I've got almost 500 miles on my Asics Nimbus
shoes, and the tread is almost as-new on the heel, a little worn on the toe and forefoot -- but
there are those tell-tale midsole "lines" that indicate midsole wear, and I can tell when I'm using
them that these shoes are on their way down.

Strangely enough I look at it a bit different than the OP anyway. My experinace with
industry is "Make it look like it's still good long after it's shot" IOW the sole is made to
last a long time because your average person looks at a the bottom of the shoe to dictate if
it's still good or not. However the important part, at least to a runner, the cushioning,
heel support etc has long since passed it days of usefullness. Kinda like a car that still
that "looks really nice" but has a 200,000 miles on it.

Quoted message said:

There are some people who wear out their outsoles really quickly though, especially if the outsole
material is soft.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

I think it's really dependant on the shoe to. Our group running coach bought a pair of
"light shoes", not sure what brand, for his marathon. He did a couple of longish runs in
them to break them in and the marathon. He said by the end of the race he had completely
worn thru the sole and even into some of the mid materials in places.

~Matt

[email hidden] (Lanceandrew) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

counselor, retreading is exactly that and nothing more. i've lots of shoes
w/perfectly fine absorbtion technology....the treads are just shot/gone.

you take a $100 pair of shoes, i'm willing to bet before the technology breaks down, the treads
diminished to nill in key areas. just when that shoe is fitting your feet perfectly too!

ya know it could take 300-400 miles and countless hours to perfect the fit of a shoe.
couselor...look at that as what it is, an investment. retreading may allow one to retain an aspect
of value in an investment.

in fact when you think about it...perhaps the whole shoe industry is in a conspiracy to design a
shoe with only "so much" tread knowing the technology is good for 1K or 2K miles but the tread
for 500miles. And...then have the tread be the driver to induce another shoe purchase in some
months. People commonly look at the tread and decide they need to spend another $75 or whatever
when the technology is fine, fit perfect, and a $20 retreading to a pocket other than a shoe
manufacturer might be the viable option/answer. i am not saying this is so...just possible. but
what am i?...crazy. no, a shoe manufacturer would never employ a signaling mechanism into a shoe
(reduced tread life) to drive repeated sales...based on perception of the tread...of course not.
not these companies that change the design with the seasons discontinuing the model you just fell
in love with...

The tread on today's shoes is too complex and varied for any volume resoling. I used to do many
runner's shoes myself, buying material from a shoe repair wholesaler. Today, I still do mine and a
friend's shoes as needed. Often I do spot repairs like just the heel or half the heel, whatever is
worn. I can bring it back to original dimensions and probably last the equivalent of 2-3 pair of
shoes. It's quite labor intensive and would be hard to duplicate on a volume scale.

TopCounsel <[email hidden]> writes:

:>in fact when you think about it...perhaps the whole shoe industry is in a
: conspiracy to design a shoe with only "so much" tread

: "Planned obsolescence" is a real phenomenon, alright, but a conspiracy it is not. Do you think
: Nike and Adidas (and ASICS, etc., ad nauseam) are more friends than enemies? They are very
: determined competitors of each other.

Hell, they don't HAVE to conspire! :-) The shoes companies all think that it is such a good
idea that they just do it, and the buying public doesn't have the balls, awareness, hutzpah,
etc to object!

Conspiracy theorists are those who don't give the shoe companies credit for coming up with this
stuff independently!

🙂
Larry

Doug Freese <[email hidden]> writes:

: Lanceandrew wrote:

:> you take a $100 pair of shoes, i'm willing to bet before the technology breaks down, the treads
:> diminished to nill in key areas. just when that shoe is fitting your feet perfectly too!

: I'm not in agreement with you on this. For me the midsole turns to mush long before treads wears
: out. At least fore the Asics 20nn series. In fact when my shoes are cooked the tread still looks
: ok. At 175 I'm not light on me feet.

You know, I just don't get how the "midsoles turn to mush." Do you incessantly wiggle your feet in
your shoes when you run? Usually even when the tread is worn off, the insoles are like new, and you
can still read all the fine print inside.

Larry

The guy who invented retreading was a sort of rags to riches story, IIRC, and was featured in Time
Mag, or People, or Entrepreneur, or sumpn. They made a real big deal out of his "accomplishment",
which I think hinged on the shock people had at the time in going from $12 Converse to $60 Nikes (a
goddamm fortune back then). But, it may have been hoopla, as the press is so desperate for anything
at all to write about it will pert near invent a story. I never met anyone who retreaded, and never
heard of this guy outside of that feature. TC's observation may also have had some impact, as the
tread is not the only thing on a sneaker to go.
----------------------------
Mr. P.V.'d formerly Droll Troll "Lanceandrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:20040205130506.22865.00001403@mb-
m04.aol.com...

Quoted message said:

Does anyone still do it? You 20-somethings might not know this but there

was a

Quoted message said:

time when we all wore one of a couple of models of shoes....and as I recall....retreading was near
commonplace. You sent your pegs in and a

week

Quoted message said:

or so later...new waffles! I don't think I've seen an ad for retreading

in a

Quoted message said:

long long time.

But that was a time of a pretty much a singular design of shoes....I

suppose

Quoted message said:

todays shoes so custom engineered in materials & design that retreading

isn't

Quoted message said:

as universally a simple retro-fit as it was before.

Is it still done? Is it still done widely and am I just not noticing it?....When was the last time
anyone had a retread done?

The soles would wear out in the lower quality & price shoes before the cushioning degraded. However
I found the other way around with medium price ($50-$75) shoes. I notices the local dollar store was
selling gel cushion inserts, normally $10-$20 in drugstores. I find these gel inserts extend the
cushioning another month or two.

"Larry McMahan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Doug Freese <[email hidden]> writes:

: Lanceandrew wrote:

:> you take a $100 pair of shoes, i'm willing to bet before the technology

breaks

Quoted message said:

:> down, the treads diminished to nill in key areas. just when that shoe

is

Quoted message said:

:> fitting your feet perfectly too!

: I'm not in agreement with you on this. For me the midsole turns to mush long before treads wears
: out. At least fore the Asics 20nn series. In fact when my shoes are cooked the tread still looks
: ok. At 175 I'm not light on me feet.

You know, I just don't get how the "midsoles turn to mush." Do you incessantly wiggle your feet in
your shoes when you run? Usually even when the tread is worn off, the insoles are like new, and
you can still read all the fine print inside.

You know, I just don't get how the "tread wears out." Do you incessantly drag your feet along
abbrassive surfaces? Is sand paper your preferred running surface? . . . Get the point?

--
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º
eNo
"If you can't go fast, go long."
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º

[email hidden] (Lanceandrew) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Does anyone still do it? You 20-somethings might not know this but there was a time when we all
wore one of a couple of models of shoes....and as I recall....retreading was near commonplace. You
sent your pegs in and a week or so later...new waffles! I don't think I've seen an ad for
retreading in a long long time.

But that was a time of a pretty much a singular design of shoes....I suppose todays shoes so
custom engineered in materials & design that retreading isn't as universally a simple retro-fit as
it was before.

Is it still done? Is it still done widely and am I just not noticing it?....When was the last time
anyone had a retread done?

I don't know of retreads any more. But I used to use Liqua sole when the heel wore out. I got years
of running out of a few pair of shoes. Now that I can't find Liqua-sole I just buy a new pair of
shoes. Shoo Goo is a pale comparison.

I know retreading is more popular in the hiking boot end of things.

Andy

[email hidden] (TopCounsel) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

i don't think i understand your pound-foolish statement. are you implying that it's going to be
detrimental for him in the long run? if so, how?

That's exactly what I meant. As the tread goes out, so does the cushioning (and in some cases,
possibly the support). Re-treading will not restore the "cush" to the cushion. Running in shoes
that don't cushion is not good for someone who needs cushioned shoes. You could be trading shoe
invoices for doctor bills, and that is not an even exchange, whether in dollar terms or measured
in pain.

I always have new shoes available to trade off to. I have seen folks mark every mile on the side of
a shoe and discard the shoe at a certain mileage. Three hundred is real common. Such arbitrary
numbers are not a rational way of judging shoe extinction. If you can afford it and don't know any
different then it makes sense I guess to just keep buying new. I've taken shoes completely apart and
reassembled them before. Generally, I can tell when I work on a shoe whether the resiliency is
totally gone and those shoes may well be converted to walking shoes or snow only shoes. And some
runners are very light on their feet causing the shoe to perform much longer. I've also stopped
running with a shoe after the first run. In fact, more injuries seem to be caused by new shoes that
don't work for a given form than worn out shoes. Posting in this group frequently mention an injury
from a given new shoe. So one size doesn't fit all.

try here:

tennisrays.comitem81108.ctlgOpen ↗

AMH said:

[email hidden] (Lanceandrew) wrote in message news:<20040205130506.22865.00001403@mb-
m04.aol.com>... > Does anyone still do it? You 20-somethings might not know this but there was a >
time when we all wore one of a couple of models of shoes....and as I > recall....retreading was
near commonplace. You sent your pegs in and a week > or so later...new waffles! I don't think I've
seen an ad for retreading in a > long long time. > > But that was a time of a pretty much a
singular design of shoes....I suppose > todays shoes so custom engineered in materials & design
that retreading isn't > as universally a simple retro-fit as it was before. > > Is it still done?
Is it still done widely and am I just not noticing > it?....When was the last time anyone had a
retread done?

I don't know of retreads any more. But I used to use Liqua sole when the heel wore out. I got
years of running out of a few pair of shoes. Now that I can't find Liqua-sole I just buy a new
pair of shoes. Shoo Goo is a pale comparison.

I know retreading is more popular in the hiking boot end of things.

Andy