Alternative "Cushioned" shoe?

looking at your situation from my point of view is the "extra cushion in bottom of any major brand
shoe will do the trick" but buy the best, the 30-35 wk. mileage your feet are taking a big pounding
age is a contributing factor here also if you're wanting to stay competive an additional weight loss
would be very helpfull 165lbs is very heavy for competion I'm suggesting you compete at 145lbs using
supplements while dieting i was competive at 140lbs. this is just my opinion good luck.

I use the New Balance 879 cushioned shoe, and I really like it a lot. It's highly cushioned. I tried
the 751, and though it was "OK", the 879 was a noticeable improvement for me. The 879 has been
upgraded to an 880 now, and I haven't tried that yet (I just bought 4 pairs of 879's at 1/2 price!)

Teresa in Tucson

Tracer said:

I have run in the 7 series New Balance and the various Air Max Nike shoes.I prefer straight lasted
shoes.I am 51,am 5'11",164 lbs, and run 30-35 miles a week. Does anyone have a "highly cushioned "
shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond. [email hidden]

Tracer said:

Does anyone have a "highly cushioned " shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond.
[email hidden]

Asics

Quoted message said:

I have run in the 7 series New Balance and the various Air Max Nike shoes.I prefer straight lasted
shoes.I am 51,am 5'11",164 lbs, and run 30-35 miles a week. Does anyone have a "highly cushioned "
shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond.

Adidas Climacool.

When I started running distances, I have very bad results with Nike (medial shinsplints and a foot
fracture) which only ended when I dumped Nike trainers (still use their spikes). I have been with
Adidas for years with no such problems. My feeling is that Adidas is better for larger runners who
do not overpronate, and New Balance is better for those needing stability/light motion control.

Lyndon "Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!" --US Olympic Track Coach Brooks Johnson

I, too, really like the NB87x. In fact I have not yet graduated to the now-outdated 879, because I
am still using up my last 2 pairs of 878s. This is a shoe made on the SL-2 last, so it is a little
roomier than others in the toes.

I read where Runner's World (I think) gave the NB880 the *best update* award, so maybe it is an even
better shoe now.

Brian Jones "Teresa Bippert-Plymate" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I use the New Balance 879 cushioned shoe, and I really like it a lot. It's highly cushioned. I
tried the 751, and though it was "OK", the 879 was a noticeable improvement for me. The 879 has
been upgraded to an 880 now, and I haven't tried that yet (I just bought 4 pairs of 879's at
1/2 price!)

Teresa in Tucson

Tracer said:

I have run in the 7 series New Balance and the various Air Max Nike

shoes.I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

prefer straight lasted shoes.I am 51,am 5'11",164 lbs, and run 30-35

miles a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

week. Does anyone have a "highly cushioned " shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond.
[email hidden]

Below are but two more Nike horror stories. When will people learn? NIKE SUX!

(Lyndon) said:

Quoted message said:

I have run in the 7 series New Balance and the various Air Max Nike shoes.I prefer straight lasted
shoes.I am 51,am 5'11",164 lbs, and run 30-35 miles a week. Does anyone have a "highly cushioned "
shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond.

Adidas Climacool.

When I started running distances, I have very bad results with Nike (medial shinsplints and a foot
fracture) which only ended when I dumped Nike trainers (still use their spikes). I have been with
Adidas for years with no such problems. My feeling is that Adidas is better for larger runners who
do not overpronate, and New Balance is better for those needing stability/light motion control.

Lyndon "Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!" --US Olympic Track Coach Brooks Johnson

The Brooks Dyad is the only Neutral(cushioned) shoe with a straight last. It was designed for the
flat footed runner with a neutral gait cycle. The NB 880 is a respectable alternative, though not a
straight last it is not as curved as most others.

George

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

Quoted message said:

I have run in the 7 series New Balance and the various Air Max Nike

shoes.I

Quoted message said:

prefer straight lasted shoes.I am 51,am 5'11",164 lbs, and run 30-35 miles

a

Quoted message said:

week. Does anyone have a "highly cushioned " shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond.
[email hidden]

George Maxwell said:

The Brooks Dyad is the only Neutral(cushioned) shoe with a straight last.

Uninformed idiot.

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

Quoted message said:

I have run in the 7 series New Balance and the various Air Max Nike

shoes.I

Quoted message said:

prefer straight lasted shoes.I am 51,am 5'11",164 lbs, and run 30-35 miles

a

Quoted message said:

week. Does anyone have a "highly cushioned " shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond.
[email hidden]

Saucony 3d Grid. I weigh am 5'7" ,185lbs and run about 15-20 miles a week. I buy all my shoes at
Snails Pace, I try on and run around the parking lot about a dozen of the latest greatest cushioned
shoe. That one felt the best.

Lyndon said:

Quoted message said:

I have run in the 7 series New Balance and the various Air Max Nike shoes.I prefer straight lasted
shoes.I am 51,am 5'11",164 lbs, and run 30-35 miles a week. Does anyone have a "highly cushioned "
shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond.

Adidas Climacool.

Cool (sorry).

Quoted message said:

When I started running distances, I have very bad results with Nike (medial shinsplints and a foot
fracture) which only ended when I dumped Nike trainers (still use their spikes). I have been with
Adidas for years with no such problems. My feeling is that Adidas is better for larger runners who
do not overpronate, and New Balance is better for those needing stability/light motion control.

Second what Lyndon said. Also, you might want to consider a 3rd-party insole. Lyndon and I are both
forefoot (or front midfoot) landers but I'm (a lot) heavier than Lyndon so I need a little extra
cushioning for the ball of my foot. I use the Sorbothane UltraSoles. They are pricey but, at least
in my case, they last the life of the shoe - look for sales. There are other insoles that are just
as good for different body types and running styles. I tried the little gel thingies that go under
the ball of the front but they didn't work for me. Your mileage may vary.

Layne

-------------------------------------------------------
The rec.running report archives may be found at kinder.cis.unf.edurec.runningOpen ↗

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:19:52 GMT, Brian Jones wrote:

I really liked the 879 (4E, thank you very much). However, based on two pairs of 880s, I'm very
disappointed. The heel seems to be quite a bit narrower than the 879/878. The forefoot box also
seems a little narrower but not as much as the heel. On the good side, the upper has a lot more mesh
(not so good for our cold weather running kin) and they don't seem to have messed with the sole.
After trying the second pair of 880s, I went on a hunt for 879s (got 2 pairs).

One person's limited experience, Layne

Quoted message said:

I, too, really like the NB87x. In fact I have not yet graduated to the now-outdated 879, because I
am still using up my last 2 pairs of 878s. This is a shoe made on the SL-2 last, so it is a little
roomier than others in the toes.

I read where Runner's World (I think) gave the NB880 the *best update* award, so maybe it is an
even better shoe now.

Brian Jones "Teresa Bippert-Plymate" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I use the New Balance 879 cushioned shoe, and I really like it a lot. It's highly cushioned. I
tried the 751, and though it was "OK", the 879 was a noticeable improvement for me. The 879 has
been upgraded to an 880 now, and I haven't tried that yet (I just bought 4 pairs of 879's at 1/2
price!)

Teresa in Tucson

Tracer said:

I have run in the 7 series New Balance and the various Air Max Nike

shoes.I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

prefer straight lasted shoes.I am 51,am 5'11",164 lbs, and run 30-35

miles a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

week. Does anyone have a "highly cushioned " shoe they prefer? Thanks to all who respond.
[email hidden]

-------------------------------------------------------
The rec.running report archives may be found at kinder.cis.unf.edurec.runningOpen ↗

Layne Wallace said:

Lyndon said:

problems. My feeling is that Adidas is better for larger runners who do not overpronate, and New
Balance is better for those needing stability/light motion control.

Second what Lyndon said. Also, you might want to consider a 3rd-party insole. Lyndon and I are
both forefoot (or front midfoot) landers but I'm (a lot) heavier than Lyndon so I need a little
extra cushioning for the ball of my foot. I use the Sorbothane UltraSoles. They are pricey but, at
least in my case, they last the life of the shoe - look for sales. There are other insoles that
are just as good for different body types and running styles. I tried the little gel thingies that
go under the ball of the front but they didn't work for me. Your mileage may vary.

Layne

I'll third what Layne said. I'm a forefoot (well, front-midfoot) striker also, and use second-source
insoles too. I need a little more arch support, though, so buy the Arch Plus insoles. It makes a big
difference for me. You can feel the difference in cushioning between the insoles that come with the
shoe and the second-source ones. Second-source insoles are a lot more cushioned. They've always
lasted at least as long as the shoes.

Teresa in AZ

I buy insole padding to improve the cushioning sometimes. They about five pounds from your nearby
Chemist or Drug Store.

Hi,

I recently got some Brooks Illusions. I had originally intended them just for kicking around,
but found that they made a decent shoe. I think I paid in the $30-$40 range per pair, which is
quite good.

I'm 173 lbs, heel striker, and don't overpronate. Right now, I'm putting about 25 miles/week on
the shoes.

I used to be a big Asics fan, but the last couple of pairs I've had haven't been to my liking.

Bob

"Layne Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I really liked the 879 (4E, thank you very much). However, based on two

pairs

Quoted message said:

of 880s, I'm very disappointed. The heel seems to be quite a bit narrower than the 879/878. The
forefoot box also seems a little narrower but not as much as the heel. On the good side, the
upper has a lot more mesh (not so good for our cold weather running kin) and they don't seem to
have messed with the sole. After trying the second pair of 880s, I went on a hunt for 879s (got
2 pairs).

The 880 is more narrow and runs a half size smaller than previous models. Most of our 87X customers
are going to a wider width and up 1/2 size.

Jim Johnson

Jim Johnson said:

The 880 is more narrow and runs a half size smaller than previous models. Most of our 87X customers
are going to a wider width and up 1/2 size.

Thanks, Jim. Yeah, I was afraid that I'd have to do that. I tried on a pair that was 1/2 a size
larger but the new heel is really narrow and I'm already at 4E <G>. If you get a chance to slap an
NB person around a little (socially, of course), get in a couple for me, please. The last rep I
talked to suggested that I "try them until I got used to them." I had a few suggestions for him to
try until he got used to them.

Layne

-------------------------------------------------------
The rec.running report archives may be found at kinder.cis.unf.edurec.runningOpen ↗