Shoe vs foot width

Quoted message said:

All my shoes that re too narrow end up putting the outside edge of my
foot over the edge. The inside edge would be even more uncomfortable.

Doing your pen-trick, I only shaved a few millimeters. 11.7cm.

Maybe I was probing a bit more than you, or maybe it's my foot structure.
My feet overhang on both sides, but in regards to comfort and support, it's
more noticeable on the inside because the big toe joints at the balls of my
feet are enlarged and bulge out about 4 or 5 mm to the inside. I guess they
might be called bunions, except they don't hurt and mobility is fine.
Callouses are built up under the "bunions" because of pressure, so that's
where I would like more room. I tend to bust through the uppers in my
running shoes there (and also on the outside).

My feet do overhang on the outside of shoes too, just not as noticeably
because I concentrate more force through the inside or inside/center of my
feet on push off, especially when running and xc skiing. I do notice when
the upper is too tight or shaped wrong because they can sometimes pinch my
little toes there.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Salomon Carbon Pro Classics (labeled 44/US 10/28 cm) are 9.5 cm wide.
These
feel not quite wide enough underfoot (and on top too), and my feet
overhang
on the inside. They are useable though.

I have some Alpina race skate boots and some SP15 classic boots. The
more sport oriented classic boot is much wider and rather comfortable.

The only reason I have those Carbon Pros is because I got lucky in a prize
drawing. I classic ski in old Adidas Naganos that are very comfortable. I
just checked, and the soles on these are also 9.5 cm. Maybe most of the
Profil soles are the same shape.

Quoted message said:

I have some Nike Trail something or others that are 11.5 wide (15)
that are comfortable and have no roll-over. My wife has some Nike Free
4.0 and if I built some cycling shoes, I'd like the uppers to be like
that, but with some strapping.

I loved the Free 4.0, but I don't think it's available anymore. With plenty
of width and only stretchy material over my "bunions", they were the most
comfortable running shoes ever for me. Plus, I liked that they were
slip-ons.

Mr. Salmon from Nigeria sent an email offering to cut me in after the
first post.

I wanted Salmons but too narrow then North Face showed up and I
thought well, Zappos will let me send them back if too narrow so I
bought and narrow but yes OK to go after a breakin period. 3/16th's
extra both sides on an E foot in 14's

http://www.zappos.com/n/p/dp/11748582/c/108020.html

mmmm mmmm mmmmm

A top run review stated: this shoe runs to size and not one mm more. ?

Zappos, and this is xmass its that time of year
with Zappos yule want to stand clear
caws they's gotta shoe catapult for delivery

datakoll said:

a euro size 48 is 13.5? a euro 50 is a US 13.75?

Euro sizes seem to vary more than US sizes. It's been a long time
since anything other than a US 15 fit me, and almost all my shoes are
Euro 50. But I have 2 pairs that are 48.

Joseph

Quoted message said:

the running shoe idea is best for the odd sized recreational cyclist.
Zappos has Goretex running shoes in stock, or durable AT running
shoes.
finding the stiff sole material? try the plastics store. The materail
used in most cycling shoes was commercially unavailble last I looked.
plywood?
pry out the new insole, fit new plastic/resin sole, mount cleat to
sole, install new soft sole as necessary.
running shoes may lift the upper heel from the heel sole. The 2 part
epoxy found at walmart marked for RUBBER is applied after sanding
rubber/upper and picking the threads clean. use a ply form top and
bottom cut ti fit as shoemaker then deep reach CLAMP form shoe form
together. lasts longer than the upper. use the 5 minute epoxy.

In article
<[email hidden]
egroups.com>,
"[email hidden]"

Quoted message said:

Hi All,

There have been a bunch of threads about big shoes lately, and I'm
well aware of who makes big shoes. But now I pondering how widths vary
by size and how big shoes may or may not be proportionally wider.

Shoes of varying widths are often made using the same sole, but with
more upper material to create a greater volume. In discussions with
vendors, I have been told that shoes in my size will fit and be
comfortable despite the sole being significatly narrower than my foot.
I do not have a particularly wide foot, but I think this is common
with the larger sizes, and I don't buy it.

I wear US 15, Euro 50 and my foot is 12cm wide. This is a D or regular
width. I have yet to find any cycling shoes with a sole wider than
10cm. This means 2cm of my foot hangs over the outside edge and is
unsupported and has the edge of the sole digging in when I push down.

Somebody who uses size 10 US (43 Euro) in a D width would have a foot
about 10cm wide. Do size 43 cycling shoes have a sole that is 8cm
wide? Is that wide enough? Do folks with more normal sized feet have
solid sole under their whole foot?

Shimano SPD mountain bicycle shoe,
size 45
100 mm sole width measured on the outside
105 mm foot width.

I am comfortable in these shoes.
Typically I wear US size 9 1/2.

--
Michael Press

Michael Press said:

In article
<[email hidden]
egroups.com>,
"[email hidden]"

Quoted message said:

Hi All,

Quoted message said:

There have been a bunch of threads about big shoes lately, and I'm
well aware of who makes big shoes. But now I pondering how widths vary
by size and how big shoes may or may not be proportionally wider.

Quoted message said:

Shoes of varying widths are often made using the same sole, but with
more upper material to create a greater volume. In discussions with
vendors, I have been told that shoes in my size will fit and be
comfortable despite the sole being significatly narrower than my foot.
I do not have a particularly wide foot, but I think this is common
with the larger sizes, and I don't buy it.

Quoted message said:

I wear US 15, Euro 50 and my foot is 12cm wide. This is a D or regular
width. I have yet to find any cycling shoes with a sole wider than
10cm. This means 2cm of my foot hangs over the outside edge and is
unsupported and has the edge of the sole digging in when I push down.

Quoted message said:

Somebody who uses size 10 US (43 Euro) in a D width would have a foot
about 10cm wide. Do size 43 cycling shoes have a sole that is 8cm
wide? Is that wide enough? Do folks with more normal sized feet have
solid sole under their whole foot?

Shimano SPD mountain bicycle shoe,
size 45
100 mm sole width measured on the outside
105 mm foot width.

I am comfortable in these shoes.
Typically I wear US size 9 1/2.

--
Michael Press

105/100 sure sounds more comfy than 120/100. Are they long for you?

Joseph

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:17:00 -0800 (PST),

Quoted post said:

Michael Press said:

In article
<[email hidden]
egroups.com>,
"[email hidden]"

Quoted message said:

Hi All,

Quoted message said:

There have been a bunch of threads about big shoes lately, and I'm
well aware of who makes big shoes. But now I pondering how widths vary
by size and how big shoes may or may not be proportionally wider.

Quoted message said:

Shoes of varying widths are often made using the same sole, but with
more upper material to create a greater volume. In discussions with
vendors, I have been told that shoes in my size will fit and be
comfortable despite the sole being significatly narrower than my foot.
I do not have a particularly wide foot, but I think this is common
with the larger sizes, and I don't buy it.

Quoted message said:

I wear US 15, Euro 50 and my foot is 12cm wide. This is a D or regular
width. I have yet to find any cycling shoes with a sole wider than
10cm. This means 2cm of my foot hangs over the outside edge and is
unsupported and has the edge of the sole digging in when I push down.

Quoted message said:

Somebody who uses size 10 US (43 Euro) in a D width would have a foot
about 10cm wide. Do size 43 cycling shoes have a sole that is 8cm
wide? Is that wide enough? Do folks with more normal sized feet have
solid sole under their whole foot?

Shimano SPD mountain bicycle shoe,
size 45
100 mm sole width measured on the outside
105 mm foot width.

I am comfortable in these shoes.
Typically I wear US size 9 1/2.

--
Michael Press

105/100 sure sounds more comfy than 120/100. Are they long for you?

Joseph

My bare foot is 105-107 mm wide. My Sidi Mega 44.5 mountain bike shoes
measure 91 mm on the sole and 107 on the exterior of the "leather." I
wore relatively thick wool socks last week and was comfortable. I have
worn thin socks, wool socks and Goretex socks on my Sidi Mega road
shoes. The 44.5 road shoes measure about 110 mm on the outside. When I
got the Mega shoes their length was about 13 mm shorter than the
standard width shoes I used to have. I had to get a few sizes larger
to get the width I needed with stand sized shoes.

I have never complained about foot comfort with my Sidis. My foot
hangs over both sides of the sole on both road and mountain shoes.

In article
<[email hidden]
egroups.com>,
"[email hidden]"

Quoted message said:

Michael Press said:

In article
<[email hidden]
egroups.com>,
"[email hidden]"

Quoted message said:

Hi All,

Quoted message said:

There have been a bunch of threads about big shoes lately, and I'm
well aware of who makes big shoes. But now I pondering how widths vary
by size and how big shoes may or may not be proportionally wider.

Quoted message said:

Shoes of varying widths are often made using the same sole, but with
more upper material to create a greater volume. In discussions with
vendors, I have been told that shoes in my size will fit and be
comfortable despite the sole being significatly narrower than my foot.
I do not have a particularly wide foot, but I think this is common
with the larger sizes, and I don't buy it.

Quoted message said:

I wear US 15, Euro 50 and my foot is 12cm wide. This is a D or regular
width. I have yet to find any cycling shoes with a sole wider than
10cm. This means 2cm of my foot hangs over the outside edge and is
unsupported and has the edge of the sole digging in when I push down.

Quoted message said:

Somebody who uses size 10 US (43 Euro) in a D width would have a foot
about 10cm wide. Do size 43 cycling shoes have a sole that is 8cm
wide? Is that wide enough? Do folks with more normal sized feet have
solid sole under their whole foot?

Shimano SPD mountain bicycle shoe,
size 45
100 mm sole width measured on the outside
105 mm foot width.

I am comfortable in these shoes.
Typically I wear US size 9 1/2.

105/100 sure sounds more comfy than 120/100. Are they long for you?

No, they are not. They offer plenty of room in the toe box,
but I do not slop around in them. My feet do not fit the
standard last used for shoes, as the heel to big arch
distance is relatively long compared to the big arch
to toe end distance. I buy longer shoes than my foot
length suggests. and I fill the toe box because
the front portion of my foot is thick and wide.

Sorry about the 120/100 problem.

--
Michael Press