Has anyone worn these? I'm not sure I'd want to spend $130 to find out if they're any good, but of all the Hoka shoes this is my favorite for looks and advertised features.
Has anyone worn these? I'm not sure I'd want to spend $130 to find out if they're any good, but of all the Hoka shoes this is my favorite for looks and advertised features.
Yes, they are my favorite shoe ever. They're so good, I haven't used any of my other shoes for running since I've got these shoes. Even now, with 835 miles in them and totally blown out uppers, I still like them better than my other, lower mileage shoes.
My one criticism of the shoe is that the upper fabric should last longer. I have wide feet with bunions that probably stress the upper more than average though.
The Clifton is the best shoe ever made in the history of the world and this is basically a Clifton for the trails. I will probably buy a pair along with another pair of Cliftons so I will have a shoe for the roads and a shoe for the trails. My first pair of Cliftons have about 800 miles on them and I am planning on using them for non tech trails this summer while I run another few hundred miles in my current pair of Cliftons.
I have both the clifton and the rapa nui and the latter is my favorite: just a little more solid underfoot. Hard to imagine better...
Thanks for the info, guys. I still can't quite bring myself to buy them since I have two pairs of Adidas Supernova Glide 6 Boost (my all-time favorite), one pair of which has just 200 miles and the other is brand new, and a brand new Saucony Ride 6 that is also a very nice shoe. But if the price drops unexpectedly to less than $100, I'd grab these Hokas for sure.
I'll buy a pair of these. Big fan of the Cliftons but I also blew out the fabric on the uppers after about 500 miles. The rest of the shoe still felt great so I duct taped the upper and still use them.
HOKA - FIX THE FABRIC ON YOUR UPPERS!!!
But is it a CLUNKER???
(queue the lines about "oh their best shoes are 'only 8 ounces!'")
Can we turn this into a Hoka appreciation and/or Q&A thread?! I recently bought a pair of Bondi 3 to test out. I LOVE the feel of the shoe and running in them. However...I had a minor glitch. I ran in them 3 times over a week, and I started getting pain beneath the outside ankle bone on my right foot. It wasn't on the bone, actually felt like it might be the tendon under it, and I was able to run in my Brooks Ghost 7 and Saucony Ride 7, but when I put the Hokas back on the pain was immediate.
I have worn them walking around a couple times since (it has been almost 3 weeks now) and the pain is gone, but I ran a couple minutes in them Tuesday and could tell the sensation was there so I didn't want to risk it. Does anyone have any idea what this is and how I can fix/prevent it? Will a different Hoka shoe address the problem?
I had exactly the same problem on the same foot and solved it by cutting out a small piece of the shoe directly where it was touching the ankle bone. Only took a small amount out with a pair of kitchen scissors and have had no problem since. Hope this helps.
wearing these moon boots means you are one step away from quitting running.
hagster wrote:
wearing these moon boots means you are one step away from quitting running.
How much have you run in them?
hagster wrote:
wearing these moon boots means you are one step away from quitting running.
You may be right. I think they might be really good for guys like me who are over 50 and have to do a lot of running on pavement. The extreme cushioning (I hear) is one thing that has kept me from buying them, although that's secondary to the price. Right now, the Adidas Boost line does the job perfectly for me, even on pavement. But as I get older, the tendons and joints might not be so solid, and "moon boots" might be just the ticket. Right now, though, all that cushioning might be overkill, and my older body might get so used to it that I'd be stuck with "moon boot" cushioning like a crutch from then on. I can afford to buy a pair of Hokas, but for me it's also the principle of overpaying for running shoes and being taken advantage of by a shoe company when there are so many great options out there, one of which is already close to perfect for me, that has kept that $130-$170 in my pocket. I also would never pay $180 for the "Ultra Boost," either. No running shoe is worth that, in my opinion, because no shoe costing $180 is demonstrably better than the top-of-the-line shoe from another major company that costs $100. Like I said, though, if the Hoka One One Challenger ATR dropped to less than $100, I'd scoop up a pair.
Don't they have more than 2 or 3 cut and paste stories for you to talk about? Come on, every single Hoka thread has a "different guy" saying the same thing: "I'm a 50-something veteran runner and those Hokas sure do save my legs from all the pavement pounding!"
Don't you realize somebody's going to pick up on this sooner or later?
funny that 50 year old guys in Japan don't wear these clogs
Youre fat and soft, just like your shoes
hagster wrote:
wearing these moon boots means you are one step away from quitting running.
The stack height of the Cliftons and Challengers are in the normal range. The Clifton has the same heel height (29 mm) as the Nike Pegasus 31 according to Running Warehouse. The Challenger is a bit higher due to the trail tread. I could agree if you called the Stinsons or other thicker Hokas moon boots, but not these shoes.
I have paid $70 each for my Hokas. Runningwarehouse typoically has the best deals, but google shop for best.
I developed mild shinsplint on one side for the first time since HS, due to my overextending stride. It vanished with some yoga and keeping my feet under me.
If you a women and your foot looks like Fred Flinstone's foot, then go ahead and buy the Clifton.
Shawn H wrote:
hagster wrote:wearing these moon boots means you are one step away from quitting running.
You may be right. I think they might be really good for guys like me who are over 50 and have to do a lot of running on pavement. The extreme cushioning (I hear) is one thing that has kept me from buying them, although that's secondary to the price. Right now, the Adidas Boost line does the job perfectly for me, even on pavement. But as I get older, the tendons and joints might not be so solid, and "moon boots" might be just the ticket. Right now, though, all that cushioning might be overkill, and my older body might get so used to it that I'd be stuck with "moon boot" cushioning like a crutch from then on. I can afford to buy a pair of Hokas, but for me it's also the principle of overpaying for running shoes and being taken advantage of by a shoe company when there are so many great options out there, one of which is already close to perfect for me, that has kept that $130-$170 in my pocket. I also would never pay $180 for the "Ultra Boost," either. No running shoe is worth that, in my opinion, because no shoe costing $180 is demonstrably better than the top-of-the-line shoe from another major company that costs $100. Like I said, though, if the Hoka One One Challenger ATR dropped to less than $100, I'd scoop up a pair.
They don't feel like a "moon boot." They feel like a little more cushioned version of the less rigid / more cushioned "Air Max," only with a little more cushioning.
At your age, you never know what kind of genetics you have got - and all the impact you've already put on your body that could reach critical mass some time and then a "maximalist" brand / shoe might be the only thing you can wear...
The Clifton is a great shoe. I like it. The one thing is that the fit was a bit weird at first. I had to go up 1/2 size because of this. I never have to do that.
After going up one size, I have no issues other than faster wear. Lightweight rubber to me doesn't last quite as long as GEL padding. It is the same across all brands for me, however.
Hoka gets it though when it comes to drop. 5mm-6mm. It is just perfect for me.
Although the Challenger ATR looks nice in Black, you have to admit that, overall, Hokas look pretty ridiculous when you see someone run in them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf_9OmRHvgE
I'd absolutely have to try them on and test-run in them before I'd pay the price. They'd have to be fantastic for me to trade in either my Adidas or my Saucony for such a ridiculous looking shoe.