Ho Hum wrote:
I think it's because shoe companies insist on making changes to models that are already optimized so they can have something new to sell. That means the quality goes something like this: 1st gen (good), 2-3 gen (perfected), 4th gen (dramatic changes ruin the shoe). So at any given time, there are a lot of shoe models that are garbage but used to be good, and you have to sort through reviews to figure it out.
Case in point, Nike had a great shoe with the Streak XC, kept it pretty much unchanged but ominously renamed it Streak LT, then ruined it with the LT2.
I disagree that shoe companies are just looking for change so they have something new to sell. I'm sure there is definitely pressure to come up with something new every year just like new car model every year, but I think they are looking for ways to improve upon it bc there is ton of competition and want to make sure they're the best.
Also, they are making the shoes for the pros to run and win. They want to make the shoes that's best for the pros as winning in their shoes means a lot.
So, i think it's crap to think shoes with "gimmicks" are not beneficial as if nike pros want to, they can race in Nike frees but they choose not to even though they are very flexible and little heel toe drop