Nike, for their outsized and corrupting influence on the sport.
Nike, for their outsized and corrupting influence on the sport.
Nike have been way too into gimmicks just to meet the young crowd.
Coffee Runner wrote:
Karhu.
It amazing they are still in business
Pretty sure Craft bought them. And Craft shoes are awful. But their clothes are super high quality.
Etonic
Spot Bilt
Pony
Pro Wings
Turntec
Anyone run in Newtons recently? They used to be all over big races and now it seems like you couldn’t find a pair to save your life.
Adidas - They make casual sneakers and Yeezys. Nothing serious. All junk.
Sketchers - I mean, really. A business model based on copying, a white trash brand and a a background in Walmart level sneakers.
Brooks - Ok Boomer.
New Balance - Ok Boomer 2.0 and their entitled 40something kids. Fresh Foam is junk.
Asics - Gel was cool in 1991. Seemingly nothing has changed for the brand since.
Reebok - Lol. Core demographic = basic white girls everywhere who like to thrift.
Altra - The Lone Peak 3.0 was a solid shoe, all downhill from there.
Puma - Like Pony, you only wore Pumas, back in the day, if your dad didn't have a job.
Under Armor - 'Murica & Huntin'.. Cameron Haines is a beast though. Shoes are junk.
Mizuno - Boutique brand, in Asia, at best. They do make badass badminton shoes though.
Merrel - Trail Gloves had their place in the "Born to Run" era but not any longer.
Saucony - Another boutique brand, at best.
---
Pretty much if you aren't running in Nike and possible a handful of Hokas or Salamons (for dirt)... you are wasting your time.
is it 1985? wrote:
Etonic
Spot Bilt
Pony
Pro Wings
Turntec
Pony? Man you gave a good laugh! I totally forgot about them. Lots of guys in my neighborhood used to run in red Pony's back in 1976. Thanks for refreshing my memory!
YouKnowIt wrote:
Adidas - They make casual sneakers and Yeezys. Nothing serious. All junk.
Sketchers - I mean, really. A business model based on copying, a white trash brand and a a background in Walmart level sneakers.
Brooks - Ok Boomer.
New Balance - Ok Boomer 2.0 and their entitled 40something kids. Fresh Foam is junk.
Asics - Gel was cool in 1991. Seemingly nothing has changed for the brand since.
Reebok - Lol. Core demographic = basic white girls everywhere who like to thrift.
Altra - The Lone Peak 3.0 was a solid shoe, all downhill from there.
Puma - Like Pony, you only wore Pumas, back in the day, if your dad didn't have a job.
Under Armor - 'Murica & Huntin'.. Cameron Haines is a beast though. Shoes are junk.
Mizuno - Boutique brand, in Asia, at best. They do make badass badminton shoes though.
Merrel - Trail Gloves had their place in the "Born to Run" era but not any longer.
Saucony - Another boutique brand, at best.
---
Pretty much if you aren't running in Nike and possible a handful of Hokas or Salamons (for dirt)... you are wasting your time.
Wasn't Puma the sponsor of Usain Bolt?
Puma still is. UB could outrun anyone in a pair of Crocs and it doesn't take much to make a track spike.
Champion. Champion makes the worst running shoes. End of thread.
Ultra > Marathon wrote:
Champion. Champion makes the worst running shoes. End of thread.
Oh yes, king of crap brands. Lock the thread!
Nike. Nothing wrong with the build quality or style. But they will injure you.
wctually... wrote:
Coffee Runner wrote:
Karhu.
It amazing they are still in business
Pretty sure Craft bought them. And Craft shoes are awful. But their clothes are super high quality.
No. Italian guys bought Karhu. The man who bought it together with his son founded Asics Italy and was later chairman of Asics Europe. I actually like Karhu lifestyle shoes. The Fusion 2.0 is my favourite sneaker in winter time. The current running shoe line-up is not sold anymore here in Finland. So I don't know about those. Karhu M1 was the last Karhu running shoe that I wore. That M-line was really popular here before Karhu was sold. Almost everybody had some pairs.
When it comes to this question I answer Diadora because all their shoes are heavy.
Brands that work for me:
Skechers - I didn't want to like them (they look crap, a laughable brand, they are not readily available), but once I ran in their GoBionic shoes I've not gone back, and loving my Razors.
Reebok - Again my feet seem to like joke brands, but their Floatride Run Fast work well for me.
Merrell - Good lightweight trail shoes
Nike - I have a soft spot for Pegs, they introduced me to running
Brands that have been okay for me, but nothing great
Brooks - Great for slow Sunday plods, not so good for going fast.
Puma - Not bad, not good
New Balance - Not bad, not good
Brands that have been awful for me:
On Running - interesting but rubbish
Asics - Nimbus recommended by the shop after gait analysis: slow, heavy and no fun
Mizuno - WaveRider recommended by the shop after gait analysis, caused multiple injuries
If we're talking about big companies, I've had the worst experiences with New Balance. Multiple pairs of their shoes have had the same issue where the insole falls out during runs as soon as they get wet.
Brooks and ASICS both seem to have cut R&D for a long time, though they're catching back up again. But I still see them making "lightweight" shoes that weigh 9 ounces, which is nuts.
hmmmmmmmmm wrote:
Mizuno.
I set my lifetime PRs in my best track events in Mizuno spikes.
Ran for Reebok for a year but went back to Mizuno when I didn’t have a club with a shoe deal.
old guy 74 wrote:
Easy. Brooks. I've been running for 45 years and have tried all the brands. The ones that seemed to work for me:
Saucony
Nike
adidas ('80s)
New Balance ('70s & '80s)
Hoka (recently)
Asics
Converse Equinox only ('80s)
Brooks suck.
Never tried Puma or Reebok
"I've been running for 45 years and have tried all the brands."
"Never tried Puma or Reebok."
Do you even hear yourself?
Chalky wrote:
I've given Saucony their fair shake over the years (have tried several of their flagship models from the Kinvara, to the Triumph, to the Freedom), and I'm always left feeling that they're incredibly cheap and low quality. I've never felt like I got what I paid for with their shoes.
I love my Saucony's but they definitely have a low durability. Its not as much quality of the shoe itself (upper etc.) but the outsoles are just gone way too fast. I cannot for the life of me put more than 350 miles on a Saucony Ride. And at least here in Europe they ask for pretty high end prices. The durability of most other shoes I've worn was higher. I wish they'd fix that.
And we all know what happened to Brooks: Around 2012/2013 they wanted to be the new Nike. There was plenty articles written about their change in corporate strategy at the time. And that is exactly when the brand went from something that dedicated runners wear (for many years the most worn brand at e.g. Boston) to a shoe that the moms wear to go to the gym and shop at target. This was literally their goal and ofc. they still might work for some people, most dedicated runners have moved on. I used to run in their Ravennas back in the day, was my face shoe ever. Then the cheap, mass production striked and they became god awful. Went from my daily shoe to one that I could not even run 3 damn miles in.
Who are Sketchers? Never heard of them.
realrunningshoes wrote:
Asics have kind of fallen behind. They are not BAD. They just do not take advantage of modern advances like the others do.
Besides non-running brands like Under Armor,
Quality:
Saucony
Nike
New Balance
Adidas
Brooks
Solid:
Hoka
Mizuno
Sketchers
Reebok
Asics
On seem gimmicky. I have never tried them.
I left out the trail brands, as I am not so familiar with them. I think they tend to have have lower quality products with occasional winners (Altra Escalante).
My Votes:
Asics
Sketchers
Mizuno
Asics makes a great shoe that has some outdated technology. Fine for an everyday runner. They may catch up soon.
Sketchers uses basic production and happens to have made 1 or 2 winners.
Mizuno has one gimmick that really only suits the heavy hobbyjogger.
Agree with PBlart. Hate Nikes. Nothing but injuries. Lotsa Brooks haters on here, but Brooks Ghost 11's and 12's have been great for long runs on roads, not good for speedy stuff. This thread proves that different runners need different shoes. Same shoes being hated on by some are loved by others and vice-versa. Good to have choices.....