If a brand releases a shoe with an EVA midsole in 2021, the shoe should not be considered as a good shoe.

Darby wrote:

ClonedDuck wrote:

you realize that even PEBA (PEBAX) is used to make hard shanks/plates in shoes? Track spike plates are made of it.

guess what - same stuff in Nike.

It's all about the process of how the material is treated, not what the material specifically is.

Not really. EVA has two problems: durability and weight. You can use fancy gas infusion to reduce weight, but guess how it's going to affect durability? Yep, having less dense EVA makes it even less durable.

you just contradicted yourself- you said that weight isn't an issue with an EVA, that it can be made lightweight.

and durability compared to....?

PEBAX? look how fast that packs out. it pushes the weight x durability disproportionate relationship even further.

Don't get me wrong, would be great to have shoes that last 1000 miles.

What lasts the longest? Boost. What is super heavy? Boost.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

What is the best super foam then, that is lightweight AND durable? Anyone with a small brain and zero context can critique. How about providing solutions.

Pick your battle, or at the worst, go invent something new that destroys the market by winning in everything.

uhh no just no wrote:

I have. Have you run in anything but Hokas? Because Hokas are not on the same level as anything Nike is putting out or even the likes of the Saucony Endorphin Speed, its like a night and day difference. While I haven't tried the latest Moch I've tried pretty much every popular Hoka but have now completely given up on them. Mostly because their shoes just dont ever fit my feet well and I can never get a good lockdown but secondly the materials are cheap quality (uppers and midsole).

They sure are good at marketing though I will give them that. Even if other shoe makers are copying them well, kudos to other shoe makers since they are all doing it better lol.

Ha, yes, if only you knew. As mentioned everyone else is trying to copy Hoka on the max cushioning. They are screwing it up. Nike is over-innovating with weird geometries, heavy bricks, removing the rubber, and uncomfortable uppers/shapes. They have one great racing shoe. Their trainers right now are all garbage.

Also, you should try the Mach 4.

I think it’s also the consumers fault for still buying these EVA sole shoes from these companies. I mean, you can just easily buy from major brands like Nike and Adidas with React or Boost and get the best shoes, but some consumers still choose inferior products for no reason. It’s not like Nike and Adidas shoes are more expensive as their shoes constantly go on clearance. I just don’t understand some consumer behavior willingly choosing inferior products for the hate of some major brands.

I mention Nike and Adidas but plenty of other brands have great midsole material as well like Saucony.

I’ve moved on from EVA long time ago and my shoes just last so long. It’s like my React or Boost shoes never lose the bounce. I rotate my Zoom Elite 9 shoes as I like the feel of it but they wear out 4 times faster.

On an interesting tangent, I wonder how much Walmsley would've taken down that WR if he wore Vaporflys, Endomorphin Speed/Pro, etc. The same goes for Sage's attempts at 2:19, pretty sure he would've gone a minute or two faster in better shoes.

The Mach 4 is just another dated Hoka shoe, but their marketing machine is really doing a good job. You even have shills on here trying to sell that junk.

I have almost 900 miles on my Clifton 4, seems pretty durable

bunch of people here posting who clearly have not run in more than a few pairs/brands of shoes before.

EVA is not EVA of yesteryear

yes, foams like NB's fresh foam could use a makeover, but Hoka is killing the game in terms of getting shoes on people's feet. And yes, I have the Mach 4. Yes, it's great. No, it's not pebax but it's also only $130 and will probably last 500 miles. Are any Hoka shoes among the best 5 shoes on the market? No. not even close. but the average Hoka model is a far superior shoe to the average shoe of almost any other brand.

Hoka also makes a very good assortment of trail shoes. Not even Nike has made a decent trail shoe yet.

I do not understand this shoe thing really.

If you run barefoot (on a surface that is not hurting your feet), you will have minimum LOSS of energy in that energy of movement (up and down and breaking forces) will be stored into the legs muscles and tendons. Depending on your running form there will be a large return of this energy to move up and forward. this is very important for running economy.

If you run on the beach, we all know that we will loose energy in the deformation of the sand both when landing and moveing forward.

Cushioning works to dampen the peak forces because we think that is healty and needed.

There have been done research on what happens with the stiffness of the muscles and tendons when the surface and the shoe cushioning changes. The legs adjust their stiffness according to the softness of what is underneath the feet. So if we run on sand, the legs stiffens, if we run on concrete it loosens up, all to adjust to the a better running economy. So if you add cushioning to the shoes, the legs stiffens and if you remove, they soften up.

Cushioning can dampen and work as a spring. Dampening will just dampen the forces and not return the energy so it is lost. A spring both dampens and returns energy. I guess good cushioning does both good dampening and good energy release, but will always give a loss of energy.

From a point of how the leg works, I do not see why I need such cushioning. Of course I need a shoe that can protect my foot so I can run safely on different surfaces, but since my legs stiffens the softer the "ground" is, I would not win anything by adding something that gives a net energy loss?

A comment is that the carbon plate thing with shoes is another discussion. That does not cushioning, but tries to help the foot moving through the running gait when in contact with the ground. It can reduce the stress over long distances, but if it is better than running barefoot? maybe, maybe not?

Some serious side-effects of cushioned shoes is that it can enable heel striking, which by no means is a natural way of running. If you have to run barefoot, you would never do heel striking... Another side-effect is the excess drop from heel to toe that over time might shorten your calves to the degree you have trouble running in flats or spikes and get sore legs. The new carbon plate help also makes the calves weaker.

So as you understand I am no fan of shoes that f**k up our natural running and I run in minimal shoes even on tarmac. If I do that (I have enough to protect the soles of my feet) I never get sore in the calves. I have a pair of stiffer flats I like so it is comfy with stiffer soles, but not necessary IMO

Why all the Hoka hate? I can run many miles on roads in these lightweight and soft shoes

Would love to see some of this "research"...

And if you tell me to google it, then I will correctly assume there isn't any.

thisworldisscrewedup wrote:

Would love to see some of this "research"...

And if you tell me to google it, then I will correctly assume there isn't any.

I am a researcher within IT. I do not use the word "research" unless there is scientific work behind it. Google is great at finding research beyond opinions which need to be disregarded unless they build on some credit such as other research or experience.

I think you have a good point. There's a lot of marketing around "plush" shoes right now, but the evidence that they help recovery is not really there. The same companies also pushed dual density, motion control, "everyone's an overpronator" for years, even though it never worked.

I kind of wonder how safe some of these stiff rockered shoes are in the long term. If you intentionally change how the foot works, you're moving the forces somewhere else in the chain. Are you overloading the hips, knees, etc?

Ghrelin wrote:

I think you have a good point. There's a lot of marketing around "plush" shoes right now, but the evidence that they help recovery is not really there. The same companies also pushed dual density, motion control, "everyone's an overpronator" for years, even though it never worked.

I kind of wonder how safe some of these stiff rockered shoes are in the long term. If you intentionally change how the foot works, you're moving the forces somewhere else in the chain. Are you overloading the hips, knees, etc?

If the shoe reduces the peak forces and smooths them a little bit out it might be beneficial. It could be that the foot is not designed to interact with a hard and flat surface, but on more varying uneven ground and that the repeated high forces the exact same way could be good to remove. But I run with minimal shoes on tarmac and it does not feel any harder than softer ground. Gravels and stones and edges are problematic so I need more sole when off the road in fact, but apart from that, as long as I land mid foot and end up resting against the heel, even concrete is "soft"

EVA=cheap and durable enough. TPU is heavy and expensive. Pebax is light and expensive.

Most runners don't care or don't know. Only diehard turds on letsrun are fretting about this kind of stuff.

Also, like others have said, there are some nice versions of EVA out there. I have some Skechers Hyper Burst that feel great. Brooks has some nice EVA shoes, although I don't like any of their shoes.

Just run, baby.

A wise guy on this forum in another thread wrote that some have gotten so used to the shoes that even if a shoe in theory is better, it feels wrong. I accept that, but it might still be theoretically bad to continue making such shoes.

At least I am very sensible for soles that are not compatible with my running form. Too much drop makes the heel be in the way and change my gait to more heel strike and feet forward reaching. and too much rocking motion feels weird. I like the direct feedback I get with very thin soles directly into the ground. At least for me such minimal shoes has been the way I have been able to improve my running form to something decent, at not the least much more joy in running (and reduced problems with hamstrings and pirformis)

Well I am a mostly trail guy and I completely disagree. Nike's trail shoes are some of the best all while they seem to barely try in the trail shoe market. The Wildhorse for many years now has been one of the most versatile and comfortable trail shoes out there. But I've tried every single Hoka trail shoe and never went past a few hundred miles on any one pair because no matter how hard I try to like them I just don't, theres always enough things about them that just don't work for me. Their crap midsoles being one of them.

EVA is good enough and works well for the vast majority of people. Its relatively inexpensive, light, provides cushioning, and is better than what what was available in the past.

Most of the people that are buying running shoes are not even running in them. Of those that do run, EVA is good enough for 15-20 miles per week.

You do not need a Ferrari to drive 3 miles to the grocery store. You really do not need a car at all to get their either...

Jon, you missed the minimalism movement. Peaked around 2011, maybe? Pendulum swung the other way since, probably a bit too far.

Been running for 30 years. Minimal, maximal, and mostly normal shoes. Your standard "lightweight trainer." I have a pair of grandpa shoes (Skechers Road Max) that I wear when I go slow. Liking the Atreyus for most of my runs, and I guess they are pretty simple.

I think we're in a pretty good spot with shoes right now. You can find it all.

Bummbull wrote:

I’ve moved on from EVA long time ago and my shoes just last so long. It’s like my React or Boost shoes never lose the bounce. I rotate my Zoom Elite 9 shoes as I like the feel of it but they wear out 4 times faster.

Isn't React foam essentially EVA? As is the Zoom Elite 9.

99% of the running population, if not more, runs the majority of their miles in EVA shoes. It's cheap, lasts, is durable etc. And really, I don't know why you need anything else for most of your running.