I have a pair of ASICS that are like 12+ years old used mostly as occasional gym trainer shoes, and some occasional running, so they still look and feel fine. I also have newer running shoes of course. Running in the old shoes doesn’t feel bad at all, just that they are like 3-4 ounces heavier than my current running shoes.
My question is about a seemingly inherent contradiction: the foam on running shoes supposedly “expires” after around 500 miles (give or take) in that they presumably harden (or maybe soften) and don’t offer as much cushioning or maybe support; however on the other hand, we could well be running barefoot on asphalt or pretty much any surface with some practice according to the minimalist school of thought.
So if one keeps running in old shoes, assuming they are not visibly torn and are holding together in one piece, wouldn’t your body automatically slowly get used to any hardening or softening of the shoes foam and/or support system over weeks and months as they age? What mysterious thing is happening to running shoes as they age but visually look fine and feel fine? How can it be worse than just running barefoot on the road that by itself is not known to be any more injury-prone for recreational athletes than their shod counterparts?
I do realize some of the shoe expiration date wisdom might be pushed by shoe companies wanting to sell more shoes, but am wondering if there’s more to it from a physiological and injury risk perspective. I’d rather keep my old shoes for occasional training rotations rather than let go of them just because they reached some expiration mileage.