Wall Street Journal story on Gel-Kinsei, Air Max 360

Prepare to be flamed with immature responses Steph. Better question, why are you righting a story about this?

Why don't you go ask people for whom the shoes are marketted for, weekend-warrior, runner's world subscribers. Real runners do not spend $160 for a pair of training shoes Steph.

well here's my deal... I work at a running store in California and i deal with these shoes on a daily basis. I have not trained in any of them, but i have heard feedback about all of them from many customers.

Here's my beef with these "top of the line" shoes... They claim that these are all hybrid type shoes, that will fit a wider variety of foot-types, from a neutral high arch foot, to a medium/ low arched pronator. Here's why i think they don't work the way they are billed to:

Nike's Air Max 360 has no EVA foam midsole which leads to greater durability and maximum cushioning. While the lack of EVA foam does mean no compression of materials, you lose the stability that EVA effectively provides. The problem with putting a full air midsole is that there is no structural integrity to stabilize a flexible ankle and arch. If you press upward with your thumb on the air sole unit in the heel, you will see that it is easy to compress that area. Now imagine putting your full weight on that spot, and then multiply that by 4 (which is how much force the shoe recieves on impact in the running stride). The shoe provides no stability for pronators. Although they say that the pillars that are placed throughout the sole help aid in pronation support, they just dont compare to the stability that you get from a double density EVA midsole. I think the Nike 360 is a good option for a neutral foot or a supinator. Pronators beware, no matter how much cushioning this shoe has, you wont be able to outrun your shin splits and plantar faciatis.

Asics Gel Kinsei is the newest technology that Asics offers. Bohold, they say, gel on the outside. They claim that the full gel heel not only absorbs impact 30% better then their previous top of the line shoes (gel Nimbus and Gel Kayano) but adapts to the ground in order to guide the foot and promote a smoother heel to toe transition while neutralizing pronation. Again, a hybrid shoe that mends the gap between nuetral and stability shoes. I say, its poorly mended. The problem arises in the stiff heel counter they use for their stability. It extends from the heel through the midfoot, ending just before the ball of the foot; creating what i would call, a harsh heel to toe transition. Now i'm sure that stiffness will break in, but i have had customers return this shoe because of blistering on the medial side of the heel and through the arch. The fact is, this shoe is not made for pronators. If your arch collapses in the midstance phase of the running gate, then you will end up with blistering problems due to the heel counter. Again, like the Nike 360, the gel Kinsei is a great choice for the nuetral runner, who neither pronates nor supinates.

Gimmick does not begin to describe the Adidas One. Technology has evolved emmensly from the days of the cloth, polyurathane, and rubber shoes of the past, but I just dont think there is any room for this kind of technology in running. It sounds great, the self adapting shoe, doesn't it? But what the hell does that mean? People think, it means it will adapt to my foot, my running stride, my weight, my mileage, etc., making it the custom orthotic of the running shoe world. But the fact is that this onboard PC basically ajusts its midfoot flexibilty/rigidity depending on the firmness of the surface its used on. On grass, more rigid, on pavement, more flexible. Pretty advanced, mostly useless. I would suggest that it be flip flopped to be more rigid on the roads and more flexible on the grass or dirt. Drop a golf ball on the street, then drop it on the grass. With the incresed impact forced of concrete on our joints and muscles, support becomes just as important, if not more important, then cushioning. Whether the shoe is rigid or flexible in the midfoot doesnt matter if your arch is collapsing over the midsole. Neurals runners, feel free to drop $260 on this shoe. I can't guarantee any miracles.

Save your knees, ankles, plantar fascia and soft connective tissue as well as your life savings, and buy a pair of $90 shoes that are right for your foot. Sure you might have to replace them 100-200 miles before some of these "top of the line" shoes, but you'll be saving money in the long run with less visits to the podiatrist. Get the professional opinion from someone who sees a lot of feet, whether it be a local running store, or a doctor, and have them evaluate your feet, arches and running gate. I guarantee that the knowledge you gain there will not only keep you up to date with these new technologies, but get you in the right shoe for your foot... meaning happier miles.

Good luck.

Usually, I have found "super expensive" heavily marketed Nike running shoes like this to be a lot heavier than more basic/same quality of running shoe from Asics, New Balance, and possibly, Adidas. RunningRebel, whats the weight comparison? If it isn't much of a difference, they at least look like they would feel more bulky.

"Track: run, run as fast and hard as you can...then turn left."

In the end, the majority of both shoes will be purchased by non runners who want to look trendy and fat fitness walkers.

I haven't run in any of the three of these shoes, but I tried on the Nike 360 and it is AMAZINGLY LIGHT. Especially for a big guy like me who needs a size 13. When compared to other shoes in this area (neutral cushioned, medium stability) its far lighter than the NB 1060, Asics Nimbus, or Mizuno Wave Creation.

Send me a free pair and I'll write you an essay and give you all the information you want. Size 8

tempestroad@hotmail.com

All these styles are limited and allocated.

Add marketing andt hese are designed to create brand awareness and halo effect for future products.

If something good technically emerges it will be passed down to future models.

End of story. Boring.

The most important question that a person who would buy a pair of shoes like this would ask would be "do they look good with jeans?"

Jason Rexing wears the Nike Air Max 360 on one foot, and the Asics Gel Kinsei on the other. Then he runs 13:45.

Steven,

I have never worn these shoes and I probably never will. I have been running for a long time and I have found that these “high-end” shoes equate to nothing more that a lot of marketing hype and really do not offer any more than shoes half their price. What you should right about is the growing minimalist trend in the running community, those runners that have discovered that very little cushioning or no cushioning (barefoot running) is all that is needed.

I run nearly 90% of my runs in shoes that have no more than ¼ of an inch of padding. Their comfortable, their flexible, they enable me to feel whatever terrain that I am running on, and above all else they are relatively cheap.

oops, I am so sorry Stephanie, I misread your name :-(

The problem I have with almost every shoe on the market is that they assume when people run the smack into the ground heel first and then transition to the forefoot for toe off. Unfortunately, the majority of effiecent runners out there DO NOT heel strike. The foot is generally flat on the ground when most of the impact force is absorbed via pronation (for most efficient runners). Hence all the gimmicky crap the shoe companies put in the heel of their shoes does NOTHING for this type of runner - their heels do not bear very much weight in their running stride.

I fully realize that the majority of runners out there are not highly efficient midfoot strikers, but plodding heel strikes, hence they need these special technologies (at least, shoe companies HOPE they need their technology). So it is far too much to expect the majority of shoes made by these companies to be made for the midfoot striker. But the thing that infuriates me if that companies DO make shoes for elite/efficient runners (their so called "performance trainers") but they use the same basic design as the plodder shoes. As a midfoot striker I want good forefoot cushioning, a wider toebox (to allow the feet to spread out as they would without shoes), some ankle support, and very little heel. Ideally, the shoe would have the same depth in the forefoot as the heel, instead of putting me on my tiptoes essentially, with extra heel cushioning that is completely superfluous.

Try the Puma h-street. I have been very happy with mine.

The Kinsei debuted asic's new midsole and its very sweet. SoLyte - 20% lighter. Kayano, Evo II, Nimbus all better shoes because of it.

the kinsei sucks. maybe in a few years it will be better - but not now.

don't know/care about the other two.

my take on these shoes:

360 - never tried/my store doesnt carry them probably doesnt work stick with the pegasus

kinsei - my store carries them 240 bucks canadian....only sold to 8 minute miling men in their 40s who like the feel of lotss of cusioning and have the money to drop. my dad loves his, i cant stand them

adidas 1 - GIMMICK nothing more

nike free (because i hate them) - try runnign in bare feet

thing is ALL these shoes sell but not to the runners on this board

I heard that the Air Max 360 was the real cause of Ritz's walking ammonia.

Daryl and RCW,

The word you are looking for is "write" not "right"

No thanks necessary.

-GN

And I believe the word you're looking for is pneumonia, not ammonia. Dumb ass.

The article appeared in this weekend's edition of the Wall Street Journal.

Ms. Kang, you ask for input on 3/16 with a paper run date 2 days later? What was your cutoff? You had one valid reply on the 16th. All the other replies were 3/17,18. How can you seek valid input from a number of folks within this time frame?