Fila Running Shoes

Were they the guys behind the last few years' designs? Oh man, I hope they don't totally change direction any time soon.

word on the street is that they won't change much the basic design ideas of the shoes. some tweaks here and there with arch issues, overlay concerns, etc., but for the most part, they're staying the same.

mikal peveto is working on design for fila now, along with some brainy types at the genesis agency, so there will be some good minds with good ideas behind the shoes.

there is nothing on the market, imo, with the smoothness of the current fila line, and i'd hate to see that go away. i would love to see the "less is more" design philosophy from fila continue and progress.

Where those two guys go ? anything to do with Mizuno lawsuit ?

What law suit?

i think brewer ended up at Under Armour. word is that the UA running footwear is looking really good. they hired some major players, esp in asia, for design/development.

Do we really need Under Armour to make running shoes? Isn't there enough average crap out there now? Etonic shoes are average. Fila shoes are average. Avia shoes are average. Puma shoes are average. Pearl Izumi shoes are average. I understand that it's a big market and niche brands should push the big brands, but if the niche brands simply replicate the big brands and differentiate themselves only by logos, then they'll only sell because they're not the big brand. I hope Under Armour has a different strategy. Otherwise, mark them down now.

i would agree with everything you said except for pearl izumi being average and replicating. if anyone is pushing the envelope and using new ideas it is pearl izumi. they have a completely seamless upper (no other running shoe has this), don't use dual density foam (guide frame), and have a pretty sweet new cushioning material that will debut in their spring line of '08. all the other companies you mentioned are rather average and in fact i would consider a few of them to be quite rotten.

etonic does have one good shoe they make called the jepara.

Look at a cross section of a Pearl shoe. They have seams. Even in their ads where they have a picture of the upper, you can see a seam, clear as day. There are *less* seams. If anything, Fila has fewer seams, but sweet jebus who wants to wear Fila? Good God they ride terribly.

dummies wrote: who wants to wear Fila? Good God they ride terribly.

I guess one man's meat is another man's poison. If every other trainer and road flat but the Corsa Sette (Otto) went extinct tomorrow, I'd barely notice. Except for all the whining I'd hear here.

actually adidas now has a no seam upper on all supernova and adistar line shoes.

mizuno and fila don't use dual density either. pi's lightweight trainer isn't really lightweight. it is ironic that their advertising is all about runners, yet the design engineering is clearly for the heavier jogger-type. they feel great to stand around in, and look quite good, but for running...eh.

"completely seamless upper" is what is holding Pearl Izumi back... there is no structural integrity to the shoes, thus if you are a mild to severe over-pronator, there is not a good option in the line, mostly due to their technologies for controlling over-pronation.

Shouldn't it be a rule that only fat or pigeon-toed people are allowed to talk about shoes. It's a bit like drummers talking about what kind of sticks they use. Who cares?

If you have run for a few years, you have done some miles in crappy shoes.

Even the best of them don't feel right after 600 miles. I've coached poor kids who pick thoroughly used shoes out of a donation box and then run another 500 miles on them.

Shoes..who cares?

Paul tergat used to run for fila. so they obviously must be good.

Paul Tergat could run in any running shoe. Fila ponied up the money to sponsor him at the time. That's all. Nike has more money, so they won his services.

Drummers wrote: Shouldn't it be a rule that only fat or pigeon-toed people are allowed to talk about shoes. It's a bit like drummers talking about what kind of sticks they use.

You reckon good drummers don't care about which sticks, cymbals, drum kits, etc. they use? Only crappy drummers?

I not only doubt it, I know it ain't true of the good drummers I've met.

I'll give you this though: crappy drummers and crappy runners as a group tend to overemphasize the role of the equipment, maybe because they'd rather not think too hard about the skills they bring to the table or the practice required to hone such skills. They'd rather hope the right magic equipment elevates their game. This attitude is part of what makes them crappy runners and drummers.

But all that doesn't mean the good ones don't give a shit.

A basic running shoe is all that is needed. People tend to fall in love with a particular model or brand of shoe that really has no bearing on their level of achievement.

I'm merely suggesting that shoes are insignificant in the performance or outcome of any running endeavor that applies to (as much as) 90% of folks that visit this site.

Of course good musicians want good instruments and good runners want good shoes. But give either group the basic tools and they will play great music or run great times.

All those great Kenyans that were sponsered by Fila are great in Nike, too. Goucher didn't suffer too much without Fila.

Emil Z. ran in combat boots. Minimilists want nothing between them and the ground. Motion control? Stability? Go see a podiatrist and immediately you will be put in orthotics.

Shoes..just buy some damn running shoes and run. Your "favorite" shoe will be discontinued by snowfall anyway.

Don't bother to check my spelling.

I don't.

Drummers wrote: A basic running shoe is all that is needed.

(a) For you and me and many of us, I agree. And that's part of the problem: there's few basic running shoes out there these days! All but a few models have ridiculously high heels, anti-pronation widgets, six air bags, power sunroof, and surround sound. I think those of us who do best in a basic running shoe may well have had more and better choices a quarter century ago.

(b) For others - and yeah, a lot of them are people with, uh, suboptimal mechanics and body weight etc. - they do seem to require specialized shoes to be able to run much. When people claim to get injured repeatedly until they find the right type or model of shoe, I don't think they're making this shit up out of thin air, not most of 'em anyway.

Concretely, for me, since I know my own history better than anyone else's. I started in "stability" shoes because that's supposedly what the broad majority require - the mainstream mythology of 2003 seemed to have it that a few "biomechanically gifted" running savants can get by in neutral shoes, and pathological overpronators require motion control. For everyone though the key was Lots Of Technology To The Rescue.

I incurred a number of injuries those first few years. Some clearly from training errors and ambition to do too much too soon; but others, I'm convinced, at least aided and abetted if not unambiguously caused by being in the wrong type of shoe.

Much trial and error shows that I am most comfortable running in, and can rack up significant miles without injury in, light low profile neutral fairly minimal shoes. But nothing quite as skimpy as darlings of the true minimalist crowd; I need the next small step up in cushion.

So I've found what I need in a shoe, and it's nothing extraordinary by the standards of a generation ago; but shoes that work well for me are actually pretty few and far between these days. Beyond that, I don't attribute any magic to them: the Corsa Sette (or its close relatives) don't make me a faster runner or impart perfect form; they just feel real good even at the end of a long hard run (it's amazing how many flats' and trainers' cushioning gives out by the end of say a long MP run), and they allow me to run as many miles as I care to without bringing on ITBS or PF or forefoot pain or what have you.

If you do best in whatever's most popular these days and are just as happy in any of a few dozen models, more power to you. Although in that case I wonder if you'd have done just as well in 1978.