Who would wear these shoes, looks like baby-shoes for adults...
Who would wear these shoes, looks like baby-shoes for adults...
They may be ugly and you can train for 100 miles before they break down...
the old Nike Air Stab...they FELT ugly
Any better than the Pearl Izumis or the Oakleys?
Yeah, when I'm choosing running shoes, how they look is the most important thing I look for too.
Stupid ass.
Actually they look like crap primarily because...
...they are crap.
You'd have to be crazy to like those Locos.
Has anyone here actually tried them on? I have tried them on a few times and seem to fit well and are comfortable. Looks can be deceiving. I don't know how durable they are, but I haven't heard any complaints from anyone who has bought a pair yet. The guy who designed them designed the original Pegasus for nike, so I think they know what they are doing.
If you're running fast enough, no one should be able to see your shoes.
I bet the first thing you do when trying on running shoes is see how they look in the mirror!
I choose shoes by the way they feel.
I know some people who have them and they said they like them a lot. Of course they aren't flashy, its a new company, thats how it tends to work. Personally I would rather a company focus on making good shoes, as opposed to ones that look good.
Most of the shoes Nike makes are crap as well, dumb designs and poor build quality, with lots of useless gimmicks (shox, for example).
We finally have a company that is trying to make simple, purely functional shoes, the kind we bitch about no one making, and right off the bat, complaints about how the shoes look. Who cares, they all look like shit after a your first trail run anyway.
Danger danger didn't say they weren't fantastic shoes, merely that they looked very hideous. This isn't about anything other than how hard it is to look at the locos. In fact danger danger may think that these shoes are the best shoes he's ever run in, why must you infer?Personally, any shoe company that makes a joke like the one for their racers, "garanteed to take 2 minutes off your 5k time (just kidding--of course!)", will not sell any shoes to me.
dope slap wrote:Yeah, when I'm choosing running shoes, how they look is the most important thing I look for too.Stupid ass.
They should rename to Yugo.
Yes, I got the lightweight trainers, then subsequently got sore arches again.
Perhaps the antipronation models work, or the racers.
A lightweight LOCO shoe is a bit like a YUGO GT...
hm... wrote:
Danger danger didn't say they weren't fantastic shoes, merely that they looked very hideous. This isn't about anything other than how hard it is to look at the locos. In fact danger danger may think that these shoes are the best shoes he's ever run in, why must you infer?
Personally, any shoe company that makes a joke like the one for their racers, "garanteed to take 2 minutes off your 5k time (just kidding--of course!)", will not sell any shoes to me.
dope slap wrote:Yeah, when I'm choosing running shoes, how they look is the most important thing I look for too.Stupid ass.
Yeah, when I'm choosing running shoes, the glibness of their promotional writeups is the most important thing I look for too.
STUPID ASS!
Has anyone here actually tried them on?
Yeah, months ago I got 50 good miles out of a pair. I was starting a transition toward training in flats (still am, apparently: I'm nervous about running more than 15 at a time in Waffle Racers, and found out the hard way that my Ekidens are a half size too small for 20+ - nearly lost a toenail; so I've adopted Racer ST's as my marathon shoe) and used their lightest weight trainer for some slow long and recovery runs. Really nice ride and cushioning (including forefoot IIRC) for LWT's.
Then 5 miles into a scheduled 20, the fabric behind my heel developed a tear and caused nasty pain and blistering for the rest of the run.
Dunno if it's a materials flaw, a bit of bad luck with this one shoe, or what. In the last two years a pair of Adidas Taper also broke down this way - also early in a damn long run - though at least those gave me a couple hundred miles. Maybe some of my socks are coarse and abrasive in the heel?
Anyhow IMO the Loco's are slightly less ugly in person than on the website. Fit is similar to Nikes (generally a good thing for me) but I found the toebox narrow.
Chuck
Dope Slap,
I got about 200 miles on my lightweight trainers when they started to break down. Don't buy them for that reason. Now stop ridiculing people.