Asics 2090s--deadly shoe

It seems so. I've had three 2080s, but all the palaver scared me off the 2090.

I have noticed this too. The first pair I had I came down with some patellar tendonitis. The second pair I had I came down with plantar fasciitis. Not that I think the shoes caused it but that's 2 for 2 so I only walk in my 2090s nowadays.

ITBS for me.

I used them and didn't have any injuries at all, but I just thought they were heavy and a major departure from the beloved 2080's. Since then I've gone lightweight.

i loved the 2090s as well the earlier generation (2080s) and now the 2100s (i'm in my first week with them.). obviously, there seems to be just as many different types of shoes out there as there are runner types...i guess it's a matter of finding the right pair. i think i got lucky but i know a lot of other runners who've had similar success with these shoes. in fact, my 2090s were going so well i actually lost track of how many miles i put on them until i realized i had them for 4 months...so, 1200 miles later i decided to put them in retirement and go for the newer 2100s. hope you find the right shoe!

I've moved to the DS-trainer. The 20x0 series is shit now.

had knee problems in the 2090's, though they came on acutely after running a 20 miler, so it might not have been the shoes.

switched to DS-trainers and the problem seems to be clearing up

I work in a shoe store and everyone that runs in the series hasn't indicated any problems newer versions. Anyone who has problems with the SERIES probably needs a more neutral shoe that's better at shock absorption.

How does the 2100 compare to the 2090?

im just happy they continued the all black model in the 2100.

I got off of that series a while ago. It was probably the 2060's or 2070's that I last wore. They just messed up my arches. It was a decent series, but there are many shoes out there that are better.

see also

and this one is pretty old

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=385778&thread=385778

Yeah, I'm a good size guy (190 pounds) with flat feet, and I was told these were the shoes for me, but they are tearing me up in my shins, feet, and knee. They already tried to put me in those therapeutic nightmares (Beast, etc.) and those did the same thing and I just thought it was the weight of the shoe or the extremely high heel. I'm open to suggestions for a switch.

Okay, no one ever, anywhere should be running in the Beast. I had a woman in today with severe overpronation, especially on her left foot. Luckily, she wore orthotics, so I was able to put her in the 2100 rather than put her in the cement blocks that are "motion control" shoes. Seriously, it would've hurt me on the inside to make someone wear one of those things.

There is nothing natural about running in the Brooks Beast. If it works for you, great, but it's not unlike running in boots.

Brooks beast is by far the worst shoe I have ever run in. And having been forced to wear reeboks for a number of years I can say that I have worn some pretty bad shoes.

Yes, the 2090 is a horrible shoe compared to the 2080 and 2070. Just take them and bend them in the middle, they fold. Can they even claim this to be a stability shoe? This is because it is cheaper to leave the stabalizer in the middle out of the shoe. The 2080 is one of the best stable shoes on the market, but Asics failed with the 2090. Yes, hips, IT band, knee injuries are all going to come for someone who needs a stable shoe and buys the 2090.

this again? don't you shoe geeks ever just run? or do you "listen to your body" and soak your aching footsies. no wonder the africans beat us. do they sit around and bitch about models of 100 dollar shoes? just run, you pantywaists. jesus!

I used to run in the 2080s and developed all kinds of injuries in my feet and lower leg.

I switched to the Cumulus and have had 0 problems for over a year.

The moral of the story, if you don't need a stability shoe, don't run in one.