Are Nike trainers still widely seen as being “bad”?

nike all the way. wrote:

Hoka and Altra use s*** materials, heavy, and have quality control issues. I don’t get it why people like their shoes.

I more or less agree about Altra build quality, but it's the only last that fits my feet worth a damn (except maybe Topo or Newton, which are even more expensive and generally memeier and which I haven't tried.).

so that's why I wear them.

Let's ask Rupp, Centro, Jager, Flanagan, Quigley, Frerichs, etc. if Nike products are good enough for them.

I have fairly wide feet and am a pretty serious forefoot striker. The fit of Altra's are pretty good but the durability is such garbage that I cannot justify wearing them. They literally start coming apart after less than 100 miles for me. Nike makes great shoes I just wish they made a trainer with a 4mm drop.

Nike structures, nike elites, nike streaks. 80-100mpw since senior year high school and I've never been hurt wearing those three shoes. Only when I switch to something else does something nagging pop up. I got a stress fracture switching to pegasus from structure and will never wear pegs again. Injury free in structures.

guiiii wrote:

they are bad, besides the pegasus

but they change the Pegasus every year. Are they all good? I had Zoom Elite that I loved then the next year's model I hated

Coffee Monster wrote:

Let's ask Rupp, Centro, Jager, Flanagan, Quigley, Frerichs, etc. if Nike products are good enough for them.

And then we can ask Elon Musk if Tesla make good cars

The pros likely can wear anything they want, but Nike pays them very well to wear Nikes.

I don't think your shoes matter much in your running other than for protection. Pick the pair you like best and run in them.

I generally don't like nike trainers, mostly because they just don't last very many miles. I got almost 1000 miles out of the last pair of Adidas with continental rubber soles and boost foam. The guys on my team wearing pegs or structures get maybe 350 or 400 miles out of them. That being said, I only ever race in Nike spikes or flats, they just feel better (with the exception of the one pair of NC RC1400v1s that I have). Spikes, definitely only nike.

Nice way to get free backlinks to the Nike corporate site. Minimum 15 from this thread alone.

Nah, not anymore. I think a few years ago Nike would be viewed as uninspired, and maybe okay, but not great. Brands like Brooks, Saucony, New Balance, maybe a few others, gave the running customer more attention, so their shoes were a bit more innovative. But then Adidas rolled out Boost, and lit a match under pretty much everybody. Nike went back to the drawing board, back to square one, and have put out some good, competitive stuff lately to try to get back the runners they had lost. I thought I would never run in Nike, but there are a few that I like. They do need some lower drop versions of their most popular stuff, though. The Free line doesn't cut it.

When I worked at a running store (past four years) most people who came into the store said something pretty similar.

What I came to realize is that most of the time people get a bad impression of Nike because Nike is ubiquitous at the $25-$50 price range at Dick's/Big Box Stores/Marshalls/etc. People who start running find a cheap running shoe and then end up hating it or getting injured. Because of Nike's ubiquity, most of these people end up with a cheap Nike and then think that all Nike's suck.

In reality, all $25 to $50 trainers suck, whether they are ASICS, Brooks, Saucony, New Balance, or Nike.

I've run in Saucony and New Balance for years and have been completely blown away with the Zoom Fly (finished my first Boston in them this past year).

Nike makes great running shoes. They aren't for everyone, but they are fantastic if they work for you.

Same can be said for Brooks (never liked their shoes, but they are great), Saucony, New Balance, ASICS, etc.

NoNike? wrote:

Most HS and College coaches I’ve talked to all seem to dislike Nike trainers. They claim shoe like the Pegasus, Structures, etc all get their kids hurt. Are they just stuck in their ways? Or is there some truth in this? Was there ever any truth in Nike making lesser quality trainers?

I know a lot of praise had been given in the past towards ASICS, but they changed their shoes a lot and people have began to think less of them. Has the opposite happened for Nike?

Doesn’t make sense to me because most pros wear Nike.

For the most part Nike isn't that good of a distance running shoe company. If you are not serious distance runner and have a normal arch and of average size their shoes are fine. If you have over pronation or under pronation, overweight or put in more than 65mpw go with ASICS, Brooks or Saucony.

faronixx wrote:

I generally don't like nike trainers, mostly because they just don't last very many miles. I got almost 1000 miles out of the last pair of Adidas with continental rubber soles and boost foam. The guys on my team wearing pegs or structures get maybe 350 or 400 miles out of them. That being said, I only ever race in Nike spikes or flats, they just feel better (with the exception of the one pair of NC RC1400v1s that I have). Spikes, definitely only nike.

Funny, im the exact opposite. I bought adidas cause of the hype. Boston lasted 180 miles, tempo was solid, and the Adios I put 50 miles on them and was already showing the boost foam I rubbed the continental rubber down to the boost.

Nikes I can get 200-300 miles out of them. So I'm the opposite.

I think Nike stigma is the mass prodiced big box store junk shoes is peoples experience amd not the Nike Racing line.

I have had mixed experiences with Nike training shoes, and not the low priced Target ones, the normal trainers you use for long distance running. Some of their trainers are great for me, some not so good. I have had issues in the past with air bags popping and pieces of the outsole falling off after only a few dozen miles. Several years ago I switched to Asics, now currently float between Brooks, Hoka, and Skechers. Never had outsoles pieces fall off or breakdowns similar to air bags popping but some of those brands do have outsole durability issues. With all brands, you will find good shoes and bad shoes. Some will last forever and others breakdown/wear away far too quickly. Maybe you pick up an defective pair every now and then. Lots of reasons.

I will say Nike make great racing flats and spikes. A bit higher priced than I would prefer but if I can get them on sale, I will gladly do so.

There are two types of runners - those who wear Nike and those who wear 'anything but fkn Nike'. In Australia we call it Tall Poppy Syndrome - which is the need for some people to try and cut down something/someone successful.

I started wearing Nikes again a couple of years ago after a long break and I've found the models I've bought terrific (with one exception). If I could only own one pair of running shoes the Pegasus 35 would be my pick.

just no wrote:

Modern running shoes are the problem wrote:

Explain why Lydiard said no one heard of plantar fasciitis until Americans started making shoes? Gordon Pirie said that before modern running shoes no one really suffered from injuries.

So its not just Nikes its all modern running shoes?

If you honestly believe that no one got injured before modern running shoes and we should all be training in a pair of Converse One Star's then I don't know what to say.

My advice would be to examine your training and form for causes of injury first but you seem eager to perpetuate a myth so good luck.

I had a pair of Chuck Taylor All Stars Basketball high tops to run in when running for the first time in

8th grade track & field. I remember getting knocked to my knees by pain in one of my feet after a workout

one day. After sitting for a few minutes I walked the 2 miles home to my house. But I never felt that pain again

until I was in my mid-30s.

I also knew a lot of kids who were quitting cross country or track & field. We did not always know the reasons

but often later we would find out they got notes from their doctors telling them to quit running.

NIKE! wrote:

Nike structures, nike elites, nike streaks. 80-100mpw since senior year high school and I've never been hurt wearing those three shoes. Only when I switch to something else does something nagging pop up. I got a stress fracture switching to pegasus from structure and will never wear pegs again. Injury free in structures.

I wore the Structures for many years injury free until about 3 years ago (too lazy to go check which model). I think there was some change at that time because I could no longer wear them. It took a while to figure out which shoes were causing the shin problems but I finally isolated the Structures. I switched to the Lunar Glide and have been good for the last few years.

Sadly Lunarglides are now dead my friend.

Let me point you in the direction of Odyssey Reacts as the replacement. V similar ride with none of the pebble removing from the sole required.