You are not logged in.

#1 2011-08-18 17:07:23

Oliver
Member
From: San Francisco
Posts: 6321

Running Shoes

I'm in the market for a new pair of neutral running shoes... are there any that aren't puke ugly?

I'm embarassed to go 'round the block in neon green and orange asics, but I realize style is second to good runners. I'd like to try to find something only slightly less appalling than most modern day asics, new balance, etc. Is there such a thing as performance running shoes that are somewhat subtle in design and don't look like flaming sirens?

Last edited by Oliver (2011-08-18 18:11:57)

 

#2 2011-08-19 00:00:10

DAO
Member
Posts: 149

Re: Running Shoes

Last edited by DAO (2011-08-19 00:05:47)

 

#3 2011-08-19 03:34:20

Oliver
Member
From: San Francisco
Posts: 6321

Re: Running Shoes

Thanks, those aren't too bad compared to others I've seen.. is there a good reason why modern-day running shoes are so damn ugly?

I'll check these out in store.

 

#4 2011-08-19 03:42:32

Oo Bop Sh'bam
Ivy Iconoclast
From: within.
Posts: 4067

Re: Running Shoes

I'm in a similar boat here, why do cyclists get all the good clothes?

I make do with running in plimsolls, I just stick to running on grass though, concrete destroys your back if you don't have a good pair of trainers, but like you mentioned they all seem quite fugly when you look around the shops.

Last edited by Oo Bop Sh'bam (2011-08-19 03:43:03)


''If I can't share my faith in Christ here, I'd just as soon not have to put up with people advocating drug use.''

 

#5 2011-08-19 04:23:32

Oliver
Member
From: San Francisco
Posts: 6321

Re: Running Shoes

I was considering the Onitsuka Tigers that Bruce Lee wore in '66 but don't think they'd really cut it as a performance runner. I've already got a bad back and need proper shoe support but I just can't bring myself to step out in futuristic neon space shoes. I don't even own a pair of plimsolls.. only Spring Courts and a vintage pair of canvas back Sperry CVOs and Keds which I hardly wear. The New Balance above aren't terrible though, even with all those ugly etchings and two-tone bottoms. I'd run in them... but would be great to find a performance shoemaker that excercises a bit of subtelty.

 

#6 2011-08-19 15:18:38

leilaA
New member
Posts: 2

Re: Running Shoes

 

#7 2011-08-19 16:16:11

Oliver
Member
From: San Francisco
Posts: 6321

Re: Running Shoes

Those aren't really running shoes though; do you actually run in them?

I'm not much a fan of Incontinence pants but don't think those would give the proper support like the NB pictured above. I could be mistaken but they look more like Girls Ball games shoes to me.

 

#8 2011-08-19 19:27:29

DAO
Member
Posts: 149

Re: Running Shoes

I think NB is the best bet for a good 'balance' between classic styling (for performance footwear) and not destroying your feet.

I have found them to offer superior construction, materials and longevity to most other makes of running shoes.

The 'made in USA' range has a few more examples that I think you may like. http://www.shopnewbalance.com/category.asp?type=MNCOUS

But most of their 'retro' range is probably going to fit your bill.

 

#9 2011-08-19 19:51:54

Oliver
Member
From: San Francisco
Posts: 6321

Re: Running Shoes

Thanks, I like the 373's best so far in that range... I'm going to try them on in store and see if they'd work for performance, support, etc.

 

#10 2011-08-24 21:05:11

qazw
Member
Posts: 3

Re: Running Shoes

I like New Balance shoes, thay are comfortable

 

#11 2011-08-24 21:52:03

Bob Loblaw
Member
Posts: 245

Re: Running Shoes

I have ran in Incontinence pants Girls Ball games shoes and no it isn't optimal.

 

#12 2011-08-25 09:55:50

wahoo!
Member
Posts: 184

Re: Running Shoes

 

#13 2011-08-25 16:13:56

Bishop of Briggs
Member
Posts: 3948

Re: Running Shoes


Contrary to lies of FNB and Woofboxer, I (and most of the other "Buff Bastards") have been banned from posting on this forum. There are only a few posters left so don't waste your time on here. This forum is dead and nobody cares.

 

#14 2011-08-25 16:14:56

Bishop of Briggs
Member
Posts: 3948

Re: Running Shoes


Contrary to lies of FNB and Woofboxer, I (and most of the other "Buff Bastards") have been banned from posting on this forum. There are only a few posters left so don't waste your time on here. This forum is dead and nobody cares.

 

#15 2011-08-27 04:08:42

wahoo!
Member
Posts: 184

Re: Running Shoes

 

#16 2011-08-27 05:59:57

marlowe
Member
Posts: 136

Re: Running Shoes

NB 574

 

#17 2011-08-28 07:28:21

Bishop of Briggs
Member
Posts: 3948

Re: Running Shoes


Contrary to lies of FNB and Woofboxer, I (and most of the other "Buff Bastards") have been banned from posting on this forum. There are only a few posters left so don't waste your time on here. This forum is dead and nobody cares.

 

#18 2011-08-28 07:38:10

4F Hepcat
THE Cat
Posts: 14333

Re: Running Shoes

They look cheap and nasty to me, hideous as the Bishop states.

Any grown man who wears trainers for anything other than the gym, actual training or on the beach is not going anywhere anytime soon. Maybe Paul McCartney is an exception.

The last time I wore trainers for anything other than the gym was a pair Travelfox back in 1989 or 1990.


Vibe-Rations in Spectra-Sonic-Sound

 

#19 2011-08-28 07:59:11

formby
Member
From: Wiseacre
Posts: 8359

Re: Running Shoes


"Dressing, like painting, should have a residual stability, plus punctuation and surprise." - Richard Merkin

Souvent me Souvient

 

#20 2011-08-28 08:08:28

4F Hepcat
THE Cat
Posts: 14333

Re: Running Shoes

^They were 75 quid as I remember back in 1984, way too expensive for me.


Vibe-Rations in Spectra-Sonic-Sound

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2008 Rickard Andersson