Originally Posted by livedarklions

I can play the "make nasty comment so you get in your in box then edit it" game too.

Originally Posted by AdkMtnMonster

Daddy’s busy, son.

Originally Posted by livedarklions

Not as busy as your mom at the truck stop.

Originally Posted by AdkMtnMonster

Somebody’s gotta make them pancakes.

Originally Posted by livedarklions

Do you make fun of her for not wearing pancake flipping shoes?

Originally Posted by AdkMtnMonster

These threads are always great. I love all the references to riding with “running” shoes, “hiking” shoes, “skateboarding” shoes, “walking” shoes… Shoes made for everything except pedaling a bike. This thread is exactly like the “Which shorts?” threads, the “Which gloves?” threads and the “Which lube?” threads. The best part about them, and I mean the VERY BEST part, is that the most common responses are always the ones downplaying cycling-specific things. On a cycling forum. And that’s why we can’t have nice things.

Originally Posted by livedarklions

I have no idea what is the best option for most people and never implied that cycling shoes aren't a good or the best option for many, many or most people. Stop putting words in my mouth, you do this to me a lot.

Point is there's a lot of us "outliers" out there, and it is ridiculous to exclude us from the conversation of what we wear. Wide feet is not an unusual condition. Simple math will tell you why it's harder for us to get cycling shoes in our sizes than it is other more popular types of shoes. If you're already in a niche market (cycling) with your product, segmenting that market into sizes means very small demand for wide shoes of any given style, not enough to justify the costs of producing and carrying those."outlier" sizes. If I buy a type of shoe with a broader demand, there's much higher odds that the manufacturer will create a broader range of sizes.

I've bought one pair of Freeriders, it ended up giving me horribly sore feet and cost approximately twice to three times what I pay for my NBs.

My refence to marketing labels really was aimed more at labeling something a "walking shoe", a "running shoe" or whatever and assuming that meant they weren't good for other uses as well, including cycling. Most shoes have more than one function--would you tell someone they found a pair of Freeriders to be a good walking shoe they're wrong because it's a cycling shoe? If you took from my comments that I was saying cycling shoes aren't good for cycling (if they fit), then your reading comprehension might need a bit of dusting off.

Please reread the comment I was objecting to--I was not criticizing people for buying and using cycling shoes, I was reacting to a comment that certainly implied people who buy other shoes for cycling were somehow ignorant or otherwise deficient and "why we can't have nice things.".

Originally Posted by PeteHski

Cycling shoes are not limited in sizes or widths. In fact IME they often come in more sizes and widths than most other generic shoes. You just have to find what works for you. Not you personally by the way. But when people ask about shoes on a cycling forum, it makes more sense to recommend cycling shoes than any other type of shoe. In this case flat mtb style shoes would be the first place for the OP to start looking. There is plenty of choice. NBs may well work for you, but whenever I've tried cycling in that type of shoe they've always felt way too soft. Only cycling shoes give me the level of support I want for pedalling. It's almost as if they've been designed for pedalling.....

Originally Posted by livedarklions

It's almost as if you spend wayyyyy too much time worrying about what other people are recommending.
The cycling shoes I've tried have been disasters for me, the New Balance works better for me. Support while pedaling is not an issue, I have ridden on multiple century plus rides on various types of bikes, and the combo of NB shoes and Chester pedals is highly effective and comfortable.

I don't care if you think it makes sense for me to say that or not. The question was what we use, not what should we recommend for people that will meet with the approval of certain posters.

Five 10s don't make wide sizes as far as I can find.
NB makes several types of shoes, I don't know what you mean by "that type of shoe". The one's I pick have fairly flat, pretty stiff soles. If I'm losing any energy that way, it's negligible.

And one more thing-12 EEE with a need for a really wide toe box. I can get NB that fits. Knock yourself out finding the equivalent platform cycling shoe..

Originally Posted by PeteHski

You read too much into things. I just thought it was amusing what the other poster said about people recommending pretty much anything other than cycling shoes on a cycling forum. But you had to take it seriously.

FiveTens are generally wide fitting shoes. I have wide feet and it's one of the things I like about them. Now a lot of standard fit road cycling shoes are too narrow for me, but there are enough wide fitting models around. Lake have about 3 different widths in their higher end shoes, Shimano offer a wide fit, as do Fizik now on some models. It's not that hard to find cycling shoes that fit.

By "that type of shoe" I meant flat soled trainers in general. Cycling specific shoes are invariably stiffer across the sole as you might well expect.

Originally Posted by tomato coupe

Sad, but true.

Originally Posted by freeranger

I ride flat pedals with pins (oft called BMX pedals). Trail running shoes work for me. They have a sole which works well with the pins. Should mention that I wear insoles for arch support in all of my shoes, so they might add a little stiffness also.

Originally Posted by Flatforkcrown

If you go with toe cages, leather soled dress shoes are actually great to ride in. Nice stiff sole and will keep your feet dryer if they are fully leather inside. I prefer John lobb, but you can get more budget oriented shoes too, like Alden or Trickers.

Originally Posted by livedarklions

No I don't read too much into things, this is the second thread you've picked an argument with me to try to convince me that there's something wrong with saying I prefer some sort of non-cycling kit for bicycling. No, if you think Fivetens are wide, you really don't have anything of interest to say to me about the available ranges of sizes in different kinds of shoes. Those toe boxes are tiny compared to the shape of my foot.
​​​​​​

Yippeee dingdong for you that you've found shoes you like. I really don't give a rat's behind about marginal differences in stiffness of soles, and I am extremely skeptical they make any significant difference in energy transfer. I'm sure you are certain otherwise but I have no reason to believe you. I've also looked at the shoes you're otherwise talking about and can tell just by looking at them they won't fit me. I've found good shoes that serve the purposes I need from them very well for about $50 a pair. Now if you'll stop wasting both of our time trying to argue me out of stating that, I'd really appreciate it.

Originally Posted by PeteHski

I didn't try to convince you of anything other than to acknowledge that cycling shoes are a thing that most cyclists would choose to wear (except on BF of course!). Five Ten Freeriders are certainly wider than average and happen to fit my wider than average feet. Maybe your feet are extra-wide? What shoes did you look at - Lake? How can you tell they wouldn't fit your feet when they come in 3 different widths? You are just talking nonsense now.