junkyard

teacher, teacher! You didn't give us any homework yet!!

dminor 

A bump for this thread for this road test report:

OK, so I finally broke down and bought some running traction aids this winter; a set of Yakrax Pros. The Pro model is the one suitable for running - - the standard Yaktrax are pretty much walking only. I’ve had my eye on YakTrax Pros for a while now, only the price (regularly about $30) was always a sticking point for my cheap self. But a little looking around on Amazon turned them up for $19.99 - - about the price of the walkers and more what I wanted to pay (note: just now found them there through another seller for $14.99). Mine are Mediums, which fit my size 10½ running shoes perfectly.

I just put them on and did my short 3.36 mi. out-and-back that is a mainstay run for light days. I’m happy to say that they work as advertised. I had my doubts, as I wondered how the round ‘springs’ on the bottom could catch traction. There are other types of traction devices that have tungsten carbide spikes and such; but the YakTraxs (at least around here) seem to be the traction aid of choice for runners. Anyway, they held in most conditions.

The conditions: We got about 6” of new snow overnight and this morning, so the roads were compact and loose snow, leftover ice berms and a foot of cast fluff off on the shoulders.

Compact snow and ice: Where they really seem to shine is compact surfaces - - compact snow, ice, black ice, ¼-½” of loose over hard surface. Anywhere the springs can dig in and bite.

Loose snow: In deeper snow, you’re still going to slip some, because you’re not getting down to where they can bite (snow slipping on snow). I want to try them out in a couple days on the unplowed residential streets - - after enough traffic has packed things down and where I try to avoid usually because of the compacted and icy ruts.

Hills (up and down): Once again, this is where you’ll be glad you have them. I was able to climb and descend with confidence. I never once had the sensation of my feet zipping out from under me. In any situation, especially hills, you’ll find that shortening your stride some helps traction - - keeping your feet under your center of gravity. So if you’ve been practicing any soft-running techniques they will do you well.

Cambers: Crowned roads, off-camber turns and such were another test that the Yaktrax passed with ease. Sidestepping off a track, like to get out of the way of a passing car, was as easy as when it’s bare and dry.

The result: Despite the occasional slipping in places where I was forced to run in deeper loose snow, I was able to keep a pretty-much dry-pavement pace for the run. I clocked 8:15 miles today - - not stellar but close to my dry pavement Fall paces of high 7s for the same route - - and better than some since after Christmas. All-in-all, I’d recommend them to anyone.

never

I've used the Pros for trail running and they are generally pretty good but I find they slip around on steep climbs or descents. Sometime they will come up over the toe of the shoe. If you don't notice it, they can come up quite a bit and I have broken one. It was replaced right away without any issues - translation = good customer service.

But I am using them beyond typical recommendations so I think these issues shouldn't occur during normal road running.

mx_599

thanks for the review! i might get some too

santiago

How are they when you get to paved surfaces? When I go running I start on the clean streets before I get to the parks and stuff where they would be most effective.

dminor 

^^ I don't know yet. I have concerns about how they'd hold up doing any distances on paved/sidewalk. The short bare patches I crossed yesterday were fine; but I pretty much aimed for staying on compact snow cover (and had that luxury). I wonder the same myself as the roads clear some; figured I would try to stay to the snowy shoulders/uncleared sidewalks as much as I can. That might be where the carbide spike type (like DueNorth) may do better. The DueNorth design, though, doesn't have the nice velcro strap over the top.

I will say that walking the hall in the high school gym to get outside (smooth concrete) was more trecherous than anything I encountered outdoors. Be very careful on smooth surfaces - - they'll drop you on your butt before you can say spit.

mx_599

did you guys see the new minimal shoes by merrell? not sure if they are out yet...but they are going to be a big seller. i am going to get some soon or when they come out officially

sscyco

I just got these - and I have to say that I am very, very happy with them -

mx_599

they look nice, how is the width? they still have a heel rise though. are they pretty flexible? light? do they have arch support? i want to move away from any kind of support.

actually, what brand and model are those? i am not sure i recognize?

they look like a great shoe...but probably would be ripped apart by the minimalist crowd

thanks for sharing for sure!

santiago

I use the Wave Musha 2 by Mizuno and love them. I bought them a size larger so that I have plenty of room in the toe box so that I can ride as free as possible without resorting to something like a 5-finger.



I did google the Merrell/Vibram shoe. They definitely look minimalist. They remind me of rock-climbing shoes. Are these it?

Zephyr11

Those are the Saucony Kinvara. They're a neutral shoe (so no stability or motion control features) with a 4mm heel-toe differential (which is a fairly low drop, akin to what you see in many road racing flats). They're actually fairly cushioned though. Since they were pretty popular, Saucony is coming out with a few other Kinvara-like shoes for 2011: the Mirage, which is the Kinvara with a few stability features built in; the Peregrine, which is a trail version of the Kinvara; the Cortana, which is a 4mm heel-toe differential shoe with all the bells and whistles most normal trainers have; and the Hattori, which is a more minimalist shoe with zero heel-toe differential. The Kinvara itself is a solid lightweight trainer, and a good alternative as a racing shoe for people whose bodies can't quite handle the transition to true flats. I know quite a few people who seem to like them.

I don't buy into the whole minimalist thing, personally. I log most of my miles in a normal neutral cushioned trainer (Brooks Defyance), and do my speedwork (both track and road stuff) and racing in Brooks T6 Racers (6.4oz, 12mm heel-toe differential). I haven't read "Born to Run" or any of the Chi or POSE books, though I have practically studied Daniels, Noakes, Pfitzinger, Lydiard, and others. The way I see it is when you put in significant training, it's to your benefit to wear shoes with cushioning. No one with OTC or Hansons or Zap or anyone like that is running their 120 mile weeks barefoot. Even the Africans who enter the road racing circuit buy shoes. Also, I don't believe that heel-striking is bad, as long as that leg isn't weight bearing until your midfoot is on the ground, and you'd be surprised as to how many top elite runners run that way (as opposed to overstriding, where you begin weight bearing as soon as your heel touches the ground).

I think Saucony is getting the minimal thing right. They're marketing to the barefoot crowd, with a low heel-toe drop that encourages good running form, but putting them in high quality lightweight trainers that still have good cushioning (or in the case of the Mirage and Cortana, stability). There will always be people like Tony Krupicka with perfect biomechanics who can log huge miles in ultra-minimal flats, but most of us weren't so blessed. Your body figures out the most efficient way to run on its own. If you make it run barefoot, it'll figure out the most efficient way to run barefoot. But if you put on shoes, it doesn't have to worry as much about landing so perfectly, and it can figure out how to run fast. I guess it all depends on what your goals are. My goal is to have fun on my mountain bike but tear up races that I run. I don't beat myself up if I don't clean a rock garden, but I do beat myself up if I fall off pace during a tempo run. I figure that the majority of people on the mountain bike forum who are in this topic are *probably* the reverse. But whatever you find, I hope it works out...and if you're a neutral pronator who's looking for a more minimal shoe, I'd definitely encourage you to check out the Saucony Kinvara and Brooks Launch (the latter of which isn't marketed as a "minimal" shoe, but is also a lightweight trainer with no added posting or support features, but has good cushioning).

EDIT: Santiago, the Musha is a cool looking shoe! (It's a posted racing flat, for anyone else who's wondering). Have you checked out the Brooks ST Racer? That's also a posted racing flat, similar to the Musha.

Huh. Yeah...my running team isn't sponsored by Brooks or anything like that...not at all... (Though if I didn't like them, I wouldn't mention them. My college team was sponsored by Adidas, and I'd never, ever recommend Adidas's trainers to anyone, though they do have some solid flats on the market.)

dminor 

^^ Gad, I feel so hopelessly out of the loop and old skool. I'm still in Kayanos and happy as a pig in slop. I love the ride and although I don't need the stability build from a standpoint of gait (I'm fairly neutral), I like to feel like it's there for me if I hit uneven surfaces unexpectedly.

mx_599

i disagree with just about everything you say...but nothing personal. i like you! before you dismiss it, you should look into it and research more if you have time. i have a ton of links if you want.

sscyco

I chose with the Kinvara because I went into a running store about a month ago (Runner's Soul) and asked about the 5 finger. The sales guy took me over to the Vibram display and started with the sales pitch. After 5 min we realized that our running styles and speeds were similar he then said " you couldn't pay me to run in these things" - he then went on that he thought they were a fad, and that the whole barefoot running thing is good but has it's place - most people that are moving towards it are doing it too quickly and he is starting to see/hear of several injuries because of it. Like big D, I have ran in Kayanos for quite a while (think I've owned 5 pair). The sales guy suggested that I go towards the minimalist thing in steps - he considered the Kinvara a mid step (no pun) between a full supporting shoe and a minimalist shoe (Kayano has a 12mm offset and the Kinvara 4 and half the weight). I have actually read several reviews of the Kinvara where minimalist shoe guys are going away from minimal because of injury and moving into the Kinvara. So, right now I think I have made a good choice - and they are stupid fast. I think i may break a few PRs this year with them.

never

Those sound like fighting words!

NYCJohn170

I've been running in the Kayanos for a while and have the 16s now. I may pick up a pair of Ecco Bioms. I have had lots of Ecco dress shoes and like the wide toe box.


Have there been runner specific MTBs? A more vertical seatpost like Tri bikes?

Zephyr11

Quite a few people do, haha. If I posted that on a barefooting forum, I'd get ripped to shreds! I have friends on both sides of the argument too. We don't even discuss it when a big group of us gets together anymore, it just gets too heated and we go in circles. I've done quite a bit of research on it, with the best articles I've read being the ones done by the "panel of experts" on the Brooks site (which obviously are done by a shoe company, but still about as unbiased as you can get for that kind of article) and the Harvard study (which was funded by Vibram, I believe). Most of the people on the Brooks site are on the "If your biomechanics are great, you'd be fine barefoot, but if not, you could use shoes," and everyone seems to have read the Harvard study already. I figure that both ways are valid enough, though both sides will have their staunch supporters (picture the rigid vs FS argument...plenty of people have tried both, picked their side, and nothing anyone says will convince them the other one is better...but geez, people, embrace the squish already, whether it's in your shoes or your suspension! ).

Seriously though, FWIW, I bought two pairs of Nike Frees about 4 years ago. The 5.0, which Nike replaced with the Free Run, is very similar to the Kinvara in that it's a flexible, lightweight trainer (though I thought the Kinvara felt a little more cushioned and felt like it has a wider base, and I *think* the 5.0/Run might have a higher heel-toe differential, but I'm terrible at guessing that from wearing the shoe, since I'd never have guessed the Brooks T6 racing flat has more differential than the Launch). I haven't worn out the 3.0 yet, because I tried it a few times, didn't like it, and never even wear it. However, it sounds like it might be something you should look at. I know a lot of people on barefoot forums like it because it's very light and low to the ground, ultra flexible, and if you take the insole out, has no arch support (the insole offers some very minimal arch support, but it can be worn without it). $75 on RunningWarehouse, and CP15 gets you a 15% discount to bring it to $64 with free shipping 2 day shipping and free return shipping if you don't like them (click on "team discounts" at the top and enter it there, not at the coupon code thing at checkout). That's a lot less money than a lot of companies are asking for their minimal shoes.

Ssyco, I agree with what the guy in the store said. If you're going to make the switch, you have to do it gradually. Structural changes take longer to make than cardiovascular changes, so you are able to run faster and further sooner than your tendons and ligaments are ready, and a lot of people do too much too soon (which is easy enough to do in shoes, and even easier to do barefoot). Enjoy the Kinvara, sounds like you have a pretty good store to go to!

Zephyr11

Tri bikes actually have that seattube angle to spare running muscles so they're more fresh when you get off the bike. Well, that and for aerodynamic purposes. Supposedly, a slacker seattube angle (at least on road bikes) uses running muscles more. At least that's what I'm told, and it's not like I've ridden a million road bikes and can talk from experience. On a mountain bike though, I feel like you're constantly up out of the saddle and shifting your weight around, so the muscles are different. The majority of my hardcore running friends who ride bikes either have road bikes, CX bikes, or ultralight XC bikes that are a step away from a road bike, so it's not like they're riding super slack bikes, but the seattube angle on a mountain bike is more related to what kind of riding you're doing than matching up with your sport-specific musculature. That's just speculation though.

mx_599

hahahaha

since the fagerlin days, i learned to not fight on an internet forum. this is the most most valuable thing i got from that guy!

i have to throw something about mtn biking into here for junyard; i think i will try the Breckenridge 100 this year. i barely finished the leadville race and now i want to try this one. i think the application is less complex too.

back to running...

jbrow1

Surprised (but happy) to find this thread here
I've picked up running again and have been enjoying it as well as biking. Been reading some about the minimalist, heel strike, etc. stuff and trying to sort it all out. Need to go to the next town over, they have a real running shoe store, and have a talk with them.

Been running five mile pretty easy runs lately. Thought I'd try two easy miles the other day, landing midfoot rather than on my heel.. boy my calves still hurt like hell couple days later. My thinking is with the clodhopper shoes I was wearing I had to accentuate getting the front of my foot down as to not land on the tall heel.

Anyhow, no injury, just found some new muscles Letting them repair themselves, then back to more snow running. Those yaktrax things a page or so back looked pretty cool. I fell in a ditch the other day returning some ladies dog that decided to run with me. Not sure those would've helped, but my elbow/shoulder would've appreciated not falling for sure!

dminor 

Awwwwww . . . so that's why you're no fun any more. What's an interwebs forum without a good e-fight every now and then ?

I'll throw something in for junkyard too - - Jerk! There, I said it.

Speaking of races, what became of the C d'A Ironman? Did you get in?

mx_599

thanks for the post! i didn't realize you looked into it. yeah, kind of like religion not really worth discussing...but i do anyways!!

i am not big on sci studies, so hypocritically i'll mention a few. i know there are few out there. i am going to try to keep my response to simple phrases. maybe you have already considered all these already, not sure.

1) there is a study with regard to foot shape developing at an early age depending on what we subject our childrens' feet to (princess shoes or work boots like dad!) through about age six (sort of like brain plasticity and learning a second language as a child) and a second study in a Physical Med & Rehab Journal pointing towards the heal rise and increased forces put on the various lower extremity joints vs barefoot/flat sole.

2) consider the forces and how a foot is injured in a rolling mechanism. it is nearly impossible to roll your foot accidentally in Five Fingers on a trail but quite easy in sneaks

3) not an architect, but...think arches in the man made and natural world, igloos, etc. the point is you do not support them, right? they have a keystone. why do we try to support our feet from below? ...a structure that has millions of years of R&D behind it.

4) wide feet, need i say more. no shoe company really offers a product for wide feet. it costs them too much to cover ALL sizes. Five Fingers are pretty good for very wide feet, another nice thing about them. i do believe your feet should be allowed to splay and a wide toe box is important

5) i agree about the need of a slow transition. i have been doing barefoot/minimal for about a year. sort of stagnant now due to work...but up to about 10 miles. in reality my form starts to get sloppy near 5 to 8 miles.

6) have you ever done a trail run with large rocks and logs etc in bare feet or five fingers? i cannot describe how incredible it is. i almost want to send you money to get Five Fingers and just do it. the feeling of jumping and bounding onto the large rocks, and logs, and zig-zagging, the whole experience just felt so right. i love trail running in them! as mentioned above, nearly impossible to roll or twist an ankle in them!!

7) i do not wear my Five Fingers to places like Walmart for attention whoring. I admit they look dorky. Suggest a better product and i would gladly try! but it would have to be good for wide feet, have a thin sole, no heel rise, etc. really nothing else out there...

8) "wet concrete foot print" test. some who have gone bare for a few yrs have started to reverse years of maladaptive footwear and started to see arches via footprint

9) asian foot binding. you CAN change the shape of your feet

10) orthodontic braces analogy. see above. YES, you can change shape of your feet and all the intricate bones that make them up. you guys all know forces on a bone cause it to remodel.

there is more...

mx_599

i would agree, good post. so much variance in a mtn ride, not sure there would be much muscle fatigue sparing from a different post angle. i would also guess trying to manipulate post angle might interfere with certain suspension designs? i dont know, maybe there would be benefits in the off-road tri's...

mx_599

off topic:

I think flu shots are a scam for the overwhelming majority

thanks

mx

and where is gastro? i might be getting a new motocross bike in late summer!!!!

might get a KTM. I want to get some land and build a track. so happy

mx_599

hahaha

sorry about the IM thing. those things are just a PITA to enter. i keep NOT having the money when you need to sign up. plus you know my current situation...things will be far better for me in about a year or two. i am just going to have to wait. i cannot get ANY decent training in when i have to work a 30 f'in hour shift. i hate my life right now. i wish i was on this forum more i am getting fat and depressed i have not had the will power to eat the way i think humans should eat (another topic of discussion)

i did just get a subaru forester that i plan to modify the shlt out of. this makes me a little happy. i plan to pull the whole engine

I am hoping when a sign up for the Breck 100 i will have some focus to turn things around...