scplus5

I would like to buy a new pair of shoes soon. I went to look at what is available at my LBS and he really wanted to steer me towards a $200 pair of specialized shoes.
A. I don't want to spend that much and can't justify that kind of price tag for shoes.
B. I didn't really care for the look of them.
He has some lower priced options, I think $100/$150 maybe??
He contacted me today saying that he got some new ones in that are red (I was hoping for red shoes) in case I wanted to come look at them. I'm sure the price is going to be in the 100-150 range. I found a pair of pearl izumi shoes online that I really like that I can get for about $80.

So I have a dilemma...I haven't been to see the new ones he just got, but I feel some sense of obligation to buy local when possible. However, I don't like to and am not able to throw my money away frivolously. So, hypothetically, let's say that I like the shoes (which is not necessarily going to be the case)...and they are $50-60 more than the PI ones that I like online.
Can shoes really be WORTH that much more to a mid level recreational cyclist to justify the purchase? (Comfort, speed, efficiency, etc?) I have a set of carnacs that I bought on clearance at nashbar for $30 when I started that I've got 10k miles on that don't have any issues, so it's not like I have picky feet. Will I notice a difference with new shoes enough to justify spending more than the $80 I can get some for online?

Da Reef

Yes

WhyFi

Comfortable shoes are worth a lot. A lot.

In terms of the specific models, I assume that the salesperson was trying to sell you the Experts? I have a 6 year old pair, and they're great shoes if they fit. Boa + CF sole for $200 is a pretty solid value. A step down is probably going to get you carbon reinforced nylon soles and maybe Boa, maybe not? Boas are nice for adjustments on the go, even through shoe covers, in some cases. In any event, probably a solid value if they fit and if they're stiff enough for your tastes.

Personally, I've tried on enough shoes to know that fit is very, very particular for me, so there's no way that I would look for new shoes online (replacing an existing pair with an identical model is another story). Maybe you got lucky with the Carnacs or maybe you have indifferent feet - you probably have a better sense than we if buying online is going to be a roll of the dice in that sense (though sizing from manufacturer to manufacturer can be problematic at times, too).

edit: I looked at the current models - looks like the step down from the Experts, and also available in red, are the Comps. Has a less fancy Boa closure and nylon soles. For the extra $50 I'd totally do the Experts.

DiabloScott

It's always hard to justify the cost of good shoes.
I'm always glad I did.

scplus5

Thank you for the thoughtful replies. It's hard. $200 is a lot of money for me. Maybe I'm in the wrong hobby...

Maybe I did just get lucky with my current shoes? I'm not uncomfortable in them, I've never once needed to adjust them on the go, I've never noticed flex in the soles.

I admittedly have never had nicer shoes, so I don't really know from experience if there is a noticeable improvement in anything, although I'm not unhappy or uncomfortable or slow with what I have.

Serious question, please tell me what will/should FEEL different with pricier shoes that justifies high priced versions. I totally get it for my running shoes, because the shoes ARE the sport. I wouldn't run in Walmart shoes, I wouldn't ride a Walmart road bike...but I have a hard time imagining enough real world benefit in $200 shoes that just serve the purpose of keeping my feet attached to the pedals.

So seriously, what are the real world benefits and changes that I will see?

I'm struggling with this, if you can't tell.
For the same $200, I can get shoes, a lower end gps, and some narrower bars for one of my bikes. Or I could get just shoes. Help.

memebag

My $150 shoes feel a lot like my old $50 shoes. Maybe they will last longer.

But red shoes are easily worth $300.

kbarch

Hmmmm....
You say you would "like" some new shoes, and it seems the only qualification you or your feet are aware of is their color, namely red. You also say you feel some obligation to shop locally. What does dollar cost have to do with any of this?

How should we know what is important to you? I don't think you'll spend more on medical bills if you spend less on shoes, if that's what you're getting at.
Meanwhile, I understand that a lot of women put up with a great deal of physical pain and practical inconvenience just to have pretty shoes, and they pay EXTRA for shoes that are More uncomfortable. Because they value the mere look of them.

Sounds to me like you value redness. So get the ones with the most redness per dollar.

PepeM

What's wrong with your current shoes?

scplus5

Nothing really, I've just had them for 3 years and I'd like something new. Somewhat out of curiosity most likely because I've never had another pair.

scplus5

Medical bills?
Im scratching my head.

chip1

When I upgraded from Specialized Comp to the Pro model, the difference was very apparent to me. It had a tighter, racier fit, weighed less, and had higher stiffness index in the carbon sole. All that contributed to feeling similar to an actual bike upgrade but for my feet. I've since switched to mid-range Shimano because they fit my feet better, but I do miss that snappy feel of race shoes.

Have you ever ridden an aluminum Synapse or similar endurance bikes? Imagine going from that to your CAAD9. That's how it felt for me. IMO shoes do make a big difference compared to other components in this hobby that offers such marginal difference.

scplus5

Funny you mention it, I have a carbon synapse in addition to my caad.

How do you feel the stiffness? Just curious.

chip1

You really don't. Honestly I couldn't bend neither shoes with my hand since both had carbon soles. I think the other shoe being ligher and tigher fit made it feel stiffer. It certainly felt like I was putting more watts during fast group rides. Oddly enough my current Shimano shoes have a stiffness rating of 10 but it doesn't feel as snappy as my previous shoes.

Dark Night

had foot issues, "Hot Foot", went through a dozen brands with 30 day money back guarantee. Sadly for my wallet, the $700.00 pair solved my "Hot Foot" problem.

caloso

I'm on my 3d pair of S-Works shoes. They've been great for me. I will always spend what it takes for contact points.

kbarch

I am, too. You asked whether there'd be any difference you might notice and expressed concern about spending money, so I tried to imagine some way of determining relative value of what one notices about shoes as purely a matter of money. The wrong shoes might be painful, but maybe you don't care - maybe red shoes make you happier than pain-inducing fit makes you sad - how would we know? But as far as money value goes, there could be some indirect cost - you might have to spend more on account of that pain if you have to go to a doctor for it, but like I said, I doubt it.

scplus5

You didn't get it. Everyone else did. Thanks anyway.

kbarch

Oh, I got the same thing everyone else did, but the values you assign to pros and cons, fit, aesthetics, convenience, etc. can't be assigned dollar values, which is how you expressed your concern.

indyfabz

Since the OP can't seem to decide on what is most important to him, I have decided for him. On sale for $174.95 at backcountry.com

BKE

If it ain't broke don't fix it, right? Keep the old smelly comfy ones that are working.

Now you can upgrade that GPS, get the narrow bars you want and and maybe a new seat or what ever for the other bike.

merlinextraligh

Spend time and money to get the contact points right.

Shoes, seat, shorts, handlebar tape and gloves.

Carbonfiberboy 

I look at expenditures like this in terms of amortization. My first pair of Sidi Dominators went 50,000 miles and were still in good shape when I lost them. My second pair fit exactly like my first pair. In that 50,000 miles I also consumed a bottom bracket, many chains, a few cassettes and chainrings, a pair of brifters, a couple wheelsets, and many, many tires and tubes. None of those other consumables contributed a whit to my comfort on the bike or improved my performance like those shoes did.

I went to the Sidis from an $80 pair of Specialized MTB shoes. I guessed that the Sidis would be better but I really didn't know. I suppose I was lucky. But if you think your current shoes are perfect, why change unless you aren't concerned about money? But you obviously are, though perhaps not concerned in the way an investment banker would be concerned. I try not to spend money unless I'm going to get some performance improvement out of it, though I am perhaps in a minority among cyclists.

memebag

Excellent point. My $50 Giros lasted 16,000 miles. A $250 pair of Sidis would need to last 80,000 miles to justify the expense.

Carbonfiberboy 

Or produce some noticeable improvement in either comfort or performance. Which will depend on the length of rides contemplated. All the randos around here use Dominators, which was my reason for choosing that shoe as I was also planning some long rides.

memebag

I wore the $50 Giros on a few centuries, which is the most I've ever ridden in a day. They always felt fine.