Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Bike Shoes: massive challenge finding a decent fit for my wide feet

Notices
Road Cycling ďIt is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.Ē -- Ernest Hemingway

Bike Shoes: massive challenge finding a decent fit for my wide feet

Old 08-04-22, 06:56 AM
  #26  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,004

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 352 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20317 Post(s)
Liked 9,033 Times in 4,481 Posts
Originally Posted by redcon1 View Post
BITD -- before I discovered Sidi Mega fit my 3E paws well-- I successfully used a wooden shoe stretcher to widen the toe box (particularly at the small toe area) of several pairs. Thoroughly wet the shoes, adjust and insert the stretcher and let dry overnight. I repeated the process 5 or 6 times and was able to get some room in several pairs of Shimano MTB shoes and a pair of Specialized road shoes. Since switching to Sidi Mega I haven't had to break out the stretcher for cycling shoes (Dress shoes are another story) :-)
Leather cycling shoes aren't really the norm, anymore, either - Lake still has some as does Sidi, IIRC - so stretching may not be an option for many of the shoes with synthetic uppers out there. Then there's also the matter of High Volume (generous/stretched uppers) vs Wide (wider lasts/foot beds) - people with moderately wide feet seem to be able to get away with HV (which is the majority of the cycling shoes marketed as Wide) while those with true flappers need the wider foot bed.
WhyFi is offline  
Likes For WhyFi:
Old 08-04-22, 07:16 AM
  #27  
redcon1
Senior Member
 
redcon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: South Central PA
Posts: 539

Bikes: Focus Arriba, Specialized Roubaix Expert, Bianchi Impulso Allroad

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked 82 Times in 53 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
Leather cycling shoes aren't really the norm, anymore, either - Lake still has some as does Sidi, IIRC - so stretching may not be an option for many of the shoes with synthetic uppers out there. Then there's also the matter of High Volume (generous/stretched uppers) vs Wide (wider lasts/foot beds) - people with moderately wide feet seem to be able to get away with HV (which is the majority of the cycling shoes marketed as Wide) while those with true flappers need the wider foot bed.
All of the shoes I stretched were some combination of nylon/synthetic uppers and the stretching process worked well enough to wear them. Agree about High volume vs. wider footbed distinction. Sidi Mega are a combination of both. I have Sidi Genius 5 in both regular and Mega, both size 43. The Mega definitely has a higher volume to allow a roomier instep, but also a wider footbed. The combination allows a decent fit for me.
redcon1 is offline  
Old 08-04-22, 07:18 AM
  #28  
GhostRider62
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 2,843
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1670 Post(s)
Liked 1,381 Times in 874 Posts
I buy Sidi Mega width shoes. The problem? Bike shops do not stock shoes and certainly not 48 wide. There are online shops that will pay return shipping if the shoe does not fit. You have to order online, it is that simple.
GhostRider62 is offline  
Old 08-04-22, 02:20 PM
  #29  
ZHVelo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 788
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked 204 Times in 148 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
Leather cycling shoes aren't really the norm, anymore, either - Lake still has some as does Sidi, IIRC - so stretching may not be an option for many of the shoes with synthetic uppers out there. Then there's also the matter of High Volume (generous/stretched uppers) vs Wide (wider lasts/foot beds) - people with moderately wide feet seem to be able to get away with HV (which is the majority of the cycling shoes marketed as Wide) while those with true flappers need the wider foot bed.
I can highly recommend knitted material. I have the Bontrager Ballista Knit now, but I believe I saw other brands have similar materials. Only shoe I immediately felt comfortable in. And with the BOA system you can get them just tight enough without causing discomfort. Other shoes felt tight and hard immediately, never mind what they would have felt after hours riding.
ZHVelo is offline  
Old 08-05-22, 04:14 AM
  #30  
RGMN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 537
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked 209 Times in 140 Posts
Have you looked at Bont Cycling shoes? I know they make double wide shoes in some of their models. Iím riding their Vaypor G shoe and it is the best fitting shoe Iíve ever used. Iím not nearly as wide as you are, but a buddy that has super wide feet also rides Vaypor G and said he thought they might be too wide when he first got them. After he heat molded them he said they are perfect.
RGMN is offline  
Likes For RGMN:
Old 08-05-22, 06:41 AM
  #31  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,004

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 352 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20317 Post(s)
Liked 9,033 Times in 4,481 Posts
Originally Posted by RGMN View Post
Have you looked at Bont Cycling shoes? I know they make double wide shoes in some of their models. Iím riding their Vaypor G shoe and it is the best fitting shoe Iíve ever used. Iím not nearly as wide as you are, but a buddy that has super wide feet also rides Vaypor G and said he thought they might be too wide when he first got them. After he heat molded them he said they are perfect.
It's a shame that there are so few manufacturers of (truly) wide cycling shoes and that the two most prominent (Lake and Bont) have the worst distribution in the biz.
WhyFi is offline  
Likes For WhyFi:
Old 08-08-22, 04:15 PM
  #32  
Donw9876
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Ok, folks, I'm checking back in on this thread. When I posted originally I was evaluating a pair of Shimano SH-XC3 and I decided, once again, not really wide, and painful. (Even very hard to put on, which has been the case of almost every pair I've tried.) So I got an RMA and returned them to bikeshoes dot com.

Per the majority advice here I engaged Bikeshoes in a lengthy email thread and asked for their help. Keri (who provided awesome support) made me aware of what some of you are saying that most "wide" shoes have larger circumference uppers. I was not aware of this. Just before I boxed up the Shimano's I pulled out and looked at the insert. It looked like the sole of a frikkin' ballerina shoe. And it was supposed to be "wide". The sole appeared to be a good inch less in width than my actual foot, seriously.

Keri recommended based on what I stated a pair of Lake MX177-X wide in a size 42. I got them over the weekend. INCOMPARABLE difference. The soles are actually about the width of my feet. Wearing thinner actual cycling socks these will work. The toe area is a little more snug than I prefer but it's usable and I'll get used to them.

She recommended as the next notch up in width the MX219-X which is $239. At this point it's not a cost thing (the manufacturers have literally worn me out with sh*tty choices) and I'd pay it, but the pair I got is already more expensive than the best dress shoes I've ever had.

I've ridden since the late 70s. My first pair of biking shoes were grey Avocets with a ridged gum type sole. I also remember a brand called Bata Biker which were heavily advertised. It seemed like finding these things at the local level was extremely easy. Bike shoes now seem to be incredibly elitist and nichey, and exclusionary, and push very particular body sizes, and the material choices suck outright - few fabric or mesh choices. I'm not skinny. I'm used to buying bike shirts in XXL or even XXXL just to get a fit like I do with XL in regular clothing. But shoes are even beyond bike clothes in accessibility.

I know, lose 100 lbs. Sure.

Anyway, very helpful thread and that's what I wound up settling on. Thanks, guys.

Last edited by Donw9876; 08-08-22 at 04:24 PM.
Donw9876 is offline  
Likes For Donw9876:
Old 08-08-22, 04:22 PM
  #33  
Donw9876
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
PS: Actually I could see dropping back to toe clips and not using cleats... just to have a wider range of shoes available.
Donw9876 is offline  
Old 08-08-22, 06:09 PM
  #34  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,004

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 352 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20317 Post(s)
Liked 9,033 Times in 4,481 Posts
Originally Posted by Donw9876 View Post
Ok, folks, I'm checking back in on this thread. When I posted originally I was evaluating a pair of Shimano SH-XC3 and I decided, once again, not really wide, and painful. (Even very hard to put on, which has been the case of almost every pair I've tried.) So I got an RMA and returned them to bikeshoes dot com.

Per the majority advice here I engaged Bikeshoes in a lengthy email thread and asked for their help. Keri (who provided awesome support) made me aware of what some of you are saying that most "wide" shoes have larger circumference uppers. I was not aware of this. Just before I boxed up the Shimano's I pulled out and looked at the insert. It looked like the sole of a frikkin' ballerina shoe. And it was supposed to be "wide". The sole appeared to be a good inch less in width than my actual foot, seriously.

Keri recommended based on what I stated a pair of Lake MX177-X wide in a size 42. I got them over the weekend. INCOMPARABLE difference. The soles are actually about the width of my feet. Wearing thinner actual cycling socks these will work. The toe area is a little more snug than I prefer but it's usable and I'll get used to them.

She recommended as the next notch up in width the MX219-X which is $239. At this point it's not a cost thing (the manufacturers have literally worn me out with sh*tty choices) and I'd pay it, but the pair I got is already more expensive than the best dress shoes I've ever had.

I've ridden since the late 70s. My first pair of biking shoes were grey Avocets with a ridged gum type sole. I also remember a brand called Bata Biker which were heavily advertised. It seemed like finding these things at the local level was extremely easy. Bike shoes now seem to be incredibly elitist and nichey, and exclusionary, and push very particular body sizes, and the material choices suck outright - few fabric or mesh choices. I'm not skinny. I'm used to buying bike shirts in XXL or even XXXL just to get a fit like I do with XL in regular clothing. But shoes are even beyond bike clothes in accessibility.

I know, lose 100 lbs. Sure.

Anyway, very helpful thread and that's what I wound up settling on. Thanks, guys.
The shoes that you got have the "Sport" last; the ones that she recommended you move up to are their widest - the "Competition" last (which happen to be the ones that work best for me, too). They'll get you about 4-5 mm extra width for the same size.

I was in a similar situation a few years ago and I, too, got to the point where enough was enough and I just wanted shoes that worked, even if they cost a little more than I might normally be comfortable with. A few years later, absolutely no regrets and the shoes don't look like they're going to crap out any time soon. Over the course of a decade or two, an extra hundred bucks, or whatever, is a pittance for feet that don't hurt.
WhyFi is offline  
Old 08-08-22, 10:07 PM
  #35  
Donw9876
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
The shoes that you got have the "Sport" last; the ones that she recommended you move up to are their widest - the "Competition" last (which happen to be the ones that work best for me, too). They'll get you about 4-5 mm extra width for the same size.

I was in a similar situation a few years ago and I, too, got to the point where enough was enough and I just wanted shoes that worked, even if they cost a little more than I might normally be comfortable with. A few years later, absolutely no regrets and the shoes don't look like they're going to crap out any time soon. Over the course of a decade or two, an extra hundred bucks, or whatever, is a pittance for feet that don't hurt.
Totally agreed with that assertion. I owned and used this pair I trashed since 2000 so they have given 22 years of service and cost about $80-100 at the time. That's less than $5 per year of amortized ownership cost.

It's kind of like even the LBSs want to just get you to buy the in-stock crap that hurts, because (I found) no shop seems to really understand fit of shoes so they act like it's a totally random selection on your part and not based on actual dimensions. It's worth paying a lot if that's what it takes. I hate being placed in that position but it is what it is.

These Lake shoes are beauties, though. I almost don't want to ride in them, HA HA.
Donw9876 is offline  
Old 08-11-22, 05:05 AM
  #36  
noimagination
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 556
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Liked 325 Times in 190 Posts
For your next trick: try finding hiking boots suitable for multi-day backpacking trips with a wide last. That's another level of difficulty. The hiking boot "industry" has gone through the same "consolidation" process that cycling equipment has - the old quality brands have been bought up by mega-corporations and no longer make good quality boots. Try going custom, you're looking at $500+ and a 6 month or more wait.

Thru-hiking the AT is on my bucket list, if I ever get the opportunity I'll need about a year just to make sure I have appropriate footwear, between the buying and breaking-in processes. Or, I can buy multiple pairs of "disposable" hiking boots for $350+ a pair and hope that, when they do fall apart, I'm not too far from re-supply.
noimagination is offline  
Likes For noimagination:
Old 08-11-22, 06:31 AM
  #37  
aliasfox
Full Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked 74 Times in 63 Posts
Itís not just cycling shoes. Try going into your typical store and ordering wide dress shoes - never in stock. I have a few Allen Edmonds that I rotated through when I went into the office, mainly because theyíre one of the few brands that is not only consistent in their lasts and sizing, but also carries stock of 9E in their stores. Sure, the leather quality is pretty good, and Goodyear Welting generally makes for a high quality shoe, but frankly $300 and up for a pair of shoes that donít pinch my feet (most size 9 shoes) or donít feel like clown shoes (most 9.5-10, which are wide enough for my feet but too long) seems a bit excessive. Sure, for the two pairs I rotate through regularly, the quality is there to last a while, but I donít need to spend that much for shoes that only come out a few times a year. And itís not like everyone can budget $300 and up for a pair of shoes that donít pinchÖ
aliasfox is offline  
Likes For aliasfox:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.