I’m a fan of Brooks® Trance, and version 11 is no exception. Although lightweight, Trance 11 still provides plenty of pronation control and support. Runners will also appreciate the more fitted instep and shallower toe box, compared to version 10. This is one of my favorite shoes this season.
Here’s a link to my previous Trance 10 shoe review https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2011/10/11/shoe-review-brooks-trance-9-vs-10/
It can be a challenge to find a cycling shoe wide enough to accommodate a bunion. A patient came in today with Specialized© Expert Road cycling shoe, which has mesh in the forefoot, making it not only lightweight but ideal for a bunion as well.
This shoe runs wide, but if you still need a little more forefoot room you can always remove the leather overlying the mesh, since this is simply stitched on.
This shoe will also accommodate an orthotic. $200 suggested retail. There is a entry-level version, Comp Road, at $150; and a higher end version, Pro Road, at $285.
Lightweight, cushioned and compatible with a variety of foot types, Mizuno Wave Alchemy 11 is one of my favorite shoes this season.
***Spoiler Alert*** Saucony® PowerGrid Hurricane 14 is nothing like ProGrid Hurricane 13. As the following video shows, Saucony® has converted their signature version 13, stability shoe into a cushioned, potato shoe. This change will affect every runner wearing version 13, who requires pronation control and support.
Alternative shoes to Hurricane 14, include Brooks Trance 11, or Brooks Adrenaline GTS 12.
My previous reviews on Saucony® ProGrid Hurricane, follow the video.
Saucony® Hurricane 12 vs. 13
Saucony® Hurricane 11
Saucony® Hurricane 9 vs. 10
For all of you Asics GT-2160 wearers out there, you will be very disappointed with Asics GT-2170. My following video review shows you how the 2160’s signature structure and support has been compromised, making the 2170 a much more flexible shoe. I have also posted a field review video of Asics GT-2170 which can be found here.
If you are a 2160 wearer you may want to try Brooks Adrenaline 12 or Asics Gel-1170 instead. My previous posts on the 2100 series follow the video.
Asics GT-2160 Review
Asics GT-2150 Review
Asics GT-2140 Review
Asics GT-2130 Review
Asics GT-2120 Review
I have been reviewing Saucony Hurricane since version 9. But Hurricane 12 was my least favorite version, which is why I never reviewed or recommended it. Hurricane 13, however, has restored my faith in this model and surpasses all prior versions with respect to fit, stability and comfort. Structured yet lightweight, Hurricane 13 has a thick, cushioned forefoot and firm EVA medial midsole providing support for even the most excessive pronators.
If you haven’t tried Saucony ProGrid Hurricane 13 yet, you may be missing out on one of this season’s best running shoes. Here’s my video review. My previous Hurricane posts follow the video.
Here’s my latest video shoe review on Asics Gel-Kayano 17. Unfortunately, the current Gel-Kayano is a shoe I just can’t endorse. Hopefully, Gel-Kayano 18 will make me a believer again.
Here are links to my other Gel-Kayano shoe review posts:
Asics GT-2160 is the perfect shoe for a narrow, shallow foot https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2008/01/14/narrow-vs-wide-feet/. It also works for the medium foot, easily accepts an orthotic and provides lots of support. Here’s my video review on this great shoe.
Today’s video compares Addiction 9 to Addiction 10 and highlights the changes to 10 which may make a difference for you. Overall however, Addiction 10 fits similar to Addition 9 and still is a great shoe for the shallow, pronated foot.
Brooks Ariel is a great shoe for the excessive pronator who also has a wide, deep foot. Brooks has kept the shoe the same for the past several years which is great for those women who rely on this shoe for serious support. Here is my latest video on Brooks Ariel. Additional posts follow the video.
I prefer the new Brooks Trance version 10 over version 9. Trance 10 is more stable and slightly wider than version 9. Additional reasons are outlined in my latest Shoe Review video.
In general, I’m a huge fan of Saucony ProGrid Guide and version 4 is even better than version 3. My only caution is width. Guide 4 is slightly narrower than Guide 3 which this video shows.
Brooks Ravenna 2 is a great shoe which might otherwise be overlooked due to it’s soft heel counter. Podiatrist in general recommend firm, non-collapsible heel counters which Brooks Ravenna 2 doesn’t have. What it does have however is a longer, firm rubber, heel outsole than most running shoes which provides significant midfoot support.
Saucony ProGrid Guide 4 is one of my favorite shoes. The upper has a generous amount of mesh which improves airflow, lightness and comfort. Mesh is also helpful if you have bunions or hammertoes.
The rearfoot midsole is thick providing maximum cushioning at heel strike and the firm medial EVA (grey) helps resist pronation and improves stability.
The width is not too narrow and not too wide. This image compares Asics 2160 to Saucony ProGrid Guide 4. Notice how the Guide 4 outsole is slightly wider in the forefoot than the 2160? This is a great feature as most feet are slightly wider in the forefoot than rearfoot.
All in all, Saucony ProGrid Guide 4 is a great shoe and I also like the new bright colors.
When Saucony changed the Grid Stabil design to ProGrid Stabil CS, I was underwhelmed as the ProGrid Stabil CS whas not nearly as stable or supportive as the the Grid Stabil https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/shoe-review-saucony-grid-stabil-vs-progrid-stabil/. Fortunately, the ProGrid Stabil CS 2 has reinstated the features I was so fond of with the earlier Grid Stabil. These include:
A less deep toebox for better fit, while still retaining ample upper width for toes or orthotics if necessary.
The ProGrid Stabil 2 midsole is thicker and firmer than the prior version which makes for a much more structured, stable shoe.
The most important change with ProGrid Stabil CS 2 is a firmer, more durable outsole. The prior version’s outsole was thinner and softer, causing the shoe to wear out more quickly than it should. It was also not not very effective at pronation control whereas the CS 2 is.
If you’re a runner with a wide foot looking for lightweight support, then Grid Stabil CS might just be for you.
I’ve been a fan of Nike Air Structure Triax for quite sometime, however there are some changes with version 13 that you should be aware of if you’re upgrading from version 12.
First and foremost the Triax 13 is almost a full size shorter, heel-to-ball, than the Triax 12 https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/size-matters-heel-to-ball-vs-heel-to-toe/.This can cause conditions like plantar fasciitis (arch pain) or metatarsalgia (ball of the foot pain) so make sure to check the size before you buy.
Lack of firm EVA caps (blue highlighted areas) on the Triax 13 waffle sole also means less durability than the Triax 12. This means you may not get as much mileage as you would in the 12. If you owm the Triax 13 you will want to check outsole wear sooner than with the Triax 12.
Pluses about Nike’s Air Structure Triax 13 include a firm heel counter and firm EVA in the medial midsole. These features continue to make the Triax one of Nike’s most stable, supportive shoes.
Basketball shoes can be a challenge because they typically don’t come in widths other than medium and tend to run wide, making it all but impossible to fit a narrow foot. Nike Zoom Kobe VI is an unexpected exception. In addition to a narrower last than most basketball shoes, it’s also extremely stable.
Another plus is the insole waist of the Kobe VI doesn’t hourglass providing a more supportive foundation for a pronated foot.
With an inflexible forefoot sole, torsional stability and a firm heel counter, this court shoe rivals some of the most stable running shoes available, which truly is an exception to the rule.
My only minor reservation with this shoe is that it’s a mid-top style and not a “true” high-top which may exacerbate ankle instability. This is easily remedied however, by wearing an ankle brace during play. If you remove the sock liner, there will be more than enough room to accommodate any additional tightness an ankle brace or custom orthotic might cause.
I have blogged about Brooks Addiction 8 in previous posts https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/shoe-review-brooks-addiction-7-vs-8/ and have been waiting for the 9 to debut. Fortunately, the version changes have been worth the wait.
I much prefer the Addiction 9 to the 8 because it provides better midfoot fit. It also narrower which matches most feet better.
The toexbox depth of the Addiction 9 is shallower, so it won’t feel like you’re toes are swimming, which for some runners happened with the 8.
Other than these changes, the Addiction 9 is the same stable well designed work horse that the Addiction 8 was. Keep up the good work Brooks.
I have been a fan of North Face Fire Road I for quite some time https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2008/11/04/shoe-review-north-face-fire-road/. It fits the narrow, shallow foot well and is lightweight and stable. Unfortunately, Fire Road II is not quite the same shoe. For starters, there are fewer eyelets on the II . This means the shoe will not adjust as easily or cinch up as tight. These features are crucial to a narrow foot type.
The next and most important difference is the toebox depth. Fireroad II has a much deeper toebox than I, which will not fit the narrow foot as securely. This may contribute to sliding forward and improper fit in the forefoot and heel.
If you are upgrading from version I to II, you will want to pay close attention to the changes this shoe has undergone as they can affect function. This is especially true if you have a narrow foot.