Finding a running shoe that works as a racing flat is not easy. Finding a racing flat that fits a wide foot is nearly impossible. Fortunately, Asics Gel-Speedstar 3 qualifies.
Although it looks like it should be narrow, the mesh upper has extra depth which makes this a great match for a wide foot.
Even thought the midsole looks thick, it’s made of soft EVA which is lightweight, providing shock absorption. All this in a mere 9 ounces.
What a great shoe!
Posted in Shoe Fit, Shoe Review, Sport Specific Shoes, Wide Feet
I was very disappointed when Gel-Kayano 15 debuted. I was a fan of prior versions, but not the 15 and I blogged about the reasons why https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2009/01/15/shoe-review-gel-kayano-15-vs-14/. The main difference was the 15 was deeper than the 14 and the 15 was much more unstable laterally. These trends haven’t changed with Gel-Kayano 16.
Overall, Gel-Kayano 16 is not a big departure from the 15 with the exception that it is even deeper. The medial midsole of the 15 and 16 are nearly identical as shown below. The outsole is exactly the same.
Gel-Kayano 16 has a similar midsole to the Gel Kayano 15 with more gel and less EVA in the lateral (outside) midsole. This design may make your heel strike more wobbly causing things like ankle sprains or tendonitis. Everyone doesn’t necessarily need firm lateral EVA but if you do, you would be better off with the 2150 than the Gel Kayano 15. This modification is a huge departure from versions 14 and prior.
Asics has continued with the asymmetrical lacing, however this version design is better than the the 15. I’m still not a fan of asymmetrical lacing, but at least this one won’t bunch up causing irritation like the 15 did. The lack of trim over the big toe, also means less potential irritation along the top of the big toe.
The one plus is Gel-Kayano 16 has a higher heel counter int he back which will reduce heel slippage if that’s been a problem for you.
Overall, Gel-Kayano 16 is too much like Gel-Kayano 15 and not enough like Gel-Kayano 14 and prior versions for me to recommend.
Posted in Narrow Feet, Shoe Review, Sport Specific Shoes
Asics just debuted their GT-2150 model and I am happy to report it is very similar to the GT-2140 https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/asics-2140-has-arrived/
I am a huge fan of this series as it is one of the few shoes that works for the narrow foot. Although the GT-2150 model is ever so slightly wider than the GT-2140, I don’t think this will be a problem for most feet.
All in all, the 2100 series remains one of my favorite running shoes and I will continue to recommend it for many of my runners feet.
Posted in Narrow Feet, Orthotic Friendly Shoes, Shoe Review
Progrid Omni 8 is a departure from the 7 version in that the 7 had both moderate and ultimate styles depending on how much stability you wanted. The Progrid Omni 8 is closer to the 7 moderate version in medial EVA firmness as shown below.
The other big difference is sizing. Progrid Omni 8 runs 1/2 size shorter than Progrid Omni 7. Therefore, if you’re used to wearing a size 10 in the Omni 7 then you will want to size up to a 10 1/2 in the Omni 8. Below is a comparison length between Progrid Omni 8 W and Asics GT-2140, both in women’s size 8. The 2140 is true to size whereas the Omni 8 is not.
Thank goodness, Brooks has debuted Adrenaline 10. I count on Adrenaline to fit the most narrow foot, which is why the Adrenaline 9 was such a disappointment. Prior versions were perfect, but version 9 had changed so much from prior versions that it would no longer fit the narrow foot properly. Here’s my post about it.https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/shoe-review-brooks-adrenaline-gts-8-vs-gts-9/.
Now however, I am happy to report that Adrenaline 10 rises to the level of fit for the narrow foot that all versions prior to 9 had. What a relief. This is a classic case of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” and Brooks has been restored to their rightful first place in helping runners with narrow feet find a perfectly fitting running shoe.
As an added bonus, the overall look is much more stylish and sleek making this shoe even nicer. Thanks Brooks and thanks JY for bringing these shoes in for me to evaluate.
I have previously reviewed the Saucony Hurricane 9 and 10 https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2008/08/12/shoe-review-saucony-progrid-hurricane-9-vs-10/ and Saucony has now released version 11. Overall I like the changes to the 11, but this model has even less volume than the 10, which may be a problem if you’ve been wearing this shoe for it’s roominess.
One of the changes I especially like though is a thicker forefoot midsole which is great for added cushioning at toe-off as seen below.
The waist of the 11 is also wider than the 10 providing much better midfoot support and help with pronation.
My only problem with this shoe is how expensive it’s become ($139). Each new version is $10 more than the prior. At this price point the shoe is OK but better designed and less expensive, similar shoes include Adrenaline GTS 9 or Asics 2140. I even prefer Saucony Guide Shoe to this shoe in terms of overall design and fit.
This is the 1st time I have seen this shoe and I am underwhelmed.
One of the things I like most about many Asics running shoes is that they are generally well structured and stable which makes them a perfect choice for many runners. The Gel Frantic on the other hand is anything but. It strikes me as a Nike Shox wannabee in design without any of the rigidity associated with many of the Shox shoes. This shoe rolls up like a ball with very little effort and anyone who pronates at all would be ill-served by this flexible shoe.
In summary, I would probably never recommend this shoe for a serious runner, especially one having foot, knee or iliotibial band pain.
Posted in Shoe Review, Sport Specific Shoes
If you are a runner who doesn’t pronate too much and need maximum cushioning or shock absorption then Saucony Progrid Echelon may be the shoe for you.
It’s upper is similar in design to the Progrid Stabil 6 https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/shoe-review-saucony-grid-stabil-vs-progrid-stabil/ without the firm EVA medial midsole. It’s mesh cutouts also help if you have bunions or hammertoes.
The outsole doesn’t hourglass much which is helpful if you have a wide or high arched foot or just need extra width to keep from spilling over in this area.
Reader Ken asks “I read in one of your reviews that you don’t like the Nimbus 1o from Asics. This shoe was recommended to me as a neutral runner with high arches and problems with shin splints and IT band soreness. Can you elaborate on your problems with the Nimbus 10.
The Gel Nimbus is a very popular Asics shoe and I must admit I am much happier with Gel Nimbus 11 than I was with Gel Nimbus 10 or 9. In fact, the 11 is a great shoe for a neutral runner with high arches, shin splints and IT band soreness. As long as you don’t pronate too much you should be just fine.
Here are some of the major differences between the three versions.
All in all, if you have previously avoided wearing Asics Gel Nimbus – now is the time to give the 11 a try. It has a much more biomechanical design and I really like the improvements Asics has made to this light weight shoe cushioned running shoe.
Posted in Shoe Fit, Shoe Review, Sport Specific Shoes
Having completed the first Avon Breast Cancer 3-Day walk (1998), I know all too well how grueling the training and walk itself can be. I am therefore always pleased when I can recommend a shoe which withstands the demands and rigors this event requires. New Balance 1123 is a running shoe which provides maximum support, stability and it even has pink trim!
This shoe is a tank and it works for wide and deep feet. It also has mesh on the inside which works if you have a bunion. It has medial and lateral midsole EVA and no hourglass in the waist which especially helps if you pronate. Bottom line, this is a really terrific shoe but pricey, so make sure you use your 3-Day discount card when purchasing.
Here is my other New Balance 1123 Post https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/shoe-review-new-balance-1123-excessive-forefoot-wear/
This is a great shoe for the narrow foot. However, if you wear this shoe, you will want to pay particular attention to forefoot wear. BT came in today with this pair which were only 6 weeks old. When placed on a flat table, the heel counter is no longer upright, tilting to the outside, indicating excessive wear.
Looking at the forefoot sole on the bottom, excessive wear is also evident. This causes the shoe to pronate causing metatarsalgia (forefoot pain) and in this case worsening plantar fasciitis.
Surprisingly the rearfoot outsole wear is unaffected and is evenly worn.
In this case, the worn shoe can cause foot pain and problems so carefully evaluate your shoes monthly for excessive wear.
Posted in Foot Pain, Narrow Feet, Shoe Review
Trying to find a shoe for a wide foot can be a problem, especially if your foot is deep and wide. Many podiatrists tend to go with Brooks (Addiction) or New Balance (1123) which isn’t always the best choice. In fact, Asics Gel Evolution in many cases is a much better choice, especially if you wear size 2E.
As this image below shows, the Gel Evolution in Wide (2E) is much wider than the Brooks Addiction in 2E. It is also has a firm heel counter making it much more stable than the New Balance and much better overall for pronation control in addition to being lighter weight.
Bottom line, if you have a wide foot and are wishing for sleeker design, lighter weight, stability and motion control in your running shoe, then Asics Gel Evolution 4 may be just right for you.
It seems many running shoe companies do not put the same effort into trail running shoes as they do non-trail running shoes. In fact, similar to hiking boots, trail shoes are often heavy, wide and a poor anatomic match to most feet. Asics 2130 Trail shoe was in this category, however the new 2140 Trail shoe is much improved and I recommend it whole heartedly for those trail runners wanting support as well as a more form fitting design.
It easily accommodates an orthotic which is great. An inflexible, firm EVA midsole makes this a stable shoe as does the firm heel counter. The upper is made of lightweight mesh, which is not too deep in the toe box and the sides are nicely padded for a comfortable fit. It comes in both medium and wide widths, which accommodate most feet unless your foot is really wide.
Posted in Narrow Feet, Shoe Fit, Shoe Review
Brooks Adrenaline has been the exact same shoe version after version since the GTS 6. Now however, they have changed not only the version number (8 vs. 9) but also the shoe.
If you have a narrow foot and found the perfect fitting running shoe in Adrenaline GTS 8 , you will be disappointed with the extra volume found in GTS 9. In fact you may want to try Asics 2140 in narrow width instead. If you hve a wide foot, however you will like the changes GTS 9 provides.
Here is my Adrenaline GTS 10 post https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/shoe-review-brooks-adrenaline-gts-10/
Posted in Narrow Feet, Shoe Review
I recommend Saucony Grid Stabil 6 daily for narrow feet needing a lot of support. This year Grid Stabil was replaced with Progrid Stabil as Saucony’s ultimate support shoe. Unfortunately, Progrid Stabil is nothing like Grid Stabil and if you wear this shoe, you may be headed for injury if these differences matter to your foot type. Here are the major differences.
In summary, the Progrid Stabil is not the same as the Grid Stabil. It’s wider, deeper and less stable. If you have a narrow foot and you need firm medial support and an inflexible forefoot, then the Brooks Addiction is a better choice than the new ProGrid Stabil. If you have a medium foot, then Saucony Guide is a much more stable shoe.
Posted in Narrow Feet, Orthotic Friendly Shoes, Shoe Fit, Shoe Review
The new Gel-Kayano 15 recently debuted and at first glance I was very excited. The Gel Kayano is at the top of my list for narrow, shallow feet and is narrower than any other of the current Asics available now.
1. Toebox Depth and Length – The 15 has a deeper toebox than the 14 which helps for those whose 5th (baby) toes were getting crowded or develop a corn when wearing the 14 which was the biggest problem I found when people switched from the 13 to the 14.
It also is slightly longer which helps if your heel to toe measurement is bigger than your heel to ball measurement. https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/size-matters-heel-to-ball-vs-heel-to-toe/
2. Midsole Construction -This is a significant change from the 14 and may create problems for many runners who were otherwise running pain free in the Gel-Kayano 14. The design is more like the Gel-Nimbus 10 which is one of my least favorite shoes.
The 14 has much more EVA in the lateral (outside) midsole than the 15. This means longer wear and greater support at heel strike with the 14 than the 15.
This difference is HUGE, so make sure if you decide to upgrade, you have a professional evaluate you in both pair as the 15 may make your heel strike more wobbly causing things like ankle sprains or tendonitis. Everyone doesn’t necessarily need firm lateral EVA but if you do, you would be better off with the new 2140 than the Gel Kayano.
3. Asymmetrical Lacing – According to Asics this system of lacing “conforms to the bony structure of the foot for an enhanced fit” – My findings and common sense both say, No. In fact this lacing tends to pucker the toebox area for a worse fit, creating an elf-shoe-like appearance with no benefit whatsoever, except maybe irritation at the base of the toes. In fact, I wound up re-lacing as below to simulate a normal (and better) straight lacing design. If you wear this shoe, I would recommend that you do this too.
All in all, I’m very disappointed in the Gel-Kayano 15 and will probably not be recommending this shoe for as many of the runners that come in as I did with the 14.
Note – I have also reviewed Gel-Kayano 16, the post can be found at https://drshoe.wordpress.com/2010/01/31/shoe-review-gel-kayano-15-vs-16/
Posted in Narrow Feet, Orthotic Friendly Shoes, Shoe Review
When Zappos.com puts a particular running shoe on sale, it’s usually because they are clearing the way for an upgraded model. This is the case with the new Asics GT-2140 which are replacing the GT-2130.
Unfortunately, these two shoes are not the same.
1. Width – The 2130 is much wider overall than the 2140. Great if you have a narrower foot, not so great if you have a neuroma, metatarsalgia (ball of the foot pain) or a bunion. If you have these conditions, you will want to try both the medium and wide widths on to determine which fits the best.
2. Toebox Length – 2140 has a longer toebox with a more acute pitch than the 2130. This will benefit those having a longer heel to toe than heel to ball.
Overall, I like the new look and slightly more cushioned design of the new 2140. My only concern is how narrow it is. In fact it reminds me more of the older 2120’s. All in all though, this is a great stable shoe which will also accommodate an orthotic perfectly.
Posted in Orthotic Friendly Shoes, Shoe Review
Finding a hiking boot for a narrow foot can be a challenge. MB came in today with the Ecco Lo, which fit her narrow foot to a T.
This is a very supportive shoe and comes in a low top version (Lo style) and a high top version (Mid style). It comes in men’s and women’s sizes and is made with Gore-Tex so is waterproof.
My only hesitation with this boot is it does not have a firm heel counter, so if you pronate excessively, this shoe may not work for you, especially if you plan on hiking over rugged terrain.
Otherwise, it’s a terrific shoe for an otherwise challenging narrow foot to fit.
Posted in Narrow Feet, Shoe Fit, Shoe Review
If you have a shallow foot then the ProGrid Guide may be the shoe for you. This is one of my favorite shoes because of it’s stability and fit, available in both medium and wide widths.
The Saucony Guide is similar to Asics 2130 but is around $10 less, which helps.
It has a removable insole which can accommodate an orthotic and has mesh in the inside and outside of the forefoot which helps if you have bunions and need a little extra room here.
It is torsionally stable (doesn’t twist) and has an inflexible forefoot sole which not only prolongs wear but also prevents excessive pronation or rearfoot collapse.
Posted in Orthotic Friendly Shoes, Shoe Fit, Shoe Review
I have always been a fan of Brooks Ariel for the wide, deep foot. The shoe is torsionally stable with a stiff heel counter and an inflexible forefoot sole. Recently Brooks changed the model which may or may not be a good thing depending on your foot volume.
The first change is toebox depth. The old Ariel (left) is shallower than the new Ariel (right). If you have a deep foot than this will be great. It’ won’t be great however, if you’re wearing the old Ariel and it was already too deep in the toebox.
The next change is overall length. The old Ariel is shorter, given the same size, than the new Ariel. This only applies to the toebox length, as the heel to ball measurements remain the same in both shoes. This will matter if your heel to ball is a 9 and your heel to toe measurement is a 7, because the extra toe box length may make the shoe uncomfortably long for you.
The back of the shoe in the old Ariel is lower than the back of the shoe in the new Ariel. This change is generally a good thing, as the new Ariel will accommodate an orthotic as well as reduce heel slippage.
In summary, the new Ariel is deeper, wider and longer than the old Ariel. For many people who wear this shoe, the changes won’t matter. However, if you try them on and it seems you’re swimming in them, you might want to try the Brooks Addiction which is also deep but a bit narrower.
Posted in Orthotic Friendly Shoes, Shoe Review
Dr. Jenny Sanders Shoe Blog 