Running Shoes

Shoe engineers have always dreamt of designing a shoe that can fulfill the shoe’s most critical requirement, the erratic requirement of cushioning. That’s how they have come up with numerous solutions, utilizing a range of out of the ordinary materials, materials you wouldn’t think before of being integrated into a shoe design successfully. We have seen Reebok come up with the Air Rump system, the only unique shoe concept that gives to the wearers the facility to fine tune the shoe’s cushioning, a technology only later to be eclipsed by another successful albeit more efficient air bag sported in the Nike Air Max. Now we see gel pods from Asics, variable density midsole foams from Adidas, and progressive shock dampening polymer columns from Nike. Still, each of these technologies is far from the ultimate Holy Grail pursued relentlessly by the shoe manufacturers.

Cushioning requirements is still too erratic to be solved collectively. It changes in the slightest conditions, like as when the runner gets tired, his strides become more leaden, foot hitting the ground becomes harder. Then the cushioning requirement for the running shoe needs to change. The pace, the running surface, the lateral movements, all these also require specific cushioning needs. Then there is also the physical difference of each runner, the weight and the strength. Shoe designers have come up with a general solution for this one, however imprecise it is. Rationalizing that the majority of the women would weight less than men, so women’s running shoes becomes less cushiony and more flexible than men’s running shoes, and men’s running shoes are decidedly firmer and more cushioned out. This is to compensate the lighter weight and the lower strength of female runners; men tend to bend their shoes without so much of an effort. Of course there would be exceptions; as some men are lighter than women, much as some women are as equally strong as most men. Then the gender bias in shoe design becomes more or less compromise. No, the whole cushioning requirement becomes more or less a compromise.

That’s what makes choosing the right kind of running shoes harder, because you have to deal with a compromise. Would you have better cushioning in the form of full length Shox, but have lesser flexibility? Or would you choose the adiPRENE for its flexibility and feel each and every impact you make every stride?

Your feet might also present a need for special set of requirements. Feet conditions, such as overpronating feet require running shoes specified for the condition. Motion control running shoes are designed to help those with the condition. A flat-footed runner using a regular running shoe could lead to a long-term damage especially on the knee area. If you belong to this foot category, get motion control running shoes. Good examples of such would be the Nike Air Structure Triax, the Reebok Premier Road Plus II and the Brooks Addiction 6 Stability running shoe.

To find out if you have an over pronating feet, you can do a simple water test. To do this, you have to wet lightly your foot and step on a clear paper. Study the arches of your footprint. A normal foot has ¼ the width of your broadest area. An over pronated foot looks has little or no arch at all.

You can buy a healthy choice of running shoes without spending too much. The Shox is really one of the best shock-dampening choices in running shoes, but you might find the price too steep for comfort. Asics might provide you a better option since its Gel technology is somewhat similar to Nike’s but without the over hyped price. New Balance also has a generous range of exceptional selections, especially its New Balance 800 Series. Adidas adiPRENE technology is best adapted as cross training shoe and trail running shoe, so if you find yourself doing much of the latter, then Adidas might be your choice of running shoes, and so are puma running shoes.