Barefoot Running/Shoes

BJohnson

pgibbo wrote: »

Does anyone know where I can get a pair of the socks around the Galway area? Or do I have to go online for them?

Someone told me that they got a pair at the €2 shop in town - he said they weren't very good quality, but if you want to see what socks feel like in the shoes, you might want to give them a try.

Orion

tunney wrote: »

Anyone know of somewhere in Dublin I can try a pair on for size?

pgibbo wrote: »

Does anyone know where I can get a pair of the socks around the Galway area? Or do I have to go online for them?

http://www.barefoot.ie/page.asp?id=130

[edit]Sorry - misread the Galway one. afaik the distributor in Cork will be doing the socks in the next few weeks. The shops he deals with should have them then.

d.runs

I'm looking to buy the vibrams, probably the Bikila.
Do I buy a size smaller than my normal shoe size of 43?
(best value seems to be at http://www.53degreesnorth.ie, I've rung them up and they only have euro sizes on the box).
Thanks. D.

pgibbo

d.runs wrote: »

I'm looking to buy the vibrams, probably the Bikila.
Do I buy a size smaller than my normal shoe size of 43?
(best value seems to be at http://www.53degreesnorth.ie, I've rung them up and they only have euro sizes on the box).
Thanks. D.

I'd recommend trying them on. My KSO's are a different fit to my Asics. So bricks and mortar is safest for your first pair anyway.

d.runs

I'm over 100 miles away! Is your KSO's a size smaller than asics. Thanks.

InTheTrees

From what I'm reading its pretty important with the first pair to try them in the shop so you can get the sizing perfect. Because the sizing really needs to be spot on.

robinph

Definitely would suggest buying from a real shop. I normally wear UK 10's, which would be EU 44's. I think they first tried me in a pair of 43's, but they were far too loose so I'm now in a pair of 42 KSO's.

d.runs

Thanks for advice. I'll probably go for one size smaller. They said I can post them back if size is not right (cheaper than driving there!).

Orion

There's a sizing guide on the Vibram site:
http://www.vibramfivefingers.it/eng/kso.aspx - click on Size conversion chart. I tried on some in the shop and I was a 43. I take size 8 Asics if that helps.

RacoonQueen

I'm actually considering a pair of these now. Lots of minimalist shoes around now. Have just ordered a pair of Saucony Kinvara not exactly barefoot running but from reading reviews it's a lot more minimalist than the other shoes I have.

dna_leri

RacoonQueen wrote: »

I'm actually considering a pair of these now. Lots of minimalist shoes around now. Have just ordered a pair of Saucony Kinvara not exactly barefoot running but from reading reviews it's a lot more minimalist than the other shoes I have.

Let us know how you get on with the Kinvara's. Read the review on runblogger a while ago and am considering them.

Gear Freak

Got my pair of KSO's in www.53degreesnorth.ie and they fit like a glove. The guys there measured me up using two different devices and gave me some great advice on breaking them in and barefoot running in general. Plus I got a nice membership discount too.

I absolutely love them and I’ve been running 4-5 times a week.

My recommendation is to get fitted in a specialist store like 53 Degrees North, peace of mind and all that jazz, and to take it easy at the start until you adjust to them. You won’t look back.

Is it bad if I wear my pair to work on Fridays?

ronanmac

dna_leri wrote: »

Let us know how you get on with the Kinvara's. Read the review on runblogger a while ago and am considering them.

I bought a pair of Kinvara's a few months back, and I really like them. There's a bit of midfoot cushioning but no real stability additions to the shoe. They are very light (compared to what I was used to) and actually feel like slippers when on. Very comfortable. I had considered wearing them for DCM, but found my soles a bit sensitive after 20 mile runs in them, so went with the Asics Noosa on the day. I would say it's more my running technique than the shoe, as I saw a German guy at the start of the marathon wearing the Kinvara's.

I wore them last night for the first time, post-marathon, and had forgotten how comfortable and light they are. Two thumbs up!

shels4ever

Whats the grip like in these things, can you get a spiked version for XC too

BJohnson

shels4ever wrote: »

Whats the grip like in these things, can you get a spiked version for XC too

The grip on the FiveFingers is good - there are a lot of little grooves on the underside of the sole that you can only see if you bend the shoe backwards - you can't see it in pictures. It's a clever design.

pgibbo

shels4ever wrote: »

Whats the grip like in these things, can you get a spiked version for XC too

I ran close to 4 miles on a very wet and muddy Galway Racecourse during the week and I had no issues. The grip was fine

mo_bhicycle

I picked up a pair of aqua-shoes in Aldi for €10 a while back and took the insoles out. I can't imagine how much better the Vibrams can be ... certainly not 10 times better.
I totally believe in the basic concept behind the Vibrams ... but not the price. I think they've done a great job in marketing something that should really be 1/5th of the price.
Question for the Vibram wearers, what's the point of the individual toes?

BJohnson

mo_bhicycle wrote: »

I picked up a pair of aqua-shoes in Aldi for €10 a while back and took the insoles out. I can't imagine how much better the Vibrams can be ... certainly not 10 times better.
I totally believe in the basic concept behind the Vibrams ... but not the price. I think they've done a great job in marketing something that should really be 1/5th of the price.
Question for the Vibram wearers, what's the point of the individual toes?

I know a guy that runs in some sort of water shoes too, and he really likes them. Anything that takes away most of the cushioning under your foot will give you a similar experience. One thing I've been impressed with is the build-quality of the Vibrams. After running about 1000 miles in mine so far, there's hardly any noticeable wear pattern at all on the sole - it's thin, but very tough. It'll be interesting to see how long they last, but so far they're in great shape. Compared to the New Balance shoes that I used to run in, by the end of the year they would be in pretty rough shape and need to be replaced.

I don't find the price too bad - any running shoe that I buy is going to cost me around €100 anyway, and if I get one that lasts twice as long, that's a bonus.

The idea with the individual toes, I would guess, is to make it feel as much like a bare foot as possible. They were originally intended as a shoe for working on the deck of a boat, but got popular with runners somewhere along the way. To each their own, I guess!

robinph

The separate toes might be something to do with compensating for your foot being squished inside a regular shoe for years and the toes being too close together.

Or it could just be to make them look a bit funny.

Peetrik

mo_bhicycle wrote: »

Question for the Vibram wearers, what's the point of the individual toes?

Grip. On muddy/wet grass, especially downhill, your toes are able to splay out and stop your foot skidding forward.

Well thats the effect anyway. No idea if it was intentional or not. I suppose thats just how bare feet work anyway

mo_bhicycle

I guess one of the reasons for my suspicions is because of the history of the fivefingers, as mentioned by BJohnson. I kinda have the feeling that the individual toes may have benefits for boating situations but not necessarily when applied to running. How much running specific research was applied to the original design?
It kinda smells of a marketing gimmick to me. If one was to remove the toes from the fivefingers they would have very few unique selling points. Luna Sandals and other similar products don't have or seem to need individual toes with individual motion control.

The above is a bit of a brain dump about a gut feeling. I don't have crazy strong opinions on the subject ... just that i'm very interested in the area.

My brother has a pair of KSOs, I should really try them out and see how they compare. I'm just a bit off-put my the smellyness :P
I'll try and get them from him and see what they're like compared with the aqua-shoes.

One final question, does the extra material between the toes not cause significantly more blisters in comparison to conventional shoe designs?

Insane1

mo_bhicycle wrote: »

I guess one of the reasons for my suspicions is because of the history of the fivefingers, as mentioned by BJohnson. I kinda have the feeling that the individual toes may have benefits for boating situations but not necessarily when applied to running.

One final question, does the extra material between the toes not cause significantly more blisters in comparison to conventional shoe designs?

IMO arguing the point of the indiviual toe design of Vibrams is kinda like arguing with millions of years of evolution and the need for human toes at all when running! I know a guy who had his big toe removed due to cancer. To say that his balance was affected is a major under statement - he is forever stumbling and tripping even 10 years on.

Ever try to play the piano with oven gloves on? Same thing as trying to run while wrapping your feet in Nikes... Ok maybe I have exaggerated the comparison but you get the idea...

Take a look at the two pictures I have attached. One is a picture of feet from the Tarahumara Tribe (the running tribe who nonchalantly run 100miles+ at a whim) and have never worn shoes.
The second picture is your average Joe in the 'developed world'. Again the pictures are a little exaggerated but I think it makes a good point. The difference in development and musculature is incredible - like different species!

Just look at the difference in the toe formation and decide which one will be the more balanced, more efficient, stronger and faster of the two...

And just to answer your final question, since I have been wearing Vibrams I have found that the exact opposite is true with regards to blisters. I have yet to get one in Vibrams while in runners I was constantly plagued with them. I have run marathon distance in them too. I have however heard that blisters are still an issue with some Vibram wearers.

Jan_Wall

airscotty wrote: »

Just read an artical in this months 220 triathlon mag all about barefoot running. Does anyone on here do it? What are their favorite type of barefoot runners?! Vibram seem to be most popular but does anyone have some feed back on them?

I have tried both Vibram Five Fingers KSO Trek and New Balance MT101. So far so great. I have never had any problems at all. I like these shoes as they mimic the feeling of barefoot running.

KSO Treksport
New Balance MT101

mo_bhicycle

Insane1 wrote: »

IMO arguing the point of the indiviual toe design of Vibrams is kinda like arguing with millions of years of evolution and the need for human toes at all when running! I know a guy who had his big toe removed due to cancer. To say that his balance was affected is a major under statement - he is forever stumbling and tripping even 10 years on.

The big toe still serves it's intended function regardless of whether it's barefoot, in fivefingers or in nikes.

Insane1 wrote: »

Take a look at the two pictures I have attached. One is a picture of feet from the Tarahumara Tribe (the running tribe who nonchalantly run 100miles+ at a whim) and have never worn shoes.

Do they not wear sandals?

Insane1 wrote: »

Just look at the difference in the toe formation and decide which one will be the more balanced, more efficient, stronger and faster of the two...

I don't think you'd fit the Tarahumara foot into a pair of fivefingers :P
I'm thinking about the Tarahumara and the fact that they usually wear sandals, where they don't have gaps in the material under their feet. If I was to try and relate this back to the fivefingers, does this mean that one of the main benefits of the fivefingers is greater freedom to stretch your toes out wide? Kinda like getting the benefits of sandals without the drawbacks.

Insane1 wrote: »

since I have been wearing Vibrams I have found that the exact opposite is true with regards to blisters

That's very interesting, will def have to give them a try.

Cool Running

The barefoot style runners certainly seem to be getting very popular. I never taught I would hear of people running long distances on the road with them but a few posters here have done marathon distance in them.
I've seen videos of them but never actually seen someone run in them. I think it may be a defining point in running history kinda like when Asics Gel was first introduced maybe.

When a few people winning races are wearing them thats when people will really start paying attention

RudyM

I've been using my VFF KSO for more than a year now, straps have started to become worn and will probably tear quite soon.
FF would be great if it has not been for the fact that (I think) because of the lack of cushioning in them I have injured my hip and have been limping for over a month now - which is bad for a 30 yr old guy

RE*AC*TOR

My 2c (fwiw). I'm a new runner, a heavy runner (ie weight not mileage) at that. Started running a few months back in a pair of Asics Gels (not entirely sure exact model) I had but never really used. Grand.

Got wind of the Vibrams, bought a pair (KSO), ran a couple of 5k runs in them (road). After the first run my calves felt like they were made from marble, tight as bejesus.

The second run I picked up an injury I believe to have been extensor tendonitis from a combination of overtight calves, not really letting my heal land properly and pushing off with my toes.

I was just relieved it didn't seem to be a stress fracture.

Perhaps the sane thing to do at this point would be to ditch them and go back to the asics. The only problem was when I went back to the asics they felt like I was running with concrete on my feet. So I cut back to one short run a week in the Vibrams, and the rest in the Asics to let the foot mend.

At this point it has completely healed and I've done a few 10milers in the Vibrams, without pain.

I find I run far more efficiently in the Vibrams, they encourage me to have a lighter step (now landing mid foot and allowing the heal to touch down), and perhaps a shorter stride, higher cadence. I find it hard to replicate this form in the traditional runners. When I run in the Asics it feels like I'm putting much more work on my thighs instead of spreading it more across the whole leg with the Vibrams...

On the negative side, they do look weird, and I do feel like a berk in them. I have a couple of pairs of Nike Mayflys that I'm trying out to see whether they'll give me a similar effect... no conclusions reached on that so far.

devotional1993

Im interested in using these for racing xc. Has anybody used them or raced with them for a variety of conditions?

thepassanger

i love running barefoot, i may be extreemley biased after reading the born to run book by christopher mc dougall. at first when i tried it out i thought it was only because it forced me to run slower that i wasnt getting pains in my knees etc... but now i believe it is purely because it corrects some bad habits people can develop in runners.
yesterday in ran a couple of km barefoot in vienna (on holidays with now runners) and a lot of the people i was running beside gave me a complimentary nod, not the "youre a wierdo nod" from locals at home.

nerraw1111

The whole argument of the Tarahumara Tribe is deeply flawed. To reduce it to 'they run 100 miles BECAUSE they don't wear runners' VERSUS most amateur runners get injured BECAUSE of runners is ridiculous.

Tribe members didn't suddenly wake up and start running hundred plus miles. It's a slow, measured build up. Most amateur runners get injured because they don't have a slow measured build up.

It strikes me that footwear is the least likely cause of either situation. It's the person.