Shoes and pack questions.

[barnyc]

if you ring Pete Bland in advance of the race, they will bring a selection of shoes/sizes along with them for you to try on.

[tenohfive]

Ordered the cheaper OMM bum bag.

Think I'll ring PB if I don't manage to wangle a trip up north before the Downfall.

Thanks for all the advice, I suspect I'll be back for more as time goes on.

[tenohfive]

OMM bum bag has arrived, impressions generally good although the side pockets aren't as stretchy as I'd hoped - not big enough for a 400ml soft bottle, or a pair of Prism gloves. Main pocket is a decent size though.

Stupid question time: should a bumbag sit on the hips or on the belly?

[TheChizler]

OMM bum bag has arrived, impressions generally good although the side pockets aren't as stretchy as I'd hoped - not big enough for a 400ml soft bottle, or a pair of Prism gloves. Main pocket is a decent size though.

Stupid question time: should a bumbag sit on the hips or on the belly?

It's called Fanny Pack in the US. The name is derived from the way they were traditionally worn facing the rear above the buttocks.

[tenohfive]

Bit of a bump. Not bought any new shoes yet and I'm coming to revisit the subject.

I'm decided on Mudclaws now but I'm hesitating on 300 vs. 265. Long term my aim has been to move onto something more minimalist, so whilst either option has more drop than my SC3's, that desire - coupled with wanting a 'racing' shoe that's a bit lighter - is leading me towards the 265.

I'm happy to slowly build up the mileage - mile at a time etc - to adjust from the 10mm drop on my SC3's to the 3mm on the 265 if that's a practical option, but am I trying to do too much too soon? I've put about 500km on my SC3's and intend to keep them and anticipate using them for longer training runs.

And the next question is Precision Fit or not. The SC3's are the most comfortable shoes I've owned, so with the Mudclaws does anyone know whether the Precision Fit or the standard fit is closest to the Speedcross fit?

ETA:

Long term I'm trying to build up mileage with my races - my next 3 off roaders planned are 22, 22 and 34 miles respectively - should that point me towards a bit more support or less?

[Alan Lucker]

Bit of a bump. Not bought any new shoes yet and I'm coming to revisit the subject.

I'm decided on Mudclaws now but I'm hesitating on 300 vs. 265. Long term my aim has been to move onto something more minimalist, so whilst either option has more drop than my SC3's, that desire - coupled with wanting a 'racing' shoe that's a bit lighter - is leading me towards the 265.

I'm happy to slowly build up the mileage - mile at a time etc - to adjust from the 10mm drop on my SC3's to the 3mm on the 265 if that's a practical option, but am I trying to do too much too soon? I've put about 500km on my SC3's and intend to keep them and anticipate using them for longer training runs.

And the next question is Precision Fit or not. The SC3's are the most comfortable shoes I've owned, so with the Mudclaws does anyone know whether the Precision Fit or the standard fit is closest to the Speedcross fit?

ETA:

Long term I'm trying to build up mileage with my races - my next 3 off roaders planned are 22, 22 and 34 miles respectively - should that point me towards a bit more support or less?

I accidentally ordered some 265s in precision fit. After previously having several standard fit 265s (there my favourite fell shoe) I was worried they may be too narrow. But I found them to fit just as well. there seams to be little between them to me.