Hokas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by simgreen78

Limited sizes, but a bit of a deal on at PBS for £90...

http://www.peteblandsports.co.uk/pro...afate-sale.htm

---

Handy if you're attending this weekend's Showaddywaddy fan-club convention :closed:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mykind

So the solution is just to get your brain to believe you are weightless (or massless) and you will have zero impact force and hence never be injured. No matter what my brain thinks I will still be hitting the ground with a force of roughly 740 Newtons as long as I'm on planet Earth.

---

That's not what I said at all. Why not go outside and try this for me. Jump up and down on the spot with no shoes on in whatever way feels comfortable and note your natural shock absorbing legs in use. Now, do the same but land straight legged and flat footed. Notice the difference between impact? That is what your brain is doing, simply adjusting the amount you use your muscles/tendons to absorb the shock of impact. The study mentioned earlier simply proved that these impacts were more controlled (the force was distributed evenly with no impact spike) when less cushioning was used. Hence "running lighter". That is all.

Would the total energy be the same, just exerted over a slightly longer time frame? Like a crumple zone on a car?

Saw some fella running in these Hoka beasties today, he didn't seem too emphatic about them. Although he looked like he was struggling a wee bit so might have just been grumpy.

Running shoes allow for first cushioning (to some degree) then an aid to transfer the energy into a push. All runners are different, but in theory the better your bio mechanical efficiency is (including body weight) the less cushioning you would need. My opinion is, it is better to be able to feel what impacts your feet are dealing, so that you can adjust your running style to aid efficiency. Less cushioning seems to make more sense. Although in ultras where foot comfort is important, they may be useful. But they are not for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Lucker

Running shoes allow for first cushioning (to some degree) then an aid to transfer the energy into a push. All runners are different, but in theory the better your bio mechanical efficiency is (including body weight) the less cushioning you would need. My opinion is, it is better to be able to feel what impacts your feet are dealing, so that you can adjust your running style to aid efficiency. Less cushioning seems to make more sense. Although in ultras where foot comfort is important, they may be useful. But they are not for me.

---

Sums up my opinion really. That and they look a bit daft. For those reasons, I'm out.

Thank God! Common sense. I have been trying to hold myself back - and still will.

Just seen the price of these!

They make Inov8 look cheap!

See that they've brought out a new "reduced volume" one now, the Rapa Nui.

The originals had a midsole 2.2 times that of a normal shoe, the new one ( which they describe as a race shoe ) is 1.5 times

http://www.castlebergoutdoors.co.uk/...mp-unisex.html

Still expensive though..............

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yaks

See that they've brought out a new "reduced volume" one now, the Rapa Nui.

The originals had a midsole 2.2 times that of a normal shoe, the new one ( which they describe as a race shoe ) is 1.5 times

http://www.castlebergoutdoors.co.uk/...mp-unisex.html

Still expensive though..............

---

Not quite as 'Babyspice' as the other ones:D

I've had a couple of pairs of Hokas. They successfully smash up my little toes and they are ok on dry ground. Add some mud and they are not great. If you are after less height, might be worth having a look at the Adidas Boost as an alternative. Bouncy but with less height! They do not have an aggressive sole tread, so again dry trails for the most part