More INOV8 Complaints

[daz h]

You missed my point. There is no way that an inov-8 shoe costs the same to produce as a montrail or Asics shoe. I'm certain that if inov-8 used the same pricing model as Montrail - the shoes would sell for less (say £40 to £50) - they have managed to get us to accept a substandard product at the same price as the compeition. Very well done to them.

Yes it's a shame that most shoes are made in the east by individuals paid peanuts but why should we accept this as ok cause it's market forces. If the consumer doesn't change then the companies won't so it's up to us to make a more considered choice.

I've ran my own profitable business for years. I'd rather not be in business than sell a poor product! I'm in business to provide the best possible service and product not something that the consumers find acceptable. Thankfully I'm in the minority and it makes my job far easier!

so one minute your happy to pay for a better product that lasts longer but you would also be happy if innov 8s were about £40 quid.
like i say its really down to us if we buy them or not, i suspect the market will settle and those who hate them will go back to what they obviously thought was crap in the first place or they wouldnt have changed to innov 8.
personally i think a lot of runners changed to innov 8 cos they looked good and didnt look like an old style of fell shoe, perhaps this is why they sold so well.

[who killed bambi]

i bought a pair of inov8 end jan 2007 and have used them just for racing in ,they are just about hanging in there hopefully till wansfell.
in the past i have bought 2 pairs of walshes in 1 year so i reckon they are ok,
also i have never had a blister or any probs with them i find wet before you t tighten you laces they give no probs and tie your laces well 3 times and tuck them in.
everyones feet are different i hated ETAS but others loved them

[IainR]

It's not that others think other shoes arecrap, I just think the willingness for people to try new types of shoe shows that people are not yet content with what they are getting. Doesn't mean they are crap, but I think people do feel there could be better.

On the roads I buy almost the same make and type every time, yet on the fells I try many of the new or different types. I'm happy with my road shoes, my walshes are OK, but I wouldn't say they last long enough.

[dominion]

Anybody out there really love their inovs? As someone above said, in the interest of balance...!

When I returned to the fells 2 years ago after a lengthy absence I bought a pair of Mudroc 290's (A rare pair in black). I've worn them for all manner of fell / cross country running, and although the soles were starting to get a little worn down the uppers were as good as new, except being covered in crap - although they were machine washed on a couple of occasions (short cool wash).
I'd still have them and still be wearing them if I hadn't lost one of them back in May. They were a really comfortable pair of shoes. I also have a pair of Mudclaw 270's, which I don't think much of. They're just the wrong shape. When are they going to make a decent pair of Mudclaws which don't weigh as much as the 330's and don't have the crappy lace design of the 270's?

Fast forward to this summer and I bought a pair of Walsh PB Trainers. The uppers looked wrecked after a couple of runs and I reckon the studs are going to start falling off soon.

[daz h]

When I returned to the fells 2 years ago after a lengthy absence I bought a pair of Mudroc 290's (A rare pair in black). I've worn them for all manner of fell / cross country running, and although the soles were starting to get a little worn down the uppers were as good as new, except being covered in crap - although they were machine washed on a couple of occasions (short cool wash).
I'd still have them and still be wearing them if I hadn't lost one of them back in May. They were a really comfortable pair of shoes. I also have a pair of Mudclaw 270's, which I don't think much of. They're just the wrong shape. When are they going to make a decent pair of Mudclaws which don't weigh as much as the 330's and don't have the crappy lace design of the 270's?

Fast forward to this summer and I bought a pair of Walsh PB Trainers. The uppers looked wrecked after a couple of runs and I reckon the studs are going to start falling off soon.

im sure you wrecked them at black rocks you got them to wet and chucked them in the boot , ive got witnesses

[S1eepless]

You used them over 8 weeks before you found out you didn't like them? In most shops you would get to jog on the spot for 10 seconds before making your decision.
Seems a fair comment by the shop in my opinion.

For the record, I tried Inov8's a couple of years ago. I bust a pair after 2/3 short races, got a replacement pair, same thing happened & never bought another pair since.

When they started falling apart I bought a pair of montrails from Ambleside. I have run further and had them longer with no complaints!

That is the kind of shoe I would expect for £65. The opinion of the shop was that they woul replace them no problem, so it isnt really a fair comment.

surely a shoe should be fit for purpose.

[Graham Breeze]

Anybody out there really love their inovs? As someone above said, in the interest of balance...!

Again:

Since INOV-8 came on the market I have raced in no other shoe and I race over 50 times a year.

If INOV-8 were £120 (like Asics Kayano?) I'd still buy them over a £50 Walsh and I ran in Walshes for 20 years.

[daz h]

Again:

Since INOV-8 came on the market I have raced in no other shoe and I race over 50 times a year.

If INOV-8 were £120 (like Asics Kayano?) I'd still buy them over a £50 Walsh and I ran in Walshes for 20 years.

graeme this thread has gone silent
now you can prob afford £120 per pair, but come on you state you ran in walshs for 20 years , why the sudden change. please explain in detail .
you cannot tell me you suffered for 20 years
i really appreciate your advice , 20 yrs experience is a lot of time on the fells
can you give us a really detailed reason why you changed , dont just say you switched , tell us why
your knowledge is appreciated by myself
thanks
daz h

[Graham Breeze]

graeme this thread has gone silent
now you can prob afford £120 per pair, but come on you state you ran in walshs for 20 years , why the sudden change. please explain in detail .
you cannot tell me you suffered for 20 years
i really appreciate your advice , 20 yrs experience is a lot of time on the fells
can you give us a really detailed reason why you changed , dont just say you switched , tell us why
your knowledge is appreciated by myself
thanks
daz h

Daz,

Runners may not believe it at 21 but sooner or later every fellrunner will suffer serious injury. The more cushioning there is in a fellshoe the further away that day will be.

I did not suffer in my Walsh days: I just think the inov-8 range is a better product for me (eg because of cushioning) and eg the grip of the Mudclaw is unsurpassable.

I have dug out the review I wrote 3 1/2 years ago (for a local news paper) and I still think it covers a lot of bases although since then inov-8 have brought out the Mudclaw which is now my shoe of choice. I threw my last pair of Walshes away virtually unused, nothing wrong with them but I just never wore them.

Graham

inov 8 Mudroc 290
To challenge Walsh in the fellrunning shoe market a manufacturer needs confidence, deep pockets and a better product. Most shoe makers have tried, and to some extent they have been pushing at an open door because many fellrunners resent the cost of the spartan Walsh and wonder where the money goes, but decades after its introduction the Walsh brand remains ubiquitous.

The newest competitor in the field is the wittily named inov 8 Mudroc accompanied by a technical and comprehensive website - www.inov-8.com. Although the shoes in the four model range are primarily aimed at mountain runners and have a couple of recent victories in the Snowdon race to their credit, the website includes side swipes at the "stagnation in development" of traditional fell shoes so it is appropriate to judge the Mudroc against the Walsh benchmark.

Fellrunners are not impressed with bells and whistles or striped laces that adorn the Mudroc and they may also feel that two finger-tags per shoe is two too many. When a fellrunner sees someone in a new shoe he asks questions like "do they grip, are they comfortable and how much?" and not "tell me about the biomechanicals."

The Mudroc looks like the trail shoe it is, rather than a fell shoe which it is not and the reward for the extra ounces in weight over a Walsh PB, which is not noted for its ability to absorb shock, is the side and mid sole cushioning and the larger sole area. Mudroc studs are stubbier but therefore less precise than those on a Walsh and the sole is thicker and the footprint bigger which all helps shock absorption. It may be relevant that inov 8 feature rock, rather than grassy banks, in their advertising.

The heel surround is much firmer and higher than fellrunners expect but this good heel hold is likely to cause blister problems, at least initially, for some runners.

Overall the contours of the shoe look strikingly and perhaps peculiarly different and by including such refinements as sole volume adjusters the buyer may feel that his £60 is buying a lot of technology.

This reviewer raced in the Mudroc effectively "straight from the box" on the 12 mile Mickleden Straddle, an act described by a fellow competitor as proof of madness. In traditional tight fit fell shoes it would have been because Mickleden, with its long down hill rocky paths and ascents up streaming paths, although not much pure fell, is as testing a trial as you can get. The comfort of the Mudroc was astonishing and it coped with everything. Even the striped laces stayed tight.

Trail runners who do not experience particularly severe or varied terrain could love the shoe. However for fellrunners the drawback to the shoe is the corollary of its virtues. Fellrunners do not wear a Walsh for comfort but as fit for purpose. A Walsh is like a second skin to ensure precise, positive positioning of the foot in conditions where a slip might send you down a mountain side. The comfort of the Mudroc is paid for by a sensation of more sponginess and bulk than fellrunners like and a concomitant lack of confidence when placing the foot. Inov 8 claim buyers get used to the new sensation and one would have to because when a fellrunner is powering down a mountain side confidence is all.

Most fellrunners will have no need to spend £60 on the Mudroc that tries to be all things to all off-road runners in contrast with a Walsh which, by sticking to its last, continues to be the benchmark for, say, steep grassy terrain and sheep trods.

Whether the shoe has durability will require future testing on some lakeland scree but fellrunners who have never run comfortably in a Walsh could find the Mudroc is the answer to their plight and even Walsh enthusiasts might decide that for races like The Three Peaks with its long lengths of track and rocky descents the Mudroc is worth a try. I do and I have sent my Peaks entry in already.

Graham Breeze
29.02.2004

[Rhiannon]

If Inov-8s cost 120 quid, you'd want them to last a whole heap longer than they do.

My New Balances cost 32 of your English pounds, and they've outlived my Inov-8s by orders of magnitude. So have a pair of Montrail Highlanders, which cost the princely sum of 39 pounds...it's a no brainer. You can buy almost 2 pairs of something half decent (if you look around a bit) for one pair of nice, trendy Inov-8s.

To be fair, they're nice products in a tiny market, but it's a case of being prepared to take the risk. They work for some, but not everyone.

Rhiannon