Shoes- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Shoes

  1. #1

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    148

    Shoes

    this year I'm going to try and race some more, so I'm wondering if I shoud buy new 'racing' shoes. I curently own a pair of these

    And thinkin of buying:


    What are the differences between them? And why are the lower ones better for racing?

    Tnx

    SHooTEK

  2. #2

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16
    chances are the more expensive shoes are lighter, stiffer, breathe better, look better, and last longer. I guess if i were lighter, stiffer, breathed better, looked better, and lasted longer that would be a good thing too.

  3. #3
    The Riddler
    Reputation: Kaparzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,008

    Stiffer sole and strap system are often key...

    I got the shimanom221 for a few reasons. Its a great shoe for both road training and mtb racing as it has a carbon sole, really stiff. That means that its really easy to put the hammer down and despite what people warned, my feet never get sore. Secondly the sole eliminates any mushiness other shoes with weaker soles would have with a crank bros egg beater pedal. The carbon sole acts almost as a platform. The top bluckle is a rachet so it works well. They're kind of expensive but they last forever and are great all around shoes. I dont mind running in them either, I just dont like to run.

  4. #4
    jl
    jl is offline
    climb
    Reputation: jl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,293
    Quote Originally Posted by rpironcladracer
    chances are the more expensive shoes are lighter, stiffer, breathe better, look better, and last longer. I guess if i were lighter, stiffer, breathed better, looked better, and lasted longer that would be a good thing too.
    I've had a number of 'racing' shoes, shimano, sidi, northwave, and yes the are lighter (doen't make any difference), I don't think they are any stiffer (can't really tell), breathe better doesn't help if you are riding in the cold, looks better is a matter of opinion, and last longer is not true. The longest lasting shoes I have owned were the specialized rock hoppers with the laces. I still have them after 2 years of hard riding. The shoes I like the best have been the diadora gekos. Lace up, and inexpensive.

    Don't pay too much for shoes, if your planning on spending more than $100 your spending too much money. Go upgrade something instead . I would look at the low cut shimanos. Shoes do wear out.

    Stay away from the northwave's I haven't had one pair last for more than a year. I won't pay $160-$200 for a pair of shoes again. It hurts my budget, and it doesn't make me any faster, or cooler, maybe more fredish
    We don't need more to be thankful for; we just need to be more thankful.

  5. #5

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    148
    So basicly there is no advantage????? So why are all the pros using it (it's a bit strange cause I asked a lot of people and nobody can tell why 'racing' shoes would be better, but they are all using them).

    SHooTEK

  6. #6
    Trail rider and racer
    Reputation: Trevor!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,691
    Well I don't know if I can prove these points but:

    IMHO the good old lace up shoes are great shoes, they are stiff, comfortable and great n all, but what I find is, the fit is not snug enough for my liking in racing type applications.

    I have had three types of shoes:
    SIDI, Shimano High end model and Shimano low end model.

    This is what I found. Shimano High end shoe, always gave me sore feet and I usually felt numb wearing them after a while. They were stiff enough for me too, and the buckle system worked great in sloppy conditions. They were noticeably heavy. The low end shimanos were great, warm, comfortable and stiff enough for me. They were simple looking too. My SIDIs cost the most, look nice too, are really noticeably stiffer, noticeably lighter, really comfortable after 5-6hrs of riding, snug fitting and most importantly the best fitting shoe. All of the shoes I wore were size 45...

    My point is stiffness and weight aside, I think the most important thing is FIT. I size 45 shoe may feel bigger or smaller than another size 45 shoe. Once you have found the brand that you like, wear the shoe you can afford or are happy wearing. Big $$$ shoes are generally lighter, use different materials, look more high tech, which may or may not be wanted etc.

    So you see my point: Who cares how much they cost or what they claim to offer, as long as they fit you and are the most comfortable.

    Hope that helps.
    Trevor!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    250

    have to agree about fit............

    The most important part of your race bike is YOU. As the Beach Boys said "take good care of your feet......" If you have shoes that are too tight, often the case with bicycle shoes in my experience, then it doesn't matter how light or stiff or cool looking they might be. Shoes that don't fit properly will rob you of performance. OK, I can't quantify just how they will rob you of performance but if my feet hurt or go numb it's a distraction and I certainly won't be going at full potential.

    But what you want to know is why you should pay $$$ for lightweight stiff shoes. I have to disagree with the comment above regarding weight making no difference. Winning races is all about VERY small percentages of improvement. Reducing the weight you have to spin on those pedals means you can spin them faster and longer before you fatigue. Yes, lightweight shoes ARE an upgrade. Shoes that breath keep your feet cooler. Most of my racing is done in warm or hot weather, keeping the body cool is a performance enhancement. Shoes that are stiff provide a more efficient transfer of power from your feet to your pedals plus provide more precise control of the bike. One thing I"ve found is that all bike shoes suck when I'm off the bike. Buying a shoe because you can run well in it just doesn't make sense for mountainbike racing. My solution to that problem is to not get off my bike when I race. *grin*

    The thing to be careful about with buying shoes is not to get caught up in the bells and whistles. I question whether it's cost effective to pay a great deal extra for the latest and greatest "ratcheting shoe closure system." I question whether a large increase in cost for carbon fiber over a good plastic is value effective.

    First and foremost find a shoe that fits properly. If it's lightweight, stiff and breathes well then you'll be able to optimize your performance ..............which is what racing is all about.

  8. #8

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    148
    Well these were the two answers I was waiting for.

    Tnx Trevor! and AndrewMcD

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone dremel their shoes?
    By Chester in forum Apparel and Protection
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-10-2005, 11:17 AM
  2. Finally...Adidas Hematoma shoes...
    By [email protected] in forum Apparel and Protection
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-02-2005, 05:05 PM
  3. Are all Lake shoes that small?
    By MegaVolt in forum Apparel and Protection
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-06-2004, 09:21 AM
  4. How to fit new shoes?
    By tdogger20 in forum Apparel and Protection
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-03-2004, 09:02 AM
  5. New shoes with Crank Bros pedals...
    By Dr.J in forum Apparel and Protection
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 07:47 PM

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.