Shoes for an old man

I really like Saucony Kinvara and have run in some version of them ever since they came out. They are fairly lightweight but not racing flats, and have a reasonably cushioned, "bouncy" feel. Not sure of their suitability for others--a lot depends on biomechanics and personal preference. I think they're best suited for fairly lightweight runners with good biomechanics, who aren't especially vulnerable to impact injuries. (I don't know if your knee issues would indicate a need for more cushioning.) I'm 50 as well, a lifelong runner, and wear Kinvara for most runs.

For when I'm getting over an injury, or just feeling tired and a bit beat up after a long ride or run, I also have some Hoka Cliftons. They are nice and cushiony and have really good traction for rough trail runs and snow, but personally....they drive me nuts on pavement. I feel like I'm not really using my natural stride in them. Like I have to think all the time about what my feet are doing. I never feel this way with the Kinvara! Hoka also has some "lightweight" shoes intended for racing or speedwork that are probably more cushiony than the Kinvara but I haven't tried those.

I run 80% of the time in Kinvaras, 20% in Cliftons. I much prefer the Kinvara.

I don't injur easily around the knees (knock on wood) but I did more at the achilles and groin. No problems since I have used these 2 shoes.

Only thing I fon't like about the Kinvara is the come apart at the heel for me. 3 pairs in a row have done this.

Personally I think the shoe is not a big a deal to injury as many claim. Imbalances, bad technique, too much too fast, weight....are much bigger factors.

I'm 7 years older than you.

Edited by marcag 2020-06-21 6:09 AM

I've also had some durability issues with Kinvara. Not sure what kind of heel wear you're referring to, but mine tend to wear out at the heels inside the shoe. Some starting in as little as 1-2 weeks. It has varied with different models, though. The Kinvara 10's were particularly bad--wear was so extreme that by four or five weeks that I had to stop running in the shoes as they were giving me blisters. No such problem with the Kinvara 9--I had two pairs that I wore (alternating) for over a year, with only minor heel wear. Overall, they don't seem quite as durable as some of Saucony's heavier shoes, or the Hokas.

Exact same thing. They rip on the inside almost center of the heel. Last pair did it within 2weeks. I have been on the 10s
But they don't prevent me from running.

Interesting. I always assumed they wore out because (like our illustrious president LOL) I have bone spurs on my heels and that somehow didn't work with the Kinvara design. Unlike Trump, my "spurious" heels have never stopped me from doing anything, including probably 20 marathons, an Ironman, lots of HIM, tons of hiking and trekking, and 40+ years of recreational and competitive running. Maybe I should stop blaming them for wearing out my shoes. Still going to blame them for why I can't seem to run more than a mile sockless in any shoes without getting horrid blisters, though.

including going to Vietnam :-)

I have bone spurs, worst on one foot and that's the side that wears out first. Exact same pattern on two pairs of shoes.

So we conclude Kinvara's are no good for bone spurs.

Wonder how they do on traction if you have to go down a ramp .....Never can have too much traction on a ramp.

As someone who managed to crash the run in a triathlon and break an elbow, I'm not sure I'm eligible to comment on that one! But at least it wasn't on a ramp.

Maybe the president should look into some Hokas. Better traction for those ramps, and seem to play well with bone spurs. Plus plenty of cushioning for those two-hour "speeches".

Thanks for the info and recommendations!!!!