General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Puma Faas running shoes Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2012-04-30 4:26 AM


46
25
Subject: Puma Faas running shoes
Hi,

Has anyone used these or know of them? they have a few models in their range and they look great. Just wondered if they are actually ok running shoes for 5-10k training runs?

I run forefoot and normal roll.

Cheers

James.


2012-04-30 11:11 AM
in reply to: #4180319

User image

Veteran
345
10010010025
SE TX
Subject: RE: Puma Faas running shoes

Faas is a pretty broad line in terms of shoe weight and amount of cushion. I have 2 pairs: 250 and 300, which I bought during a half-off sale for a total of $50 shipped (for both pairs). These two have the same, relatively thin midsole and outsole with a modest toe-drop. Both are very light (low 7-oz range). Both shoes are very flexible throughout. The main difference is an extra layer of fabric in the upper of the 300s, and the 300 having a "real" tongue with padding in it.

I bought the 300 as Kinvara replacements, a role they almost fulfill. For reference, I typically run 15-20 miles per week, with a long run in the 6-8 mile range. I run a few miles a week in Vibram FiveFingers KSOs. The 300 are my "mid-range" training shoes, for 3-6 miles only. Any more than that and my feet/ankles will complain loudly. They are exceptionally comfortable for walking around, and feel great for a few miles, but I need just a little more structure for my longer runs.

The 250 are my 5k shoes. They are basically racing flats. They are very light and comfortable, but the tongue is just a single layer of fabric, making them less than ideal for T2. I use them for the occasional 5k and feel like I'm flying.

I've looked at both the 500 and 550 in stores, and they look ok. Much more cushion, but still fairly light (9-10oz range). Not really for me, but if I was looking for a long-run shoe I would consider them.

2012-04-30 1:24 PM
in reply to: #4180319


46
25
Subject: RE: Puma Faas running shoes
Thanks very much! I love the look of them, so figured if they're ok for me then ill get them.
I run on my forefoot so if you're a vibrams user and you like them I guess they'd suit me.

Only things is I'm heavy so may well need the 500's. I'll try them both. Thanks!
2012-04-30 7:28 PM
in reply to: #4180319

User image

Extreme Veteran
1136
100010025
Subject: RE: Puma Faas running shoes
I have a pair of Faas 300.  I really wanted to like them, and I think I would have if they weren't too narrow for my feet.  They are just narrow enough as to cause some discomfort for me over the course of a 4-5 mile run.
2012-05-01 1:27 AM
in reply to: #4180319

Member
566
5002525
Subject: RE: Puma Faas running shoes
I have a pair of the FAAS 400.  Great looking shoe, but I found that the cushioning bottomed out for me and there was too little torsional stiffness.  I'm back on Nike LunarFly 2 and use the Pumas as casual streetwear (again, great looking shoe).
2012-05-01 7:20 AM
in reply to: #4180319


46
25
Subject: RE: Puma Faas running shoes
Interesting, cheers. They are a great looking shoe, yeah.

I have wide feet. Really wide I think. And im heavy. Are they considered a minimal shoe in the 300?

I've seen some 500's in the flesh and they're still very light, and still nice looking, but have wider soles and more cushioning. I'll try them.
I just didn't know if puma were any good for running.

Ill try on the 500's and if I like them ill get the colours I want on line. I love the look of the 300 and may get some for recreational use and give them a go for shorter runs, but looks like 500's may be better if I go with the Faas.

Thank you.


2012-05-01 8:50 AM
in reply to: #4183034

User image

Veteran
345
10010010025
SE TX
Subject: RE: Puma Faas running shoes

Monbeef - 2012-05-01 7:20 AM Interesting, cheers. They are a great looking shoe, yeah.

I have wide feet. Really wide I think. And im heavy. Are they considered a minimal shoe in the 300?

If you have really wide feet, I'm betting the 300 is not for you. My feet (though flat like a duck's), are normal-ish width and at a half-size up the 300 is bordeline too narrow. Whether it is a "minimal" shoe is extremely debatable: It is minimal weight, minimal cushion, and minimal support. However, it has a real upper, laces, and a visible midsole w/some toe drop, so purists would probably call it some kinda lightweight trainer. I just call it "skimpy."

Don't forget there is also the 400. Supposed to run a little wider. YMMV.

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Puma Faas running shoes Rss Feed