D
Remove ads on the forum by becoming a donating member. More here. |
---|
Yeah, I can attest to the challenges of cobblestones and granite setts on the Portuguese Camino. When you look at guide books for the Portuguese Camino, the immediate reaction is that it will be easy because of the number of days without significant elevation change...Wrong! The cobblestones (hobblestones) and granite setts more than make up for it.If I decide to walk the Portuguese next year I am thinking of shoes with lots of padding instead of my usual sandals - because of all the stone sets and cobbles. I have a very wide forefoot but New Balance don't work for me. I'd be trying the Hoka One One Bondi 5. Mainly for the cushioning.
I get despondent when I read shoe recommendations because I have small feet. I am therefore relegated to the so-called women's fit shoes which are invariably far narrower than the men's and which usually have narrow heels that cause blisters and trigger achilles problems. I thought I'd solved my problem with Inov8 Roclites, but this spring they have changed the design and now cut on a much narrower last that I can't even get my feet into let alone walk in.
So, does anyone know of a light trail shoe that is very wide, and comes in size 38 European size? My old Inov8's are almost falling to pieces now.
Hello @Moorwalker it took me forever to find a light trail shoe that worked for me. I settled on the HOKA ONE ONE Bondi 5. They have a wide base, lots of support and cushioning. I LOVED THEM!!!!! I walked the Camino Frances from SJPP and never had a blister or sore feet. Hope you find shoes that work for you.
I am going to do a bit of a hijack of your post
Hi Dave, great assessment as always. After one day I’m loving my Hoka Tor Hi WP although a part of me will always be loyal to ly Lowa Aeox gortex trail runner mid. I will let you know how the Hoka Tor fair on the camino. After wearing them most of today and in Physio they feel great even with the heel spur. I was able to walk without the crutches as soon as I put them on and without pain. According to the Hoka website there is no wear in period and they are true to size. I wear a 7.5 and I bought a 7.5. Plenty of room in the toe box and even with the insoles I have plenty of room. My feet did not feel cramped. They are higher than usual above the ankle but I always go with the higher shoe, usually mid height, due to my need for ankle stability but so far on my initial assessment these shoes feel really stable on my feet. They go great with my superfeet orange insoles.I am going to do a bit of a hijack of your post
The Hokka One One Bondi 5 was replaced last year by the Bondi 6. Having used both, I find the improvements to the 6, while minor, make the Bondi an even better shoe.
I also want to make a minor point of distinction in order to help clarify the Bondi's function. Now, I use the Bondi as the shoe I wear backpacking and also on Camino, so I am not at all trying to discourage its use for such activities by sorting thru definitions.
The Bondi series are designed primarily as running shoes rather than as a trail runner or a trail shoe. The distinction defines both the feature set, build, and construction of the footwear. The Bondi does not incorporate those things that are particular to a trail runner or trail shoe.
1. Running shoes are designed for runners whose primary paths are largely hard packed or paved. They generally incorporate a bit more and firmer cushioning, and the outersole is usually not specifically designed with an aggressive tread. The uppers are constructed from lighter duty materials, and the overall design is to achieve as much lightness to the weight of the shoes as possible.
2. Trail runners / trail running shoes are designed to provide more protection for a runners' feet. It does this most frequently with the addition of a 'rock plate' which is usually embedded between the outersole and the midsole. This is needed because unlike road running, trail running involves, well, running on trails with its associated pokey stuff like rocks, roots, debris, etc. Another major distinction is a beefier structure to help with stability and motion control under rugged conditions. The third major characteristic is that they are equipped with much more aggressive tread patterns so that they can grip the trail and reduce the risk of slipping.
3. Hiking shoes. These are designed around the basic model for hiking boots. The materials are usually much 'beefier' and less flexible to the foot. This means that of the three types of shoes, they are much heavier and benefit from a prolonged break-in period. The outersoles a usually much thicker than the other two shoes types. While the structure of the shoe is stiffer, it doesn't add better stability or motion control.
Running shoes and trail runners require virtually no break in. How they feel out of the box will not substantially change with use. Wearing them will develop a 'memory' for the foot as it sits on the insole, and some minor changes to the upper on the outside of the feet may occur. Because they are lighter than hiking shoes, there is less energy use and fatigue potential to the walker.
Unlike stiffer and less flexible material like thick fabrics and leather, these shoes it will not become substantially 'molded' in the manner that one associates with traditional hiking boots. Hiking shoes, however, MAY benefit from a 'break-in', but in a far shorter period of time than traditional hiking boots.
Because the fit of the running shoe and trail runner is not subject to break in, it is important that they feel and fit well when purchasing them; they will not get 'better' with more wear. What many folks associate as a runner or trail runner 'breaking in' is actually the wearing out of the materials as they fatigue.
As I wrote above, I use my Bondi's as a trail runner even though they are a road running shoe. They do not have a rock plate, but they don't need one; the plush cushioning isolates the trail debris from the sole of the foot.
The tread is not the aggressive, deep-lugged outersole. But what I have found is that they are 'grippy' enough to provide excellent off-road traction. Part of that is how Hokka incorporates a type of micro-siping in the tread. . . . miniature, thin slits. These slits actually open a bit with each step on the ground which, in effect, creates hundreds of micro-edges that are biting into the trail surface.
I was exceedingly skeptical of the Bondi's ability to be a trail shoe, but after a lot of testing they are now my favorites. My own subjective assessment of foot aches and fatigue after 20+ miles of walking or hiking is that the cushioning markedly reduces how uncomfortable my feet feel.
That I find the Bondi a great trail shoe does NOT mean that anyone else will. I suggest it as one of several shoes to consider, but what I like is not a universal given for others.
Hi Dave, great assessment as always. After one day I’m loving my Hoka Tor Hi WP although a part of me will always be loyal to ly Lowa Aeox gortex trail runner mid. I will let you know how the Hoka Tor fair on the camino. After wearing them most of today and in Physio they feel great even with the heel spur. I was able to walk without the crutches as soon as I put them on and without pain. According to the Hoka website there is no wear in period and they are true to size. I wear a 7.5 and I bought a 7.5. Plenty of room in the toe box and even with the insoles I have plenty of room. My feet did not feel cramped. They are higher than usual above the ankle but I always go with the higher shoe, usually mid height, due to my need for ankle stability but so far on my initial assessment these shoes feel really stable on my feet. They go great with my superfeet orange insoles.
Thank you as always. I will definately keep an eye on it.That sounds wonderful and very hopeful.
The Tor is very near to the Bondi in terms of the level of cushioning; both are labeled as 'plush'. The Bondi is slightly more cushioney, but I don't think it would make much difference for you.
Keep check on your Achilles tendon as you are wearing them. Because they are higher than your Lowa's, there will be different pressures that this shoe will place against the tendon. I am NOT saying there will be a problem, but be aware of the possibility. If there is any tenderness, crepitance (it feels crackly, squeeky, or a rubbing sensation when you lightly manipulate the skin above the tendon), persistent redness, or swelling, stop wearing the shoe immediately.
This does not mean you can't wear the boots if tendonitis develops. There are strategies which can be implemented to make them wearable and prevent the tendinitis.
My hope is that this footwear will keep things moving in the right direction for you
Welcome back DaveI am going to do a bit of a hijack of your post
The Hokka One One Bondi 5 was replaced last year by the Bondi 6. Having used both, I find the improvements to the 6, while minor, make the Bondi an even better shoe.
I also want to make a minor point of distinction in order to help clarify the Bondi's function. Now, I use the Bondi as the shoe I wear backpacking and also on Camino, so I am not at all trying to discourage its use for such activities by sorting thru definitions.
The Bondi series are designed primarily as running shoes rather than as a trail runner or a trail shoe. The distinction defines both the feature set, build, and construction of the footwear. The Bondi does not incorporate those things that are particular to a trail runner or trail shoe.
1. Running shoes are designed for runners whose primary paths are largely hard packed or paved. They generally incorporate a bit more and firmer cushioning, and the outersole is usually not specifically designed with an aggressive tread. The uppers are constructed from lighter duty materials, and the overall design is to achieve as much lightness to the weight of the shoes as possible.
2. Trail runners / trail running shoes are designed to provide more protection for a runners' feet. It does this most frequently with the addition of a 'rock plate' which is usually embedded between the outersole and the midsole. This is needed because unlike road running, trail running involves, well, running on trails with its associated pokey stuff like rocks, roots, debris, etc. Another major distinction is a beefier structure to help with stability and motion control under rugged conditions. The third major characteristic is that they are equipped with much more aggressive tread patterns so that they can grip the trail and reduce the risk of slipping.
3. Hiking shoes. These are designed around the basic model for hiking boots. The materials are usually much 'beefier' and less flexible to the foot. This means that of the three types of shoes, they are much heavier and benefit from a prolonged break-in period. The outersoles a usually much thicker than the other two shoes types. While the structure of the shoe is stiffer, it doesn't add better stability or motion control.
Running shoes and trail runners require virtually no break in. How they feel out of the box will not substantially change with use. Wearing them will develop a 'memory' for the foot as it sits on the insole, and some minor changes to the upper on the outside of the feet may occur. Because they are lighter than hiking shoes, there is less energy use and fatigue potential to the walker.
Unlike stiffer and less flexible material like thick fabrics and leather, these shoes it will not become substantially 'molded' in the manner that one associates with traditional hiking boots. Hiking shoes, however, MAY benefit from a 'break-in', but in a far shorter period of time than traditional hiking boots.
Because the fit of the running shoe and trail runner is not subject to break in, it is important that they feel and fit well when purchasing them; they will not get 'better' with more wear. What many folks associate as a runner or trail runner 'breaking in' is actually the wearing out of the materials as they fatigue.
As I wrote above, I use my Bondi's as a trail runner even though they are a road running shoe. They do not have a rock plate, but they don't need one; the plush cushioning isolates the trail debris from the sole of the foot.
The tread is not the aggressive, deep-lugged outersole. But what I have found is that they are 'grippy' enough to provide excellent off-road traction. Part of that is how Hokka incorporates a type of micro-siping in the tread. . . . miniature, thin slits. These slits actually open a bit with each step on the ground which, in effect, creates hundreds of micro-edges that are biting into the trail surface.
I was exceedingly skeptical of the Bondi's ability to be a trail shoe, but after a lot of testing they are now my favorites. My own subjective assessment of foot aches and fatigue after 20+ miles of walking or hiking is that the cushioning markedly reduces how uncomfortable my feet feel.
That I find the Bondi a great trail shoe does NOT mean that anyone else will. I suggest it as one of several shoes to consider, but what I like is not a universal given for others.
Sorry, I'm an idiotIf you could tell us where you live, that would help to inform us of what is available to consider.
Those look promising, and there is a running shop not too far away which stocks them. I'll go try them on. Thanks.Hello @Moorwalker it took me forever to find a light trail shoe that worked for me. I settled on the HOKA ONE ONE Bondi 5. They have a wide base, lots of support and cushioning. I LOVED THEM!!!!! I walked the Camino Frances from SJPP and never had a blister or sore feet. Hope you find shoes that work for you.
Those look promising, and there is a running shop not too far away which stocks them. I'll go try them on. Thanks.
ROFL.Sorry, I'm an idiotI'm in England.
At last - somebody who knows the difference!Yeah, I can attest to the challenges of cobblestones and granite setts on the Portuguese Camino. When you look at guide books for the Portuguese Camino, the immediate reaction is that it will be easy because of the number of days without significant elevation change...Wrong! The cobblestones (hobblestones) and granite setts more than make up for it.
It was a welcome relief some days just to walk on asphalt or concrete surfaces just to have a break the cobblestones and granite setts!View attachment 52384View attachment 52386
Sorry, I'm an idiotI'm in England.
I am going to do a bit of a hijack of your post
The Hokka One One Bondi 5 was replaced last year by the Bondi 6. Having used both, I find the improvements to the 6, while minor, make the Bondi an even better shoe.
I also want to make a minor point of distinction in order to help clarify the Bondi's function. Now, I use the Bondi as the shoe I wear backpacking and also on Camino, so I am not at all trying to discourage its use for such activities by sorting thru definitions.
The Bondi series are designed primarily as running shoes rather than as a trail runner or a trail shoe. The distinction defines both the feature set, build, and construction of the footwear. The Bondi does not incorporate those things that are particular to a trail runner or trail shoe.
1. Running shoes are designed for runners whose primary paths are largely hard packed or paved. They generally incorporate a bit more and firmer cushioning, and the outersole is usually not specifically designed with an aggressive tread. The uppers are constructed from lighter duty materials, and the overall design is to achieve as much lightness to the weight of the shoes as possible.
2. Trail runners / trail running shoes are designed to provide more protection for a runners' feet. It does this most frequently with the addition of a 'rock plate' which is usually embedded between the outersole and the midsole. This is needed because unlike road running, trail running involves, well, running on trails with its associated pokey stuff like rocks, roots, debris, etc. Another major distinction is a beefier structure to help with stability and motion control under rugged conditions. The third major characteristic is that they are equipped with much more aggressive tread patterns so that they can grip the trail and reduce the risk of slipping.
3. Hiking shoes. These are designed around the basic model for hiking boots. The materials are usually much 'beefier' and less flexible to the foot. This means that of the three types of shoes, they are much heavier and benefit from a prolonged break-in period. The outersoles a usually much thicker than the other two shoes types. While the structure of the shoe is stiffer, it doesn't add better stability or motion control.
Running shoes and trail runners require virtually no break in. How they feel out of the box will not substantially change with use. Wearing them will develop a 'memory' for the foot as it sits on the insole, and some minor changes to the upper on the outside of the feet may occur. Because they are lighter than hiking shoes, there is less energy use and fatigue potential to the walker.
Unlike stiffer and less flexible material like thick fabrics and leather, these shoes it will not become substantially 'molded' in the manner that one associates with traditional hiking boots. Hiking shoes, however, MAY benefit from a 'break-in', but in a far shorter period of time than traditional hiking boots.
Because the fit of the running shoe and trail runner is not subject to break in, it is important that they feel and fit well when purchasing them; they will not get 'better' with more wear. What many folks associate as a runner or trail runner 'breaking in' is actually the wearing out of the materials as they fatigue.
As I wrote above, I use my Bondi's as a trail runner even though they are a road running shoe. They do not have a rock plate, but they don't need one; the plush cushioning isolates the trail debris from the sole of the foot.
The tread is not the aggressive, deep-lugged outersole. But what I have found is that they are 'grippy' enough to provide excellent off-road traction. Part of that is how Hokka incorporates a type of micro-siping in the tread. . . . miniature, thin slits. These slits actually open a bit with each step on the ground which, in effect, creates hundreds of micro-edges that are biting into the trail surface.
I was exceedingly skeptical of the Bondi's ability to be a trail shoe, but after a lot of testing they are now my favorites. My own subjective assessment of foot aches and fatigue after 20+ miles of walking or hiking is that the cushioning markedly reduces how uncomfortable my feet feel.
That I find the Bondi a great trail shoe does NOT mean that anyone else will. I suggest it as one of several shoes to consider, but what I like is not a universal given for others.
I walked the Frances twice in mostly Chaco sandals, alternating with Altra Lone Peak because I have WIDE forefeet. Now, planning to walk the Portugues with all those cobblestones and pavement, I'm thinking I need to find something with more cushioning than the Altra. The Hoka Bondi sounds good, and it comes in wide, but I hope it's wide enough! Even most men's size wide shoes aren't wide enough for my duck feet.
So, am i understanding right that the Hoke One’s are wider in the metatarsal area (and toe box, I assume) and more cushioned than the Lone Peaks?
Hi laurie - another 2c from me!So, am i understanding right that the Hoka Ones are wider in the metatarsal area (and toe box, I assume) and more cushioned than the Lone Peaks? I walked many long days last year in the Lone Peaks and my feet were never achy. I thought it had amazing cushioning, so if you tell me the Hoka Ones are better, I will give them a try.
Interesting. I remember the thread about your shoe search and I mentioned my short-lived success with the Topo Terraventure (low drop) which was super-comfy but create another problem. A few weeks ago I bought the Brooks Ghost, also D-width, and quite like them. I'll be bringing them to Spain in a few weeks. (I have a nagging pain on the side/top of my foot that worries me, but I'm confident it is not a width or size issue.)I’ve been alternating my local walks with my trusty Brooks ghost (same size and fitting D
I'll chuck my 2 cents in here. I also have wide feet and purchased a pair of Bondi 6 late last year as I'd heard lots of positive stories.
I was initially very impressed with them and the cushioning is very very good, however, after the initial settling in period, I became a little unhappy with the width. I'd been feeling just a small pinch and eventually developed a minor callous at the widest point of my right foot and another smaller callous on my left foot. The location of the callous is low down where the top part of the shoe is bonded to the sole. My foot is clearly too wide for the Bondi and the shoe is now starting to give way in this area. They are also wearing out at the inside heel area.
More recently Hoka announced the Bondi 6 wide and I purchased a set the very day they were announced.
Unfortunately, the Bondi 6 wides appear no wider and have identical performance and issues to the originals. As they are newer shoes the wear is not as well progressed but I can see the same pattern emerging. I won't be using these shoes for my Camino later this year.
I have reverted to Keen Targhee's for now and while they are heavier and will certainly require some breaking in, they have sufficient width for my feet. NB: I'm a US size 15 and I estimate a 4E for width and I am fully aware this puts me at the far end of the bell curve.
that ridiculous bullet shape that all shoes have (and no feet have)
There are three basic shapes of feet -- one with the toes nearly level with each other, one with a prominent second toe that the big toe and the others taper away from, the third with the big toe being most prominent and the others smaller and forming a diagonal.
But there's also an uncountable number of completely unique individual variations.
Right. And none of them are shaped like a bullet steeple.
The basic shape with the prominent second toe is fairly well suited to that shoe form. NOT for anyone with the two other basic foot types, nor those having an intermediary anatomy (like me BTW).
Even with the prominent second toe (Morton's foot), I don't agree that feet are shaped like this.
Kick the front of the shoe into a post or stair or wall or someone's shin.
I also have found that the "wide" versions of shoes often don't feel any wider than the regular width version. WHY won't anybody make a truly wide shoe??
Oh, sole sister, you are singing my song.Right. And none of them are shaped like a bullet steeple.
Hi Robo. Before my Camino in 2018 I tried hiking boots, then hiking shoes, both of which were comfortable when first wearing during training but then not so after a bit of wearing. I tried Ascis Trail Runners, link below and they were great. Price wise they are at the lower end of the market but they were very comfortable and I was fortunate and didn't have any blisters at all with them. They have a reasonable sole that doesn't collect stones and dry out quickly after getting wet.We never stop learning do we? Every Camino I learn something new and this is true of Gear too!
So with 3 Caminos done, (Yes I'm a real Newbie compared to many members here), I'm thinking about gear for number 4. And reflecting on things that I have changed my mind about, or new bits of gear I love.
Just thought I would share the following.
Those Hair Shirts! (Merino) I have owned some since Camino #1 and only used them for evening wear. Too hot, too itchy...... This year I wore one walking........... I'm never going back to tech shirts! (they are like wearing a plastic bag in comparison)
As counter intuitive as it is, Merino shirts are good in hot weather as well as cold. They keep you dry and the sweat evaporates....
They don't last too well though. My walking shirt was patched with foot tape by the end. Will need to buy a couple more.
So I was wrong on the shirts!
Hikers Wool. Have loved this stuff since #1. Great for treating hot spots. Though if Pat is walking with me I need an extra pack! Her feet each morning looked like a Hobbit's .......... And thank you to the suppliers for mailing me a 2nd pack for pick up en route......
http://robscamino.com/2018/hikers-wool/
Umbrella. Worth it's weight in Gold! Mainly for hot days. Keeps me really cool and reduces my water consumption by about 40%
Quite handy in the rain too. (see the video under water bladders)
Water Bladders. Never again. I used them on #1 and #2. They are extra weight and sadly 'out of sight' so hard to monitor usage.
I'm now 'sold' on water bottles attached to the front pack straps with a drinking tube.
See video: http://robscamino.com/2018/packing-list/
Boots. The additional weight of boots may be causing or aggravating my foot problems. (Achilles, Shins). On advice from a Physio in Spain I'm going to try trail runners! Another Sacred Cow gone........ I love my boots!
What brands should I try? @davebugg?
...
Oh, sole sister, you are singing my song.
I have asked that same question countless times.
My issue is only one foot - I once shattered a big toe and now (3 decades later) the metatarsophalangeal joint is big and arthritic. Did I say big? Not like a bunion big, where there's a deviation of the great toe towards other toes - the toe points very nicely forward, thank you very much - but it's huge both medially and dorsally: it's a big knob that sticks out and up. On top of that I grew up barefoot so I have really wide 'luau feet.' So I need a very wide and high forefoot. Those newer shoes, Hokas included, are bullet shaped, and I could no more wear even a Hoka One One comfortably than fly to the moon by flapping my arms. Like you, Dave, I wore Sauconys for a bunch of years as a marathon runner. But now? Hahahaha! No way.
I'm sorry to whine, but I hate fashion.
And many sandals press that joint right in just the wrong place.
So now I happily wear Keens, because they are the only brand that fits anymore.
This year I need a new shoe because my old McKenzie I is gone forever and the Mckenzie II is not so durable - so trying the Arroyo. They are heavier than the McKenzies, and don't have some of the features of the McKenzie I loved so much - for a relatively short camino the Mckenzies are perfect. But for longer...? I'm not risking it.
Well I'll find out if the Arroyos are OK. I hope I am not disappointed.
(BTW, Neither are as cushy as the Hokas...but they fit if you have monster feet.)
I'm a fan of bondi's too but they are annoyingly tight.
This guy is pretty sorted when it comes to dealing with a narrow toe box.
Yeah, maybe off topic but I can't resist. DefinitelyREI doesn't carry the women's model, even though they have shelf space for a dozen dress shoes. AT REI... I digress
Couldn't agree more about the Chacos! Love them but a bit hard for long distancesI started my first Camino in the Keen Arroyos (men's, because REI doesn't carry the women's model, even though they have shelf space for a dozen dress shoes. AT REI... I digress). Anyway, they felt great to begin with, plenty wide. But they started to stretch out and then to fall apart. They didn't work for me. I think the Chaco sandals work well for me because the straps don't cover the bunion area. If only they made a really cushy version for walking on pavement...
ALTRA LONE PEAK are very wide. I’m onto my second pair. TOPO have a wider toe box as well.
Maybe, but they were too low-volume for my high arch. The Topo Terraventure was better, with a wide toe box and more height, but the low-rise doesn't please my left foot.The Altra Lone Peak is supposed to have the widest toe box out there.
please Let us know how the Bondi Wide is. I've heard that they left the toe end alone and made more space for the rest of the foot. Which doesn't much suit my narrow heel and high arch.I've thought about cutting a slot along the side where my forefoot is widest. Part of my problem, like VNWalking, is that I grew up walking barefoot. It's depressing to hear that the Bondi is tight. I just ordered a pair in Men's Wide. We'll see.
If any of you care to compare, the wide point of my right foot is 4" (over 10 cm) and I wear a size 9 women's/size 8 men's shoe (EU: 40-41)
please Let us know how the Bondi Wide is. I've heard that they left the toe end alone and made more space for the rest of the foot. Which doesn't much suit my narrow heel and high arch.
The search goes on for perfection.
(my problems are so first world.)
I have been using the Bondi for over a year now. I had the Bondi 5 when I first tried them out, and then switched to the Bondi 6 when it was released.
The Bondi is a 'true' wide. The wide width is correctly proportional from the forefoot to the heel. Although the Hoka One One Bondi 6 does not use the usual letter-designated for width sizes, it is the same as an 'EE' width.
I have very wide feet, and my right foot, which is the most demanding of the two, is perfectly happy with the wide.
My different experience: I got my Bondi 6, Men's Wide (and I am female, btw), and they were painfully tight at the forefoot. I wore them on a long walk, thinking they might "form to my foot" and I was almost crippled with pain at the end. I went to REI and exchanged them for the Challenger ATR 5. These were bliss for my feet.
It is interesting. Particularly the sceptic's estimate that they will break down and cause injury or pain after 200 or 300 miles. What has been the actual lifespan of these?Here is an interesting article about Hoka One One (pronounced Ho-Kah Oh-Ney Oh-Ney; a Maori phrase, meaning "to fly"): https://www.outsideonline.com/1869931/clown-shoe-thats-changing-minimalist-running
It is interesting. Particularly the sceptic's estimate that they will break down and cause injury or pain after 200 or 300 miles. What has been the actual lifespan of these?
That is really weird that the ATR in a Wide was a good fit, but the Bondi Wide was too tight. Honestly, when I was trying them out as candidates to replace my New Balance, I thought both models fit the same. It makes me wonder if theys accidentally mixed up a pair of Regular widths in place of the Wide at the factory and, they got mislabeled.
It sounds like your feet are happy nowThe ATR is a good choice and it sounds like they are a great match for you.
They looked like they were shaped differently to me, the Bondi being more bullet shaped and the ATR more rounded. Somebody else here said the Bondi was tight. Maybe it depends on the shape of your foot.
It might also be how many socks one is wearing, the types and thicknesses of insoles or orthotics, etc. As you implied, there are a lot of variations in feet.
I walked the Portugués Coastal in Lone Peaks and had absolutely no issue.I walked the Frances twice in mostly Chaco sandals, alternating with Altra Lone Peak because I have WIDE forefeet. Now, planning to walk the Portugues with all those cobblestones and pavement, I'm thinking I need to find something with more cushioning than the Altra. The Hoka Bondi sounds good, and it comes in wide, but I hope it's wide enough! Even most men's size wide shoes aren't wide enough for my duck feet.
The hoka one one 30 Day Guarantee. Don't take our word for it, ask another runner. Better yet, try a pair for yourself. Take them for a run, or two or ten. If you are not completely satisfied, you can return or exchange them within 30 days of the original purchase, no questions asked. What have you got to lose?
Your satisfaction is our top priority, and we hope your order met your expectations. If you change your mind about any of the products for any reason, you may return the product within 30 days of receipt for an exchange or refund. Please note that we can only process an exchange for the same model in a different color or size.
You may return or exchange the goods, provided that they have not been worn, damaged, washed or altered.
Please note that we do not exchange or refund any goods that are not in their original condition.
I'd have told them off for that, it's not their place to criticise your choices in that way. I've had similar experiences in shoe shops because I have feet that are difficult to find shoes for. As you say, sometimes it's a case of finding a pair that you can wear at all - any pair. The latest designs may well be excellent but if they don't fit, they are not suitable.Till now most of my walking has been done in ASICS Gel cushion badminton shoes (size 48’s), I’ve walked over well 1000km in then; mostly on streets, gravel, minimal trails. Got scolded in a shop today about that. BUT at the time I bought them, they were the only trainers that felt roomy enough at my toes and the fabric bent well when putting my foot down.
Anyone try to do this with bunions? Any solutions? Tips? Thanks!
You might like the work that a friend of mine does. Tom makes a feature and an art form out of mending.Also - I’m enjoying making them unique with darning the necessary repairs ... will make them become more and more unique over the years. Using 4 ply baby wool - taking the threads apart to one-ply
A company called Hanwag do walking boots and shoes specifically designed for bunions so they might be worth looking at.Anyone try to do this with bunions? Any solutions? Tips? Thanks!
I'd have told them off for that, it's not their place to criticise your choices in that way. I've had similar experiences in shoe shops because I have feet that are difficult to find shoes for. As you say, sometimes it's a case of finding a pair that you can wear at all - any pair. The latest designs may well be excellent but if they don't fit, they are not suitable.
I always enjoy the expressions of astonishment on some people's faces when they encounter me walking on Dartmoor barefoot. i've had all sorts of pronouncements about how I will wreck my feet, suffer from injuries etc. All I can say is that after 50 years or so of walking barefoot and in sandals my feet are doing just fine.
I think shoes are as individual as it gets to be. I got a pair of cheep kohumba hiking boots men’s size and I could not been happier, when they wore out the nex ones from Columbia where ok no mayor farigues or wearing just a bit too short for downhill. The hoka oneone Clifton 1 I got in a thrift shop new for a couple of dollars and without knowing what they were made for I fell inlove with them as alternate so not to walk in the same shoes all day and they where great or more than that. Unfortunately it all trial and error. Because all those test are not you testing it.
I’m in awe of you walking Dartmoor barefoot. That is seriously impressive.
(SNIP)
I _think_ walking with barefoot shoes recently is what has made it harder to find the right shoes, but it’s speculation.
Indeed. Incredibly individual. I’ve tried a few shoes on that people swear are the most comfortable thing on Earth but I need to get them off within a couple of minutes.
Love itYou might like the work that a friend of mine does. Tom makes a feature and an art form out of mending.
PORTFOLIO
Portfolio Below is a showcase of some of my work: A private commission of a cardigan that already had some visible mends Vintage Welsh blankets visibly mended with Shetland wool A collaboration wit…tomofholland.com
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?