125 replies to this topic

[Jo73]

I have been wearing my Nike Free 7.0's for a couple of weeks now and I am loving them. I understand that there is a 'wearing in' time frame but my question is for long term use. Are they supposed to be used alternatively with 'normal' shoes? Or is the goal to have Free's become your normal shoes? I mean, once your feet are stronger from training in them, do you race in them?

Any Coolrunners wear Nike Free's exclusively? What is your experience with them?

[tim]

I ran about 90% in the 5.0's for about 4 months. I liked them but would not recommend them for trail. There is a nice looking trail version out which i would not mind trying. I have run a few 1/2's in them and a marathon and 1 ultra. i will get back to running in them after the Western States since my knees feel better when running in them.

[Luckylegs]

Something like Tim said: I've worn the Nike Free since they first appeared on the scene! I don't know which version I have now, 4 or 5? Anyhow, they're blue & I wear them for just about all training except my long Sunday run which is done on bitumen where most of the races I do are run & I need to stay familiar with the shoe I use on those occasions. I have never had any feet, ankle, knee or leg niggles after wearing them, but sometimes do with other trainers e.g. my Asics 2110 & my newer & much more comfortable Nike Air Pegasus 2006...my favourite shoe for road training & longer running events.

In short....the Free has been very good for me & I love it to such an extent that I'm anxiously awaiting the release of the Women's #3...the very closest to bare foot running that they'll get! The Mens #3 is already available in a glorious red which I very much fancied only to find the Women's is white, blue & silver....just the colours I don't need for most surfaces, but I'll get them anyhow! LL.

Edited by Luckylegs, 12 June 2007 - 10:50 AM.

[Jo73]

Thanks Tim & Luckylegs, I'm afraid of going back to my 'other' shoes after having worn the Free's. The Free's definitely help me land mid-foot and help with a quicker leg turnover. I'm only wearing the 7.0's at this stage, but am anxiously awaiting too (like you LL) until I can get a pair of 5.0's. I did try on the mens red 3.0 in the shop just for giggles and they felt like a pair of slippers! So comfy! Was VERY tempted! Maybe next time...

I got mine from the Zelus store at Pacific Fair - I felt like Steve Butabi in Night At the Roxbury when I walked in there. You know, "what's up, what's up, what's up" etc.

[tim]

I am also surprised at home many kms I can get out of a pair of frees. I can only get about 800 - 1000kms out of a pair of Pegasus but the blue pair of frees (like LL's) must have done over 2000. I liked them so much I could not throw them out so i cut the backs off (which were torn anyway) and now they are my slippers for these cold mornings.

The 3.0's look nice. And in an extra fast red.

[Luckylegs]

Yes, that red Free looks so fast, Tim! I saw it a Rebel Pitt Street Mall & I'll simply have to try it on when I go to Sydney next Tuesday & if it fits....!!!!! LL

[RunBare]

I actually gave up wearing shoes completely in order to get my foot strike working properly and get rid of some persistent injuries. I now prefer to do all my running barefoot, but when I do have to wear shoes (rough trails etc) the Nike Frees are the only ones I'll use. I wore my 'old' regular running shoes the other day, and my feet were not impressed!

The Free's are really comfortable and don't seem to affect my stride adversely. I'm currently in the blue ones (5.0's) and will join the list of those hanging out for the 3.0's. They look so good!!

[BEN-HUR]

Jo73, on Jun 12 2007, 10:07 AM, said:

I have been wearing my Nike Free 7.0's for a couple of weeks now and I am loving them. I understand that there is a 'wearing in' time frame but my question is for long term use. Are they supposed to be used alternatively with 'normal' shoes? Or is the goal to have Free's become your normal shoes? I mean, once your feet are stronger from training in them, do you race in them?

Any Coolrunners wear Nike Free's exclusively? What is your experience with them?

I first started training in the Nike Free not long after it came out - over two years ago. At the time it was the 5.0. It innitially felt a bit strange & I had a niggle or two during the breaking in phase (which the time period would differ from person to person - pending on their weight & their biomechanics). After a relatively short time I felt comfortable wearing them for most of my training sessions - long runs, intervals on the road, track sessions, hill work & tempo sessions. I was later given a pair of 4.0's & ran over 2hrs in them on the first run with no problems. Like the 5.0's, I started doing most of my training in these as they felt comfortable & I moved better (biomechanically) in them. When I on the odd occasion trained in the conventional type training shoe I first noticed my foot strike was audiably louder & the feel was bulkier (as you would expect). I do what most would call high mileage (150 - 200km a week) with the occasional 40 - 43km long run in the 4.0's. These shoes lasted nearly a year which is an accumulation of at least 5 - 6000km. As a Podiatrist I certainly wouldn't recommend this to my patients. I only changed them as I thought it was way too long to keep a pair of shoes. The wear of the sole was still very good. Another reason why I waited so long before changing is because Nike decided to kill the 4.0 range, which was annoying. I ended up buying another two pairs of 4.0's off e.bay (overseas). Most importantly I haven't had any real injury (a niggle or two) since training in the Free's & there are phases of my training which is quite intense. I understand the importance of uninhibited foot kinetics in stregthening foot & lower limb muscles & subsequent improved efficiency of lower limb biomechanics which I feel the Free's address. Having said this I don't feel the Free range is for everybody i.e. someone with poor biomechanics due to poor structural integrity. I haven't raced in these shoes too much as they are my training shoes & I keep my racing shoes just for racing. I would probably race more in the Free in the future - depending how the 3.0's feel. I personally feel the 7.0 is too bulky (although probably suitable for heavier runners) & the 3.0 is too flimsy (just my thoughts) - although I am also keen to try the 3.0. I would have thought Nike would recognize the market for the 4.0's. The 5.0 is a good starting point for runners (without poor biomechanics) to try out on. I feel that if you are suitable for this type of shoe then they could replace your conventional training & possibly racing shoe.
There is another type of footwear which is marketed to mimic barefoot running. You will see it as one of the sponsors of this site - the Vibram Fivefingers. It does look interesting & I have recently sent them an e.mail for more info. I will probably give these a try in the near future.
Hope this helps.
BEN-HUR

[Luckylegs]

I so want that brilliant red that's out for the men's Free #3!! What difference would there be between the Men's 3# Free and the Women's #3, apart from colour? Anything against wearing the men's version, provided size conversion is correct...and how does the conversion work? Is it 2 sizes smaller than men's for the women's version? LL

[Jo73]

Thanks Ben-Hur, that is the info I'm after. I bought the 7.0's as the shop didn't have any 5.0's in my size, and I thought that jumping straight into the 3.0's wouldn't be a smart move. I tend to roll in a bit, but I don't have any injuries (although according to some schools of thought, that means I'm a 'going-to-be-injured-runner' as opposed to 'currently injured' or 'recovering from injury'). Anyhoo. I intend to progress to the 5.0's so the 7.0's are my first step towards that. I t

I ran in them this afternoon, and it's so hard to do an easy run in them. I mean, your feet feel so light and it just seems so much easier to have fast legs in them.

I also used to hear my feet 'slap' when wearing my normal runners, and now I feel like my whole running style has improved because of what's happening from the ground up.

Luckylegs, my 7.0's are a womens US 11, (EUR 43), but I think in general it equates to a mens US 9. The men's red 3.0's are soooo comfy. They would be a great shoe just to wear casually (if I'm allowed to say that - hope I'm not offending anyone!)

[wombatface]

tim, on Jun 11 2007, 09:18 PM, said:

I am also surprised at home many kms I can get out of a pair of frees. I can only get about 800 - 1000kms out of a pair of Pegasus but the blue pair of frees (like LL's) must have done over 2000.

Yes, the bloody things last forever. They feel just the same as when they were new!

I use mine for 400m track training. They're as close as you'll get to the feel of bare-foot running. I used to train bare-foot on the track, but now prefer the Frees.

I've also use them for races. I've run City to Surf in them without problems, but I don't think I'd be game to try a half marathon. As Tim inferred, on trails, ankle rolling could be a problem.

[Rudolf]

Lately I do alternate frees 5.0 with Dunlop Vollyes and find the alteration refreshing.

I am also looking forward to 3.0 version.

I thing that lower the number would also mean less material under foot, so basicaly lower shoes, which should lessen the risk of rolling the ankle etc and make it more trail safe.

The only annoying thingy, is the rock and glass getting trapped in the sole, and basicaly my decision each day is based on - am I going through gravel or not - and thats how i choose between Volleys and Frees.

[Brian mac]

Well all just picked up another two pairs of the free's yesterday I am just wrapped in these shoes and have now run my last two halfs in them now have two pairs of the 5.0s and one 7.0s will let you all know how the new ones fair in training
macca

[blair]

BEN-HUR, on Jun 12 2007, 07:08 PM, said:

There is another type of footwear which is marketed to mimic barefoot running. You will see it as one of the sponsors of this site - the Vibram Fivefingers. It does look interesting & I have recently sent them an e.mail for more info. I will probably give these a try in the near future.
Hope this helps.
BEN-HUR

BEN-HUR, did you try out the Vibram Fivefingers? If so, what did you think of them? I have been eyeing them off but have yet to hear from someone who has actually worn them.

[Fossil]

Brian mac, on Sep 15 2007, 02:15 PM, said:

Well all just picked up another two pairs of the free's yesterday I am just wrapped in these shoes and have now run my last two halfs in them now have two pairs of the 5.0s and one 7.0s will let you all know how the new ones fair in training
macca

The Nike rep gave me a pair of 5.0s to try last year and I am impressed - not quite a barefoot feel but close. It's all I like to run in now - even my very flat racing flats seem odd now!

I did a half marathon in them last year and that was fine but they seem a bit bulky for 10K or faster. The lower the number, the less the support. Right?

If so, what's the lowest number available? I hate any sort of support, even on rough ground - I prefer the feet to be free to adjust, and not have the shoe over-rule the natural flex in the feet :-)

Edited by Fossil, 15 September 2007 - 02:47 PM.

[BarefootSimon]

balri, on Sep 15 2007, 02:39 PM, said:

BEN-HUR, did you try out the Vibram Fivefingers? If so, what did you think of them? I have been eyeing them off but have yet to hear from someone who has actually worn them.

I ran in Nike Frees last year before going barefoot. I also have a pair of the fivefingers but have only used them for walking, not for running. Unless I start trail running I don't need to run in them. I liked the Frees, but I consider the fivefingers to be far closer to barefooting, there is no heel at all. They are as close to barefooting as you will find in a shoe. I got mine from gotyourgear.com, quite a reasonable price, not sure if there's anywhere in Oz yet that sells them.

A warning if you do start running in fivefingers, take it easy. When I wore them walking I kicked things a few times and it hurt! When I'm barefoot I'm more careful, but with the fivefingers on I slipped back into that invincible shoe wearing mindset - not a good idea. I'm sure it's not a problem once you get used to them.

The Frees had enough of a heel that initially I still landed on my heels when I ran - you definitely don't want to do that in the fivefingers, ow.

[Fossil]

BarefootSimon, on Sep 15 2007, 04:43 PM, said:

I ran in Nike Frees last year before going barefoot. I also have a pair of the fivefingers but have only used them for walking, not for running. Unless I start trail running I don't need to run in them. I liked the Frees, but I consider the fivefingers to be far closer to barefooting, there is no heel at all. They are as close to barefooting as you will find in a shoe. I got mine from gotyourgear.com, quite a reasonable price, not sure if there's anywhere in Oz yet that sells them.

A warning if you do start running in fivefingers, take it easy. When I wore them walking I kicked things a few times and it hurt! When I'm barefoot I'm more careful, but with the fivefingers on I slipped back into that invincible shoe wearing mindset - not a good idea. I'm sure it's not a problem once you get used to them.

The Frees had enough of a heel that initially I still landed on my heels when I ran - you definitely don't want to do that in the fivefingers, ow.

You can buy the fivefinges in Oz but I think they are $200 - My sister-in-law bought me a pair in NY for about $70 US - I wasn't willing to pay $200 to try them out! I should get them in a couple of days balri and I can report then. I intend to try them on the track asap too.

Edited by Fossil, 15 September 2007 - 05:19 PM.

[Luckylegs]

As far as I know the Nike #3 Free is the lowest number available. I've had no problems running with the #3 Frees on unsealed roads for anything up to 35km. I think you'd like them! LL

[blair]

BarefootSimon, on Sep 15 2007, 04:43 PM, said:

I got mine from gotyourgear.com, quite a reasonable price, not sure if there's anywhere in Oz yet that sells them.

Looks like they don't have my size

Fossil, on Sep 15 2007, 05:18 PM, said:

You can buy the fivefinges in Oz but I think they are $200 - My sister-in-law bought me a pair in NY for about $70 US - I wasn't willing to pay $200 to try them out! I should get them in a couple of days balri and I can report then. I intend to try them on the track asap too.

I know. I was in LA for just one day a couple of weeks back and went to a store that sells them but they also didn't have my size

[Fossil]

Thanks Luckylegs

[RunBare]

balri, on Sep 15 2007, 02:39 PM, said:

BEN-HUR, did you try out the Vibram Fivefingers? If so, what did you think of them? I have been eyeing them off but have yet to hear from someone who has actually worn them.

I bought a pair of the Vibrams recently, as I prefer to run barefoot. They are great for when you need something to protect your feet, but don't want the movement of your foot restricted. I've done a fair bit of running in them, including some trail runs. PM me if you want any more details I still use the Nike Frees as well from time to time.

[sook54]

I am still enjoying my Nike Free women's 5.0 - I'd be quite happy to run in them all the time but decided I'd better have an alternate shoe so now trying out the Loco Carumba (their only neutral shoe), which I use for my long runs. I still prefer the Frees, maybe I'll get another pair to alternate in!

[Fossil]

Saw 2 runners in Vibrams on the Bondi to Bronte path at 6:40am today

[blair]

If anyone has tried both Nike Free and Vibram Fivefingers, which do you prefer? Which do you think is better?

[Sportsman]

The Fivefingers comes in models with straps as well.
Sprint

Does the fivefingers feel secure enough?, or would there be some advantage in the Sprint for running.

[YumHallucinogens]

Naive question here - Derek Clayton ran in unsupported footwear (Volleys and similar) and has since had his knees replaced.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/athletics/th...722.html?page=2

Does anyone anticipate any long term problems from wearing Frees?

Yum (the Devil's Advocate)

[Fossil]

YumHallucinogens, on Sep 17 2007, 03:08 AM, said:

Naive question here - Derek Clayton ran in unsupported footwear (Volleys and similar) and has since had his knees replaced.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/athletics/th...722.html?page=2

Does anyone anticipate any long term problems from wearing Frees?

Yum (the Devil's Advocate)

My thinking is that, barring any abnormalities that might be corrected with other shoes, they would be better for the knees than shoes with a heel.

I would think landing with a flexed leg (rather than heel-striking with a straighter leg, would give a lot more natural suspension and distribution of forces.

I would be interested to see what a physicist might have to say on that point.

[Oakley]

In answer to the OP, Free's are meant to be a shoe you build into. 3 times a week for 20 mins a time is a good starting point. Once you have acquired the desired muscle stability to handle them, then its up to you how much you wear them
I have a pair of 7.0's and really like them. Still getting used to them though, so alternate with regular running shoes.
The science behind them is so simple its scary!

[tim]

YumHallucinogens, on Sep 17 2007, 03:08 AM, said:

Naive question here - Derek Clayton ran in unsupported footwear (Volleys and similar) and has since had his knees replaced.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/athletics/th...722.html?page=2

Does anyone anticipate any long term problems from wearing Frees?

Yum (the Devil's Advocate)

my father-in-law never ran a day in his life and had both knees replaced at 60. Does this therefore mean not running ruins your knees?

I wonder what people's knees are like in counties where there are predominately barefoot?

oh for those that are running in the 3.0 how do they compare to the 5.0?

[sook54]

Pssst. Don't tell my husband but today I sneaked out to Running Science and bought another pair of Nike Frees - the women's 5.0 version 2 (my others are version 1). These ones have more mesh in the toe area, and are apparently sturdier around the heel.

Will wear them around the Bay tomorrow and report back!

[PodRunner]

Like Ben-Hur, I'd like to warn the moderate to severe over-pronator of the danger of Free's.

I love my Frees for casual wear, but if you could see the patient I just filmed running and the massive distortion of her 5.0's and subsequent severe knee tracking problems you would be cautious if you have less than perfect biomechanics (she was moderately hypermobile).

For those who need to run with supportive shoes and/or orthotics, I would suggest you only use the Free as a casual shoe and probably the 7.0 rather than the 3.0/4.0 or 5.0.

I've had 4.0 and 5.0 and struggled with the 4.0, but find the 7.0 very comfortable and still feel the work on my intrinsic foot muscles.

Edited by PodRunner, 20 September 2007 - 04:34 PM.

[tim]

I would guess that these people would start to feel pain after a few sessions in their frees?

[PodRunner]

Nike suggest that you build up very gradually into running in the Free. I would suspect that if your arches are low and you experience any pain in your knees during or after wearing them then they may not be suitable for impact exercise.

But they are still great pub shoes....

[tank girl]

My podiatrist has always been an advocate of training your foot strength. He was amazed at how much my foot strength has developed in my five years from sedentary to ultra runner, and has given me the go-ahead to train in the Free. (At this stage I'll still be wearing my orthotics in mild support shoes for ultras.) I am thrilled to bits. Unless you have a structural deformity, you CAN strengthen to correct for your functional deformities.

And PodRunner - I agree ENTIRELY on the pub shoe comment: the only foot attire more comfortable than the Free are pluggers, and most pubs won't let you in if you wear those!

[tim]

I am sorry but my volleys are still my shoe of choice outside of running. Today whilst out I was thinking I should go for a run in them. They are certainly a better price then the frees.

[sook54]

fortunately I have neutral foot and high arch and have experienced absolutely no joint problems since starting to run in the frees. In fact I feel that my gait is better when I'm not clomping around in the weighty shoes (I'm certainly faster).

My new frees were taken for a run this morning and performed pretty much the same as my 2-3 month old pair. I do still wear my Loco Carumbas for long runs just to mix it up a bit.

[BEN-HUR]

balri, on Sep 15 2007, 02:39 PM, said:

BEN-HUR, did you try out the Vibram Fivefingers? If so, what did you think of them? I have been eyeing them off but have yet to hear from someone who has actually worn them.

Hi balri, I have only just got a pair & due to other factors haven't as yet been able to wear them in a training run. I have walked in them & can tell you that they do feel a fair bit different to the Free 4.0 I am currently training in. I feel this is due to the markedly reduced mid sole support & cushioning as well as a relatively reduced heel height in relation to forefoot height compared to the Free. My suggestion would be that if you are coming from a 'conventional' shoe type & desire to do more training in a 'barefoot' shoe type then go for a Free i.e. 4.0 (although you can only now get this shoe off eBay). This would seem to me to be a sensible adaptation to the process thus reducing the chance of injury. If on the other hand you want to go straight into the Vibrams - then take it very cautiously. The Vibrams' are certainly the closest shoe I've seen to mimic running barefoot - but that doesn't necessarily mean it is a good thing (particularly for some who are not biomechanically efficient). I will post again on the feel of the Vibrams' once I have done more training in them. Hope this helps.
Regards,
BEN-HUR.

[Hurley]

Hey i was wondering if anybody had ventured out to the Nike Warehouse (Sydney) recently? If so, did they have any Free's (3.0) there?

[blair]

BEN-HUR, on Sep 21 2007, 11:52 AM, said:

Hi balri, I have only just got a pair & due to other factors haven't as yet been able to wear them in a training run. I have walked in them & can tell you that they do feel a fair bit different to the Free 4.0 I am currently training in. I feel this is due to the markedly reduced mid sole support & cushioning as well as a relatively reduced heel height in relation to forefoot height compared to the Free. My suggestion would be that if you are coming from a 'conventional' shoe type & desire to do more training in a 'barefoot' shoe type then go for a Free i.e. 4.0 (although you can only now get this shoe off eBay). This would seem to me to be a sensible adaptation to the process thus reducing the chance of injury. If on the other hand you want to go straight into the Vibrams - then take it very cautiously. The Vibrams' are certainly the closest shoe I've seen to mimic running barefoot - but that doesn't necessarily mean it is a good thing (particularly for some who are not biomechanically efficient). I will post again on the feel of the Vibrams' once I have done more training in them. Hope this helps.
Regards,
BEN-HUR.

Thanks for the update Ben-Hur. I look forward to hearing your progress.

[tim]

I see barefoot ted (baerfooted.com) just did a 100 mile run in a five finger prototype. I wonder how they are different.

[tim]

I dug out my five fingers today and when to a few kms down the park. My feet get sweaty and you can't really wear socks. Plus my toes are too far apart, they like to hang out together. they are kind of fun though. i wonder if I could get into them quick enough for the Fitzroy Falls? I am thinking that is a great way to get injured. Maybe 2008.

[RunBare]

I've done a fair bit of running in the fivefingers. The longest was Woodford to Glenbrook (25km fire trail run). If you have not tried barefoot before, I wouldn't recommend this, start off walking on the grass and build up to longer distances. They feel nothing like regular shoes at all. The longest I've done in Nike Frees is Trailwalker. I'm considering using Vibrams for Fitzory Falls too, but not 100% sure yet.

[tim]

RunBare, on Sep 21 2007, 05:01 PM, said:

I've done a fair bit of running in the fivefingers. The longest was Woodford to Glenbrook (25km fire trail run). If you have not tried barefoot before, I wouldn't recommend this, start off walking on the grass and build up to longer distances. They feel nothing like regular shoes at all. The longest I've done in Nike Frees is Trailwalker. I'm considering using Vibrams for Fitzory Falls too, but not 100% sure yet.

After my 6 foot tragedy in frees I dismissed the frees as a trail shoe but if you can do Trailwalker in them I may have been too quick to judge. i do think the upper is a bit soft. Have you seen the Nike Free trails? I saw them in the Nike shop in Qld (Robina) last time I was there and I was tempted to buy them. I will be there in 2 weeks and I am in the market for a trail shoe

RB how long did it take for you to adapt to such distances barefoot.

[blair]

tim, on Sep 21 2007, 04:35 PM, said:

I dug out my five fingers today and when to a few kms down the park. My feet get sweaty and you can't really wear socks. Plus my toes are too far apart, they like to hang out together. they are kind of fun though. i wonder if I could get into them quick enough for the Fitzroy Falls? I am thinking that is a great way to get injured. Maybe 2008.

Tim, in the Barefoot Ted post you mentioned he said that he wore Injinji socks with his FiveFingers. Might help.

[SumDamGuy]

Jo73, on Jun 12 2007, 10:07 AM, said:

I have been wearing my Nike Free 7.0's for a couple of weeks now and I am loving them. I understand that there is a 'wearing in' time frame but my question is for long term use. Are they supposed to be used alternatively with 'normal' shoes? Or is the goal to have Free's become your normal shoes? I mean, once your feet are stronger from training in them, do you race in them?

Any Coolrunners wear Nike Free's exclusively? What is your experience with them?

there is a newer version out now the 3.0 which has even a thinner sole..I wouldnt mind trying them on tho

[tim]

balri, on Sep 21 2007, 07:17 PM, said:

Tim, in the Barefoot Ted post you mentioned he said that he wore Injinji socks with his FiveFingers. Might help.

i know but my five fingers would not fit with socks. i have followed BFT for a while and sometimes I think it would be easier if he just wore shoes

[Fossil]

My Vibrams have arrived from US - will test Monday, after Bridge run, and will post comments

[RunBare]

tim, on Sep 21 2007, 05:08 PM, said:

After my 6 foot tragedy in frees I dismissed the frees as a trail shoe but if you can do Trailwalker in them I may have been too quick to judge. i do think the upper is a bit soft. Have you seen the Nike Free trails? I saw them in the Nike shop in Qld (Robina) last time I was there and I was tempted to buy them. I will be there in 2 weeks and I am in the market for a trail shoe

RB how long did it take for you to adapt to such distances barefoot.

I saw the Nike Free Trail shoes and they looked ok, a bit more 'solid' than the regular Frees, but I haven't tried them. It has taken me about 6 months of completely barefoot running to get to where I am now, so I really don't love shoes anymore. That being said, Frees are the most comfortable when I HAVE to wear some.

Have you ever been to the Nike Factory outlet in Auburn, Sydney? I think they stock some of the trails, and they are heaps cheaper. They don't have 3.0's yet though.... I keep checking

[SumDamGuy]

RunBare, on Sep 22 2007, 01:47 AM, said:

I saw the Nike Free Trail shoes and they looked ok, a bit more 'solid' than the regular Frees, but I haven't tried them. It has taken me about 6 months of completely barefoot running to get to where I am now, so I really don't love shoes anymore. That being said, Frees are the most comfortable when I HAVE to wear some.

Have you ever been to the Nike Factory outlet in Auburn, Sydney? I think they stock some of the trails, and they are heaps cheaper. They don't have 3.0's yet though.... I keep checking

I was at the runners shop in randwick on frenchmans rd the other day and they were doing the free's in all denominations for $150 if anyone is interested

[tank girl]

tim, on Sep 20 2007, 09:16 PM, said:

I am sorry but my volleys are still my shoe of choice outside of running. Today whilst out I was thinking I should go for a run in them. They are certainly a better price then the frees.

*Grumble* just like bl00dy Bill T. I wish I could make my feet fit into a pair of Volleys or KT26s but unfortunately, they seem to be designed for long, skinny feet. I try and try, but as soon as I find a pair that fit my forefoot, my heel slips out and my toes have so much room that if I was a smoker, I could safely store my cigarettes there.