Pros and cons on 3 shoes

I bought 3 pairs of shoes, this evening, to replace my Vomero 6 and 7.

It appears the Vomeros are too cushy for how I am running, now.  I've lost about 25 pounds since May and the need for a cushy shoe appears to be waning from when I was 210-230 pounds.  I'm now 185.  I was looking for a less cushioned ride, but not devoid of cushioning.

So, I need y'alls input on the three candidates of which I could not distinctly declare a winner.  I narrowed down to the final 3 from a pool of 7 pairs.  I run for the Houston marathon in January and am doing ~35 miles per week, up to the low 40's.  I am presently recovering from a bio-mechanical issue with my feet, probably exacerbated by the softness.

Here are the contenders:
1.  Brooks PureFlow 2:  8.5 ozs.
2.  Asics Gel Excel33 2:  9.6 ozs
3.  Saucony Kinvara 4  7.9 ozs

I have 30 days to test drive these 3 and keep one of them.  If they feel good enough, I'll purchase another pair and run Houston in them.  Thanks for your time.

Unlike Mark, I'm not a fan of low drop shoes, and the pure flows fall into that  category as do the kinvaras but I like them ok .  That is personal though and you really have to try them on your own. Lightweight is good as I try to wear the lightest shoe I can even for a marathon. But I will tell you that even my racing flats are an 8 mm drop.  

I tried pureflows and for me they didn't work. I got reinjured. But again we are an experiment of one.

I'm in Michele's camp in not liking the lower drop shoes.  I've been having good luck with the NB 890 I've been wearing (I'm currently on my 3rd pair).  They're light (9.6 oz or so) and have adequate cushioning.  They are a neutral shoe, but NB 870 is the version with a little bit of support.

I've had good luck with Asics (Speedstars and DS Trainers) over the years and have actually looked at the ones you mention, but haven't pulled the trigger on them yet.

I've done regular drop, low drop and zero drop... and I've found that the MOST important factor to consider in trying a shoe isn't drop (and Nike has put me in all sorts of different drops as a tester, so I'm maybe not as much a zealot as some might think.). It's how well the shoe fits your foot. 

First:(And most important) Does it fit the shape of your foot? (I, for example, have a curved foot, so Brooks shoes -- which tend to be straighter-lasted -- don't work well for me.) That overall fit is critical.

Second: How much room does it give your toes? A lot of shoes have what I call "torpedo toes" - that tend to compress your toes down into a narrow rounded front. It looks fast, but unless your foot is built that way, it's horrible for mechanics. The shoes should have enough room to wiggle your toes - including the little piggy that went wee-wee-wee all the way home. 

Third: Cushion. Does it feel super-soft? Not the greatest choice, probably, because it'll create an unstable platform underfoot.

Last: Weight. None of these shoes are overly heavy. Any of them would be great.

I've run in the Saucony Peregrine, which is based on the Kinvara (I may have had the Kinvara on at one point, too.) and I liked them a lot. But its mostly because they fit my feet well, not because they have a 4 mm drop. 

So, IMHO, focus on Rule #1. If the shoe doesn't feel good on, don't buy it. Also, make sure the seller has a return/exchange policy in case you realize the shoe isn't working out. Most good running stores will at least allow you to try out a different model.

Good luck!

Thanks for the comments.  All three of the shoes are comfortable to have on my feet.  All things being equal on how my feet feel, the Saucony's feel the best.  It's almost a hand-in-glove feeling.

And the store from where I purchased them have a 30 day return policy, as long as I have the receipt.

So, I'm going to wear them tomorrow while I run my errands and run on them next week and the week after.  The Asics have the wildest color scheme.

If I don't feel right in any of the three of them, I liked the Adidas Boston 4 shoes.

Got about 100 miles on my Pure Flows. Ran a Half marathon in them and developed blisters on the balls of my feet. Not sure why since they felt excellent and still have a great feel. I may have raced in them too early or the split toe caused some weird effect.

I've concentrated on the Kinvaras for being evaluated.  The toe box is a bit tight, compared to prior year's running shoes.  I'm going to re-lace the shoes in the hope of freeing up a little more width.  Otherwise, I might have to get some EE width.  And this is with the PT's arch support in the shoe.

The Asics are out of the picture and the PureFlows are on deck.

Tight toe box is not a good sign. You need to let those little piggies breathe...

Mark B wrote:Tight toe box is not a good sign. You need to let  those little piggies breathe...

So Mr. Barefoot is passing out shoe advice now? 

mul21 wrote:

Mark B wrote:Tight toe box is not a good sign. You need to let  those little piggies breathe...

So Mr. Barefoot is passing out shoe advice now? 

HAHAHA!!!

Nick Morris wrote:

mul21 wrote:

Mark B wrote:Tight toe box is not a good sign. You need to let  those little piggies breathe...

So Mr. Barefoot is passing out shoe advice now? 

HAHAHA!!!

Yowzer!!  (He must be full of wisdom, since turning the Big Five-0.)

Mark B wrote:Tight toe box is not a good sign. You need to let  those little piggies breathe...

Yup.  I'm also told I need to wear them more so the upper loosens up some.  Guess that's part of the 'break-in' process.  I have about 3 weeks to do that, before I need to either return them or keep them.

I love the pure flow 2.  About a year ago, I made the switch from asics to brooks and I love the lightness.

But yeah, shoes are personal and the only way to figure out what works for you is to experiment.  Good luck!