« June 2008 | Main | August 2008 »

July 31, 2008

Running The Gauntlet Of Exercise Shoes

Some sports require lots of expensive equipment, but all running requires is a good pair of shoes. In recent tests, Consumer Reports found that, thanks to modern materials and sophisticated design, most of the shoes tested performed well.

To evaluate 24 models of running shoes, Consumer Reports bought 205 pairs of shoes, enlisted a panel of typical runners and had them crank out a total of 1,240 miles. CR selected men's and women's versions of the same model, where available. Prices for the shoes tested ranged from $28 to $120.

Of the models tested, the $120 Nike Air Zoom Vomero+2 topped the rankings for men's and women's shoes. The men's and women's Brooks Glycerin 6 were judged "Very Good" overall, but the men's version scored better than the women's, owing to better stability ratings.

Other top-performing men's shoes include Adidas Supernova Cushion 7, $90; Mizuno Wave Rider 11, $95; and the Asics Gel-Cumulus 9, $80. For women, other top performers include Nike Air Pegasus+2007, $85; Puma Shoes, $85; Reebok Premier Hatana, $85; and Adidas Supernova Cushion 9, $90.

For adequate performance at a rock-bottom price, try the men's Champion Helium at Target, $30, and the women's Champion Wonder C9 at Target, $28.

For people who like to run after dark, give special consideration to the men's Nike Air Zoom Vomero+2 and the Avia Tuned Trainer II, both $80, and women's Avia Tuned Trainer II, $80, and Reebok Premier Hatana, $85, which have the most effective reflector strips.

Whether a particular shoe is right for an individual depends on several considerations:

•Fit. Most of the shoes provided at least a good fit for most panelists, but there were exceptions. For example, while testing the top-rated men's Nike Air Zoom Vomero+2, two panelists complained of pressure under the balls of their feet.

•Cushioning. Running can be hard on feet and joints. Shoes should provide enough cushioning to absorb impact.

•Stability. A stable shoe controls motion in the ankle. Among the men's models, all but the Champion earned a Very Good score for stability. But only half of the women's models performed as well as the men's.

•Flexibility. The front of the shoe should flex enough to let the runner push off with the ball of the foot.

•Breathability. Shoes that dissipate sweat quickly keep feet cooler and reduce the risk of bacterial or fungal infection.

•Weight. The lighter the shoe, the better -- as long as cushioning and stability don't suffer.

July 07, 2008

Get some extra mileage out of work-worthy shoes


Gas prices keep going up. The trains are jammed. Buses roll on their own whimsical rhythms. Car pools? Too much sharing.

You might as well walk. (Given that somebody killed the electric car, and teleportation isn't an option.)

But first, a brief primer on the shoe as a commute-to-work device: Notwithstanding the continuing dominance of the faux ballet slipper, flats are not your friend—no arch support. Sneakers with business duds? C'mon, now, do you really want to look like the pre-makeover Melanie Griffith in "Working Girl"? Flip-flops? Please.

News flash: You don't have to do the covert under-the-desk switcheroo. When it comes to shoes, cute and comfortable are not mutually exclusive. Seriously.


A bit of a heel helps, especially of the wedge variety. Arch support: essential. You want fabric with a little bit of give, and a sole that absorbs all that pavement-pounding. Blisters have a way of stealing the chic.

Here are some options.

• A yellow-and-white VPL sandal is our lone exception to the no-flat-surface rule, thanks to its comfy-cushy rubber sole.

• Frye, home of the indestructible cowboy boot, has gone through a major makeover with its line of women's shoes.

• Funky, functional, red: gladiator glam from Matisse.

We're having a hard time picking a favorite. Walking is going to be good for the environment, but bad for our bank balance. But then, as our colleagues will attest, we do have a bit of a shoe issue.

The views and opinions expressed in this page are strictly those of the page author. The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by the University of Minnesota.