![]() She recommends using assessments offered at athletic shoe stores. Tanaka, assistant professor of orthopedic surgery and the director of the women’s sports medicine program at The Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. “When shopping for walking or running shoes, it’s important to consider the fact that each individual may vary in terms of the type and location of arthritis in their knees,” says Dr. It’s important to understand that not everyone’s needs are the same. We thank the nice people at Nike for sending us a pair of Nike Free 3.0 v4 for testing.How to choose the best walking and running shoe for knee and back pain If you want to try the Free experience but want a slightly more supportive shoe, try the Nike Free Run+ 3 ![]() And not for nothing, you’ll look pretty good wearing them as well. All told, the Free 3.0 v4 is a great step forward for the model, as it lowers the heel drop and overall profile of the shoe. This element of the shoe was difficult to overcome, and was a vast departure from the Free experience I was expecting based on previous models in the line. I did find myself wishing, however, that the upper was made of either thinner material, or provided additional wiggle-room. The shoes provided an excellent running experience, allowed me to feel running surfaces without feeling unprotected, and did not get in the way of my stride while doing speedwork or long, slow distance. On a whole, I was very happy with the latest version of the Free 3.0. Additionally, runners who do not enjoy thin socks may find that they have to order the next half-size up for the Free to ensure a comfortable fit. This, however, could vary greatly from runner to runner I’m used to a wide toebox and have larger-than-average feet (Men’s 12), so I am accustomed to a fit that is not as snug as that of the Free. Designed to fit snugly over the foot to prevent movement and blistering, I found the shoes to be somewhat constricting in the forefoot. The downside of the upper, however, is in its very snug fit. While many running shoes aren’t aesthetically pleasing enough to wear outside of a training session, the Nike Free 3.0 v4 certainly is. The upper is also a show-stealer, due in large part to its reflective material and bright design. This is an important design feature as even the smallest rock could cause irritation if stuck in the narrow space between the top of the foot and the upper. The one-piece, tongueless design also allows runners to slip the shoes off and on easily while also preventing rocks and debris from getting in between the foot and the upper material. The result is a sock-like fit throughout the entire shoe (as there is no heel counter) that is comfortable and reduces the likelihood of blisters. The nanoply layer stretches over a comfortable material that feels similar to neoprene. The mesh diamond pattern of the Nike Free 3.0 v4 is not only gorgeous, it is also built for function. The Phylite midsole material doubles as an outsole, reducing material where it matters while still creating a comfortable ride. While someone accustomed to a lighter running shoe could find the Free 3.0 to be too cushioned for their tastes, the average runner will likely find them to be a good mix of comfort and heft. New to the design this year is the inclusion of trans-tarsal cuts through the arch, reducing unnecessary cushioning elements while attempting to promote natural motion.įor a low-profile and slim heel to toe drop (down to 4mm, a 3mm drop from the 3.0 v3), the shoes are still remarkably comfortable and appropriately cushioned. The design, dubbed “sipes” in Nike’s terminology, allow for excellent surface traction. The checkered, segmented sole offers incredible contouring on uneven surfaces which allowed me to feel the road in ways that other shoes with similar cushioning could not. The Free line is known for its innovative sole design, which has set it apart from many other minimalist shoes on the market. Though snug, the shoe offers adaptive handling and a smooth experience, along with a generally positive performance for long and short workouts. All told, the Free 3.0 is a great choice for people seeking cushioning in a minimalist shoe. The upper’s fit and feel, however, was where I felt the most drastic change-the 3.0 was still quite comfortable, but not as breathable and light as that of the Free Run 2.0 (which, being a slightly more cushioned version, is to be expected). The midsole felt more cushioned, which was to be expected. The checkered pattern of the outsole was completely revised, adding contoured design through the arch and heel. Elements of the fit and ride remained the same, but I could tell the shoe had changed quite a bit from when I wore them in 2010. Having worn the Free Run 2.0 for about a year, I was familiar with the Nike Free experience and was eager to see how the 3.0 compared.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |