moving "up" from Asics 1160s

paulj38

You would probably get on well with the Cumulus, but you might not like the feel of it if you are accustomed to the Nimbus.  The main difference is that the Cumulus has a more responsive less cushioned forefoot. Try a pair on and see what you think. 

If you have got on well with the Nimbus in the past, and gone through N pairs without problems, then the low risk option would be to stick with it. 

Hi Ben,

Would you mind pointing out what the main difference between the kayano and the 2160 is apart from the price. I have got on well with kayano for a long time but have been thinking about trying some 2160s. Your opinion would be appreciated as you seem to know what you are on about. Cheers.

OK Big Footed 1

The Kayano is more supportive than the 2160, but a person who gets on with the support of one will more often than not be O.K in the other. 

The feel is very different.  The 2160 is less cushioned than the Kayano on the forefoot area, but it has a squishy pad located under the knuckle at the base of the big toe.  When you try a 2160 on, this will be immediately obvious. 

Again, the low risk option is probably to stick with the Kayano if you have got on with it previously, but try a 2160 on in a shop and see if you like the feel. 

That is really informative and good advice. I will try a pair on now as you suggest. I have been thinking about it for a while but didnt really know what the differences were-  I feel I can now make an informed decision. Cheers for that !

just to update- didnt like the 2160s, have opted for brooks gts11 which so far feel very good. cheers

I've been a long-time Gel 1000-series runner (over a decade!), in the last few years averaging over 400 miles between changes.

In Nov-11 I moved from my second pair of 1150s (about 420 miles to each pair - I record all my runs with a Garmin) to a pair of 1160s - it took about 90 miles of running before I got the unmistakable signs of worn-out shoes (Achilles tendon tenderness is the first thing that usually happens for me - I think due to over-stretch once the cushioning in the shoe's heel wears out); ill-advisedly, I completed that particular week's schedule in the shoes (I had trouble believing they had actually worn out) and it's taken 10 days for the symptoms to subside.

This topic is a few months old now, so I'd be really interested to hear if anyone else has noticed a severe degradation in the lifespan of their Gel 1160 shoes compared to previous models. I've had a couple of pairs of pretty much every 1000-series iteration with no problems except for the (I think) Gel 1110, which I vaguely remember as unsuitable for some reason.

BACKGROUND: I will typically run an average of 30 miles on-road per week; my weight is essentially stable; I have tried other makes & models (off the back of various gait analysis sessions over the years) for moderate over-pronation, but never been able to get along with them (including Gel 2120s a few years ago, and Mizuno Wave Rider 12 (?) in 2010), typically resulting in shin splints & achey knees in very short order.

Just an update to my previous post:  the other trainers I've tried over the years includes the Asics Gel 2120s and the Mizuno Inspire 6 (these were the most recent departure from the 1000-series - a costly mistake at £85!).

This might be a bit of an amateur's question, but is it possible to buy a good pair of "neutral" shoes and then get the over-pronation benefits of the Asics Gel 1000-series using some sort of inserts/insoles?

Indeed it is, Barry.  Superfeet and others make stability inserts.  Many people with mild over-pronation achieve great results with stability insoles in neutral shoes.  An experienced and knowledgable staff member at a specialist running shop can assess your gait and advise appropriate shoe/insole combinations.  However, other shop employees can spout dangerous misinformation. Best ask lots of questions