Asics shoes

After much searching I recently bought a pair of running shoes that suit me perfectly. My wife discarded the box before I had a chance to note the model name. I am fairly sure they were called Asics Mars but I can't find any reference to a model of that name. Can anyone help please.
Jim.
Posted: 06/11/2002 at 12:25

Have you looked inside or under the shoe asics normally build the name onto the shoe somewhere.
I've not heard of the "asics mars" but I surpose they would be lightweight
Posted: 06/11/2002 at 12:49

There is nothing on or in the shoe itself but a return to the shop confirmed the model is Gel Mars. They could not give me any more information.
Posted: 07/11/2002 at 13:17

Wasnt Trotters Independent Traders was it?
Posted: 07/11/2002 at 13:32

Hello Jim,

I also own a pair asics gel mars, they are a neutral shoe according to the guy in the shop. Having said that I am a mild over-pronator and they provide enough support for me. Only troubles with them, I get a blister under my arch on my right foot on my longer run.

Hope this helps

Rachael.
Posted: 07/11/2002 at 15:40

When I last went to buy some running shoes in Bradford, they tried to sell me some Asics. The model I'd never heard of before but the selling point was that this range was a limited issue with each pair individually numbered. I couldn't see the point of this (still can't) but it does suggest that Asics produce shoes for a limited edition market so the chances are that the Mars may be one of these.
Posted: 07/11/2002 at 16:02

Jim, where did you buy them? I know that ascis rename their shoes for the mass market (JJB etc), my husband bought some Jupiters (or was it Neptunes) from a high street store, they were similar but not the same as the Culumus a few years back. I think Ascis use it as a way of getting rid of old stock. Just an idea.
Posted: 07/11/2002 at 16:12

I have an old pair of asics that i bought from JJB before i became more interested in running.Not sure what model but they feel/felt fine apart from on my long run.That's when I also get a blister on my right foot medial arch! Is that a common fault of the shoe or a common site for blisters anyway? Does it suggest I need a shoe with more or less medial support? Any thoughts?
Posted: 09/11/2002 at 19:10

Am fascinated by this discussion about Asics shoes. I have worn what I believe to be Asics Gel Kayano for a few years and have used them for the FLM - and have no complaints. However, the first pair - for which I paid the high Kayano price, have written on them in various places - Asics, Duomax and Gel. No mention of Kayano - so how do I know it was a Kayano. The current pair have Gel Kayano written on the tongue - so I guess that is what they are. Now I need to replace them and I see advertisements for Gel Kayano VII, Gel Kayano, Kayano 01, Kayano 02, and now I see an Asics Gel Kayano 1X is coming on the market. I really do want to stick with Kayano but can't risk buying if I don't know what I am getting. Please could someone out there - preferably Asics - explain a} the differences and b} the reasons for so many confusing name changes. Ironically many of them appear to have exactly the same descriptions and advertising blurb - only the name is different!
Posted: 13/11/2002 at 19:10

Pussy,
The increase in number is each years update, so 01 is very old & 08 is the current model. If you buy 01's cheap your wasteing your money because as shoes get older even if the sit in a box on the self. The glue gets harder & harder therefore they have less & less cutioning.
I know it's tempting to go for the bargin £20 shoes but it might cost you more in phisyo bills.
I try to buy the current model of shoe as cheap as possible or maybe the model just out of date.
Duomax & Gel are the cushing system's that the shoes are built on.
I know about this because I have a friend who own's a running shop.
I hope this help a little.
Posted: 13/11/2002 at 20:09

Slo mo you are quite right about asics making 'exclusive' shoes for high street stores (many other brands do this too), in the majority they are not 'technical running shoes' but okay shoes & cross trainers. Big tim very correct about buying very old shoes, as they do start to firm up and the glue goes off when just stored away in a cold stock room for a long time.
From experience even the specialist running stores don't stock the whole range of running shoes from each company, for example asics have 5 support shoes, 6 neut/cush, 2 lightweight, 2 motion control, 2 racing and then off roaders etc.
Out of these I wouldn't recommend any level of consistant running in 4 of the models, and these are the ones that high street chain store do will stock as funny names. To be completely 'one sided' I can't stress how important it is the try on the shoes and get the advice of a specialist store, being a biomechanic and specialist store owner. sorry for the rant
Posted: 14/11/2002 at 09:23

Big Tim,
Thank you for your answer and your advice. VERY helpful and I will be guided by it. Thanks also to Jethro Boot. How about naming a name, Jethro. Which of the Asics might be best for me? I run marathons, have normal feet and am lightweight but am very old. Commonsense tells me to go for maximum cushioning but recent RW advice suggests stability as priority. I live in the sticks and specialist shoe shops haven't found us yet.
Posted: 16/11/2002 at 15:24

well, i bought a pair of asics froma a large jjb superstore. they were fine for ahorter distances, about two years ago wen i bagan running. then i loged more miles on the road, adn the shoes, althought they stayed toghether, they wernt cushioned at all. they weren't one of the numbered models which ascis has, i think it was an old model raciong shoe called the spacerunner. not the best, i wound up with two anda half months of shinsplints for my pennypinching. but then again it taught me to run on sand, so some good came of the injury after all~!

:S
b_phil
Posted: 03/12/2002 at 00:45

My husband's just come back from JJB Sports with a pair of Asics Mars.He usually buys Nike Pegasus but was seduced by the sale price of the Asics.When he got home he had second thoughts and doubts about them.I've tried to find out more about them and failed.Run & Become have never heard of them and neither have Bourne Sports.Should he take them back?Any more info on the mysterious Mars??
Posted: 15/01/2003 at 18:01

I'm starting out training for a half marathon and bought Asics Mars from JJB sport, the chap said 'these are just in and have more gell than the other model and are neutral' I too wanted to find out more and can't, my pair have TQ20Y printed on the tongue (if Jim Coats wants to compare). I'm going to email ASICS and JJB.

I did my first 2 miles on them today and they felt much better than the worn out shoes that I used in the previous two weeks. Apparently you should replace them every 400 miles or so, I'll get some pro help then I think.
Posted: 16/01/2003 at 17:19

After a long gap from running, I went to JJB to buy some 'start up' pairs. I used to use Asics so bought the Gel Mars (you CAN buy them at some independents but more expensively) and a Nike Pegasus (the 'market leader' they said). I was physically uncomfortable on the Nikes after a few miles, but the Asics were like slippers. Once the distance/frequency went up JJB etc were effectively 'out-of-their- depth' and I have several better Asics for various distances inclusing a lovely pair of Nimbus IV's for the London (from Run And Become). But I still buy the perfectly ok and very comfy Gel Mars from JJB for recovery runs/lunchtime jaunts etc- its the same cushioning in the heel after all just less of it!
Posted: 28/02/2003 at 10:36

I have not found my perfect running shoe yet I recently bought a pair of Asic Eagle but I am not sure if they suit my main on road running any suggestions on a good make for a heavy road runner.
Posted: 25/03/2003 at 20:11

I am sure Jacqueline your not a 6 ft and 14 stoner like myself. But for the heavy overpronators out there, some info.
I have Asics Gel Kayano and Asics MC+. Kayano a little more cushioning but not as good support and very good for 5 and 10 Km races. Asics MC+ have been excellent for long distance, used to suffer from sore lower legs frequently, but ran last years Belfast Marathon and in training again. Used the MC+ for long roads runs and really combat my over pronation with brilliant support and adequate cushioning.
Although now thinking of trying Brooks Beast? The MC+ are near the end of the road after, I would estimate over 500 miles.
Posted: 25/03/2003 at 21:26

Having looked at this JJB shoe recently it has exactly the same sole as the ASIC GEL Cumulus '99, but with a re-designed upper. Looks like ASIC have used "old" materials to give JJB a unique shoe. That said, I don't believe this is a bad base for a budget shoe and it should perform perfectly well for the neutral, cushioned market it is aimed at.
Posted: 25/06/2003 at 00:39

I've recently picked up a pair of Gel Mars from a local JJB, and am really pleased with them. The original price on the box was £69.99, but I picked them up for £30.

Bizarrely, I'm generally an UK 8 or 8 1/2, but found a US 8 to be an ideal fit. Particularly odd as all other I'm at least a UK 8 with all other Asics models that I've tried.

Here's all the info off the box:

TQ20Y - GEL-MARS
5201 - MEDIEVAL/WHITE/GOLD

Hope this helps in some way.
Posted: 20/08/2003 at 21:38

I wonder if anyone can help me out. I started running a few years ago and after a while I bought a pair of Gel Preleus. They felt fine and were a lot better then the normal trainers I had before. However, I believe that they have now reached the end of their life and I am looking at replacing them. I had my feet scanned on one of those machines and was suggested that I buy the Gel Empire. Reading above it says that this is a stability shoe but the Preleus is a neutral shoe. Is it wise to change shoe type. One issue I have had is that lately I have got really bad blisters on both feet on my arches on long runs. I am also getting pain in my left knee which is the foot that apparently requires a stability shoe. Is this a sign that the shoes I have need replacing or that I have the wrong shoe sort at the moment. Any help would be appreciated as it is not a cheep investment.
Posted: 22/11/2004 at 22:39

Peter - Asics seem to be notorious for causing blisters on the arches of your feet. However, that seems to be before your feet are used to them rather than after you have used them a lot. But, bear in mind that you should change your running shoes every 400-500 miles, so if you have been running in them for a few years, I'd definately change them. Go to a specialist shop and get fitted properly. It will probably cost you more, but physio bills will cost you loads if you end up with injuries caused by running in the wrong type of shoes. Once you have got a pair and are happy with them, you'll often find them cheaper elsewhere (in the ad's in the back of the RW mag). So basically, your first pair will cost a lot but subsequent pairs sholudn't be so bad.
Posted: 23/11/2004 at 07:43

Peter I have had the same problem with some asics shoes - blisters on the arches. one thing to check is to lift the sole insert and feel the inside of the shoe where it is constructed round the arch. on some 'cheaper' stability shoes such as the asics 2090/2100 there is a seam and i found that over a long run the pressure on this was probably causing a little bit of friction resulting in some nasty blisters as it pushed through the padding in the sole insert. the asics kayano is more expensive and doesn't have this problem. mine have never caused me blisters.

if you are getting a stability shoe also try the brooks adrenaline which i really recommend and is about the price of the 2090/2100. if you are getting knee injuries it sounds like you could do with some more stability
Posted: 23/11/2004 at 08:34

I've never had blisters using asics but i've never tried the gel mars never heard of those i'll try and find out which asics i have
Posted: 01/01/2005 at 13:55