So I want to start exercising more. I figure my main barrier clothing wise is shoes, especially since I have no idea what kind of exercise I want to do. So I’ve been shopping around.
Payless has the cheapest options, Converse at probably less than $40. Places at the mall and department style stores have shoes much more expensive, up to over $100.
Is there a reason quality-wise to spend more? Since I won’t be wearing them all the time, I figure it’ll take longer for a Vimes boots situation to come up. Is this an incorrect assumption?
Well, it really, really depends on what kind of exercise you’ll be doing. (Pilates, yoga, and Russian Kettlebell are all done barefoot, so give those a try!)
The $40 PayLess shoes might be OK for running/serious walking, or they could leave you in a lot of pain. If you’re going to be running, it would be in your best interests to get fitted at a running store.
Ditto on the “depends what kind of exercise you’ll be doing” thing.
My exercise consists of going to the gym regularly (I’m king of the stationary bikes), and I wear whatever was the cheapest sneaker that they had at Walmart whenever I need a new pair every couple of years.
If you’re a runner, that would be a Very Bad Idea - but I’m not a runner.
It’s important to know what kind of exercise you will be doing to find the right type of shoes and price range. For example, court shoes are not going to help if you’re looking to go jogging. I’ll assume you’ll be doing general workout at a gym and will be wearing cross training shoes. For a decent pair of those, expect to pay about $100-$150. More expensive ones will run you $200 or more.
As a general rule, the cheaper the shoes are, the less cushioning and stability/support you will get. This leads to discomfort when exercising and you will not be encouraged to continue with a full workout. Even worse, you will get blisters, chafing or promote a foot or leg injury. Shoes are one of the most important piece of equipment in sports and you don’t want to cheap out on something that will support your weight and stress of working out.
You’ll still need good shoes, and I’d recommend a specialty running store – some of them are trained to watch you run and give you a (very basic) gait analysis so they can recommend shoes best suited to you.
For running, you might find something decent on sale for $85 but I wouldn’t spend less than that. I mostly end up in the $90-120ish range, as running is my primary exercise. You don’t want to mess around with bad shoes when running – they can seriously mess with your feet, legs, hips, and/or spine and it can take months or years to work out and heal, even if it’s “just” spastic muscles from running with bad alignment. (Ask me how I know this… ) Those are some real injuries, and in the meantime you’ll be barely walking, never mind running.
That said, if you expect to be doing any reasonable amount of load-bearing exercise (like running, walking, aerobic dance) I’d invest in a decent pair of cross-trainers at least, if not specifically running shoes. If you’ll primarily be doing non-load-bearing exercise (bike, rowing, swimming), cheaper comfortable shoes are probably fine.
Seriously, that much?? I just double-checked online (Amazon, not that that’s where I’d necessarily buy shoes from, but to get an idea what’s available), and there are plenty of athletic shoes (including cross-trainers) in a variety of well-known brands in the $40-$90 range. What’s wrong with them?
Cross-trainers are not generally suitable for running only. Doing a wide variety of activities is what they’re built for.
A typical runner will experience 2-3 times bodyweight of impact forces. Multiply by 800-1200 steps per mile(appx) and multiply by 300-500 miles and you have a lot of pounding the shoe must absorb and endure.
Be aware that the materials that make up the cushioning and support features will age-harden. Don’t get suckered into buying last years model on clearance.
Please do not buy converse sneakers. They are nearly a century out of date and are inferior to modern shoes for athletic endeavor of every kind save weight lifting.
Obviously, more expensive products will fit better and last longer (on average), but I don’t think you need to spend $100-200 on a pair of sneakers. These $20 shoes will perform acceptably for light aerobic work in a gym. Sure, they probably don’t fit perfectly, but people wear high heels and all sorts of other terrible footwear that fit much worse. For what it’s worth, a lot of sneakers in the $50-100 price range are fashion shoes that don’t have particularly good fit, materials or design. The uglier the sneaker, probably the better its quality.
What’s wrong with the $40 shoes is that they are cheaply made, probably won’t fit your feet properly when you first wear them, and will start wearing out almost immediately.
For $90, you might get a pair of quality shoes, but if you buy them online, or from Payless or some other ‘size it yourself’ store, you’re quite unlikely to get a good fit. Do you pronate? How’s your arch length? Are both your feet the same size? A store that specializes in athletic footwear will be able to find a shoe that properly fits your foot…and instead of $90, you might have to pay $100-120. But that pair of shoes will last at least twice as long as the discount pair from Payless, and you’ll be at significantly lesser risk of developing foot problems from wearing them.
You can buy a car anywhere from $12,000 to over $100,000. There’s nothing inherently wrong with them in that they all get you from point A to point B. However, we all have necessities, preferences and budgets. Pick the one that fits your criteria. If a certain brand and price range is important to you, go for it. Just remember, as a general rule, you get what you pay for.
I don’t believe this, if it’s supposed to mean that price is a reliable guide to quality. Sometimes, part of what you pay for is hype, or fashion, or advertising, or status, or a seller seeing what the market will bear and hoping to sell to buyers who aren’t price-conscious or who just assume that higher price means better quality.
The part of “you get what you pay for” that’s true is that there’s a certain level below which the manufacturer can’t afford to use good-quality materials and careful construction to produce a good product, so any consumer buying below such a price level should expect to get inferior goods. The problem is that I don’t know enough about shoes to know where that price level is for the kind of shoes the OP is talking about.
I spent over $100 on my latest pair of exercise sneakers. I’m not a runner, but I do Zumba and Body Pump (weightlifting plus cardio).
If you’re starting out on a machine, you can probably go less expensive, but as you get more into it, you will find the higher quality, expensive shoes will last longer and provide better support.
My suggestion then would be more of a high-top court shoe than a running shoe; get some more ankle support happening. Working where I do (a shipping center) I see a lot of people going from basically average life to what amounts to a work-out. Running shoes are more for straight-line motion and can cause issues with a more calisthenics like program/action. If you are average weight, tennis low-tops or if you are a little heavy basketball.
(For all the flak they catch, your basic Chuck Taylor isn’t a bad shoe to start with)
I have a pair of Nike cross-trainers that cost all of 50 bucks, maybe $60 full price. They just happened to be a good value. I would have spent more. I wear them for weight lifting and the elliptical and general gym stuff. They’re pretty great, but starting to show some wear after only 4 months. They’re nice and stable for most lifting. (I just deadlift barefoot.). They would suck for running.
I also have cycling shoes for spin class. They cost $100 plus $20 for the cleats. Worth every penny.
I echo everybody who says that it all depends on what you’re doing. Spend what you have to on the right shoe. It’s worth it.