|
Oct 2019
4:16pm, 18 Oct 2019
9,158 posts
|
larkim
Spring like mechanism = or "foam" as we call it in all of our existing shoes.
And using phrases like "mechanical advantage" that he and I would have heard at school seems to me he's continuing with his mis-directed thinking about them. Isn't that all about levers and pulleys etc?
The more I think about the way they work, the more I'm happy for them to be around. There's no magic, there's just more efficiency.
|
|
Oct 2019
4:22pm, 18 Oct 2019
5,591 posts
|
jda
I think the longer leg length counts as mechanical advantage in this context.
|
|
Oct 2019
4:24pm, 18 Oct 2019
9,161 posts
|
larkim
Ah, I knew I'd get hoisted by something there.
That makes sense!
|
|
Oct 2019
4:51pm, 18 Oct 2019
2,350 posts
|
B Rubble
I believe there's a growing feeling that recreational runners paying £240 for shoes is a bit like an overweight cyclist buying a £5,000 bike. I can understand that there is an issue with being able to "buy" a better performance, but who should criticise a runner who has, say, been trying to break 4 hours for 5 years, still trains fairly hard and sees this as a way to achieve that goal. I suppose my opinion might change when the AlfaFly goes on the market at £400 or more and the V70 marathon record goes down to 2:25.
|
|
Oct 2019
4:58pm, 18 Oct 2019
9,164 posts
|
larkim
They've definitely managed to normalise the cost, partly simply by having the shoes available in the market quite readily.
If the magic is just some stiffness + PEBAX, it can't surely be long before others start to ape the process. You don't need carbon fibre, a stiff plastic would do for a cheaper alternativ, sacrificing some weight. Once day to day trainers catch up with some of the tech, and the the racing shoe advantage disappears, we'll be wondering why we had any debate about the shoes at all.
|
|
Oct 2019
5:30pm, 18 Oct 2019
29,537 posts
|
SPR
It's been more than two years since these shoes appeared, if it was that easy it would have been done by now.
Patents or something else is preventing others from doing it.
|
|
Oct 2019
5:30pm, 18 Oct 2019
5,592 posts
|
jda
The worry (my worry) is that there is currently no obvious limit to the advantages that could be gained by increasingly extreme designs. It makes it a very unlevel playing field. It may all shake out into something reasonable...but there is no guarantee of that.
|
|
Oct 2019
6:51pm, 18 Oct 2019
115 posts
|
AJLB
jda - there must be some limit of practicality - the risk of injury in increasing your "lever" length must be quite high, especially over marathon distance, and that's without the chance of falling off what would be platform shoes and breaking an ankle! 
|
|
Oct 2019
7:11pm, 18 Oct 2019
5,593 posts
|
jda
Well to take one extreme example, IIRC pistorius' blades were limited by detailed analysis specific to the (customised) design. Is that where we are (or should be) heading with shoes? Surely better to just create a simple blanket rule (thickness) that solves the problem at source.
I already posted an Amazon link to springy stilts (don't seem to be available right now) that users seemed to enjoy running on. If they are illegal there has to be a rule.
|
|
Oct 2019
7:14pm, 18 Oct 2019
15,433 posts
|
Bazoaxe
BR - or a runner who has been for example trying to break 3 hrs for over 10 years
|
