[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/fa/ - Fashion

View post   
File: 48 KB, 500x380, sam.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7647336 No.7647336[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Hey, /fa/, who decided that running shoes have to have the most obnoxious and hideous color combos?
Unless you go for bright ass white, it seems there are only 'off' versions of otherwise acceptable colors. (Like the purple or green you'd find on Barney, or neon blue or something.)

All I want is a pair of running shoes that aren't bright white, pink, or black- red or green as a preference, but they're fucking impossible to find. (Unless of you're willing to spend over a hundo for some Nikes or some shit.)

Why? Is it punishment for wearing running shoes 24/7 like an autistic weirdo?

>> No.7647344

>>7647336
>wearing running shoes 24/7

That's your main problem. When I run, I want high visibility shoes. Outside of that, you should spend more on your running shoes because your gait and your health are worth it.

>> No.7647379

>>7647344
I bike and walk everywhere, so they work out well.
If I'm going running properly, I have different shoes for that.

>> No.7647453
File: 1.31 MB, 1845x709, lunarglide.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7647453

>(Unless of you're willing to spend over a hundo for some Nikes or some shit)
>not being willing to spend $100 on a pair of quality shoes

embrace the autism

>> No.7647470

>>7647453
Unless you're a runner and investing in equipment, I think that's steep to spend on running shoes.

But, say I did. If I bought running shoes that cost that much, with every day wear (Walking everywhere for a start, with physical activity on top of that.), how long do you think they'd last? I can get about a semester or so out of Payless Champions.

>> No.7647500

On the topic of running shoes what are some nice ones <£100?

I don't care about wearing them any other time except for running so doesn't matter what they look like to an extent.

>> No.7647502

>>7647470
>Unless you're a runner and investing in equipment, I think that's steep to spend on running shoes.
These are your daily wear. They should be very comfortable and look nice. It's near impossible to find that at $30. Ever hear that parable about being too poor to buy cheap shoes?

Those lunarglides lasted me a year, and they would have lasted longer had I not stupidly thrown them in the washer after covering them in mud (I can still wear them, they're just ratty as fuck.) They cost $80. I would estimate that, had I not abused them on long hikes, fucking awful weather, and the gait of a 190lb 6'2" man, I could have gotten another year out of them. If you only touch pavement, they'll last a good while.

>> No.7647517

>>7647470
I've ran my whole life
and 100 is basically the least you should be spending on shoes if you don't want to mess your shit up, even if you're a casual jogger
also don't get nikes unless you really know what you're doing
get Saucony's or Mizuno's

>> No.7647522

>>7647500
Depends very much on your feet, the distance you run, and your climate. Go to a local fleet feet or somewhere similar to have them evaluate your stride if you are up above 20 miles/week.

>> No.7647527

>spending less than $150 on running shoes.
>expecting to get something good
Op, you're a pleb and a fuccboi

>> No.7647534

>>7647502
I never said I wanted $20 shoes, just not $100+

>> No.7647539

>>7647534
Filthy pleb.

>> No.7647540

>>7647534
the shoes you mentioned are available for $30

>> No.7647545

>>7647502
>>7647517
Also looking into these, thank you.

>> No.7647552

>>7647540
What, Champions? I know, but the color varies from year to year, and right now, they're doing horrible colors.
They don't seem to last very long either.

>> No.7647560

>>7647534
If you're not willing to spend over 100$ on a pair of shoes you shouldn't even make a thread on this board. Enjoy your pleb quality shoes that fall apart every 2 months.

>> No.7647567

I blame Jeremy Scott

>> No.7647585
File: 29 KB, 500x502, 1390259134380.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7647585

>>7647552
Alright, fuck it, here's the parable I just said. TL;DR save up for a nice pair of shoes because it'll save you money in the long run. It's not a perfect story but fuck you, you get the idea

“The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.

Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.

This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.”