Review : Skechers GoRun Ultra

• Type : Maximalist
• Use : Road
• Price : $90-$110

Introduction
Sometimes, I get desperate. I’ve been experiencing a weird knee pain every once in a while for more than a year now, and I’ve never figured out what causes it. One thing for sure, I know asphalt doesn’t help it. To get rid of my problem, I’ve followed about every piece of advice I’ve been given, except maybe for one…

“Run in Hoka’s, man”.

No way. That goes against everything I think to be true. But then again, I have to admit I’ve seen tons of runners, some very good ones, too, use them and harp about the benefits of super-cushioned shoes. So right after my last asphalt adventure, I had the Ottawa Marathon coming up and I figured, this is a good a time as ever to see if maximalism is for me or not.

I had a pair of Skechers GoRun Ultra lying somewhere in my closet. They’d been sent to me to be reviewed about a million years ago (sorry, Skechers!) and I’d never got the nerves to take them out for a spin. Now with a bum knee still hurting from the last time I ran on asphalt and a road marathon to go, I thought the time had come.


Road test
I showed up at the marathon starting line in my brand-spanking new, never-before-worn bright red Ultras, feeling like I was wearing moon boots. The cushioning is so massive, it actually makes you taller. Any notion of proprioception is erased and flex also becomes a distant memory. I felt like I was thumping around with my feet shoved in a pair of giant marshmallows.

The gun went off, and my first thoughts were to try and maintain as much of a forefoot strike as I could. Pretty much impossible. This is a midstrike-at-best situation; there’s over 40mm of material between your foot and the ground. The sole feels square and flat, which is not unpleasant, even if it doesn’t “roll forward” like I expected it to with its monstrous 14mm heel-to-toe drop.


Analysis
You have to understand that I come from a minimalist background, running in shoes that keep my feet close to the ground and as close to zero-drop as possible. So for me, wearing the Ultras was overwhelmingly different and an experience for which I don’t have a lot of reference points. I have to say that they did an admirable job of mitigating the pounding from the asphalt and absorbing any irregularity in the ground under me. I couldn’t quite shake off the feeling of running in moon boots, but that didn’t bother me much for most of the course. As the miles piled up, I was increasingly pleased with how fresh my legs felt.

Straight elongated leg,
toes pointing up...
Awfully looks like heel striking.

However, this massive shoe quite literally transforms the way you run. You have to basically yank your leg up using your hip muscles. I’m used to pushing off with my toes and landing lightly on the front of my foot; while wearing the Ultra, you kick your leg up and thrust it forward, elongating your stride. I’ve seen some race pictures where I quite obviously heel strike, which is consistent with the slight wear pattern that formed under the shoe. That’s a big worry on the long term.

I managed to finish my marathon with a less-than-optimal body, a finish I attribute at least in part to the thick protection of the Ultra’s Resalyte cushioning. The pain and unease I felt toward the end, I’m pretty sure, can be attributed to the radical difference in running form, to which my various next-day muscle sores can attest.

Analysis
It’s hard for me to see the Ultra as a usual, every day running shoe. I think it can be useful to the runner who wants a shoe for every situation and who contemplates running long distances on pavement when previous similar experiences have proven painful. I think it is worthy of noting that it’s really hard to run fast in these shoes because of their inherent design philosophy. I’d add it might be a great mitigation shoe for someone who’s heavier and starts being active again and / or experiences pain, although I remain convinced pain should be a guide in respecting one’s body, not something to be masked by technical solutions. But that’s another debate.


Conclusion
While Resalyte once again proves its worth, I think there is such a thing as too much. However, it’s obvious to me I probably would’ve had a very hard time finishing my marathon if I’d wore anything that resembled my usual shoes, because asphalt just hurts. The impact absorption capabilities of the thick, cushioned GoRun Ultra will, ultimately, help you last longer on unforgiving hard surfaces. So I’m left with a conundrum; stop running long distances on pavement… or wear maximalist shoes when I do.


High points

• Resalyte. Like, a metric ton of it.
• Obvious impact mitigation
• Very reasonable weight, at 9 oz
• More than half the price of a pair of Hoka’s

Low points

• 14-mm drop is way too much
• Outsole lugged design is questionable; this can’t be a trail shoe
• Will change your running form if you are a forefoot runner

The equipment for this personal review was supplied by Skechers free of charge, without any conditions.

Review : Skechers GoMeb Speed 2

• Type : Neutral shoe
• Use : Road running
• Price : $115

Introduction
The GoMeb Speed 2 is the next generation in the GoMeb series. The shoe is designed with competition in mind and feels like a more cushioned version of a traditional racing flat. Like its predecessors in the “Go” series, the outsole features the pod system, which is intended to offer some slight motion control without the use of complex mechanisms. The presence of the signature “stability plate” inside the sole almost questions if this shoe can be deemed neutral, but the overall lightweight and flexibility leave little to ponder about the GoMeb’s minimalist design philosophy.

Road test
When I tested the first model, I’d taken the guess that the GoMeb would be suitable for long runs on roads, which sadly I couldn’t try for myself since my feet inexplicably changed sizes last year. So this time around, I took the GoMeb Speed 2’s exclusively on longer runs, namely a 30K daily commute to and back from work.

The speed sensation and lightness are definitely the key elements of the shoe. I also very much liked the new construction of the upper, which feels like they applied a flexible varnish on the pressure points to make them stronger. Add very minimal stitching and you get a shoe that is ultra light, ultra flexible and very comfortable.

Analysis
There are really good things about Skechers that apply to almost all their products. The Resalyte material is the most obvious; a feather-light sole material that has just the right bounce without taking anything away from total flexibility. In this perspective, the GoMeb delivers fully.

The pod system, called GoImpulse sensors, however, had a strange effect on my feet. It seemed some of the pods would push up through the sole against my arches and cause some aches over longer distances (60K and beyond). This was confirmed when I wore the GoMeb’s daily on a recent trip to Europe, which involved long hours of walking and standing.

Although I think the pod system is clever and well-placed in more supportive models like the GoRun, I’m not sure what it delivers in a shoe that has speed in its DNA. By definition, if you buy and use racing flats, you don’t require the shoe to have any form of motion control. Stability should not be a component of a racer; flex and freedom should be put forward.

With that said, I think the GoMeb Speed 2 is an excellent shoe for shorter road runs, in the 5K to half-marathon range. It has more material under your foot than a typical racing flat, which adds a welcome addition of comfort without feeling any more bulky. I will definitely keep and use it for fast road races and shorter daily commutes.

High points

• Resalyte, as always
• Simply built, yet very comfortable
• Comfier than a pure racing flat
• Can’t argue with the price tag

Low points

• The use of the pod system is questionable

The equipment for this personal review was supplied by Skechers, free of charge, without any conditions.

Review : Skechers GoRun Meb Speed

• Type : Neutral shoe
• Use : Road running
• Price : 110$

Introduction
Meb Keflezighi is seriously fast. He's been working with Skechers for a while now, first in designing the GoRun and then his own signature shoe, which resembles a racing flat version of the typical Skechers models. The shoe is low, super light and looks like it's on fire. Will it make me faster?

Road Test
My favorite Skechers shoe, design-wise, was the GoBionic. I thought it offered the lightest, fastest feel of the family - until I tried the Meb Speed. This shoe is very, very light, but it offers some interesting features which add a certain stiffness to it that I really like.

I took my Meb's out for several shorter runs on road and concrete pathways. They are light and feel fast, just like agressive racing flats. They offer a little bit more cushioning, too, which makes me thing they would be a better choice for a longer run, like a road ultra.

Once again, the Resalyte sole material delivers fully, as it offers great flexibility and proprioception, yet cushions your foot just enough for great comfort. The overall weight of the Meb Speed is a featherly 6 oz and the upper fabric feels breathy and light.

The outsole features a pod system called GoImpulse Sensors that resembles other Skechers models, but is much lower and less in the way. The big difference with the Meb Speed is the «stability plate» located under the arch, which attracted some negative comments from other runners and bloggers. In all honesty, I can't even feel it; the only thing that bugs me a little bit is the gaping hole under the plate, which acts as a rock sucker. But other than that, the shoe feels awesome.

Analysis
The Meb Speed is a fine addition to Skechers' line of running shoes. It offers the best of a racing flat while still featuring minimal cushioning for long road rides. The fit is perfect and the shoe feels fast and solid. This is definitely my new shoe of choice for road racing. On a slightly irrelevant sidenote, I wore my Meb Speed's for a desert ultra marathon a couple weeks ago... and they are not a trail shoe.


High points

• Resalyte. 'Nuff said.
• Light and fast
• Solid feel

Low points

• Outsole hole is a rock sucker

The equipment for this personal review was supplied by Skechers, free of charge, without any conditions.

Review : Skechers GoRun2

• Type : Neutral
• Use : Road running
• Price : About $80-90

Introduction
This is the third Skechers shoe I get to review. The two previous models showed some promise, but also carried some flaws that prevented me from choosing to use the shoes after the review. The original GoRun was one of these models, so when I received a pair of GoRun2, I thought maybe I was in for a bit of the same.

First impression
The very first thing I did was flip the shoe and look at the sole to see if the “pods” were still there. Although there were still pod-like lugs, they did not look or feel like their oversized, protruding predecessors and were distributed differently around the sole. They resembled the rest of the sole pattern and went all the way around the forefoot area. Interesting.

It also seemed to me that the shoe’s profile had been considerably reduced, although it kept its signature upward curve at the heel.

Road test
I did with the GoRun2 what I had with the original model; I took it out for a couple run commutes. Immediately after putting the shoes on, I noticed they had a very different feel, which was closer to wearing a light neutral shoe. No more feeling the slightly-elevated, slightly-supported arch that I had disliked in the GoRun. No more “tilt-backward” feeling from the curved heel, either.

The slip-out insole got ditched early on

I took my sweet time to test the shoe out, at first to make sure I wouldn’t get all sorts of weird aches as I would up the mileage. But I quickly realized the GoRun2 is a very different animal than the GoRun; it felt increasingly comfortable and performed very well, even in winter conditions.

The only thing that went sideways (literally) is the insole, which was sliding out of the shoe as I ran, something I’ve never seen happen in any footwear. I was quick to throw the insole away, and I never looked back as the shoe is perfectly wearable without this mild annoyance.

Long-distance test
I grew fonder of the GoRun2 as I ran with it, and it became one of my first choices as a commuter. I also very much liked how the GoRun2 behaves when running fast, because I think it offers just the right amount of sole material to absorb the extra shock while remaining very light. My confidence in the GoRun2 increased enough that I decided to put it to an ultimate test; I wore them at the Ottawa Marathon yesterday.

Since I began trail running and strayed further and further from the roads, I find it increasingly difficult to run long distances on pavement because the hard, regular surface takes a heavy toll on my legs and feet. It requires a clockwork-type movement repeated to infinity, as opposed to the irregular, side-stepping, root-jumping dance of trail running. Wearing the GoRun2 made it a breeze by reducing my fatigue and allowing me to run as hard as I wanted in the downhills without feeling the added shock to my lower body. And I have to add that, after testing 3 models of Skechers shoes, I have become a fan of Resalyte, the soft, yet solid sole material they use in all their models.

Conclusion
I think Skechers has finally built a shoe that is a serious contender in the road-running world and that should be considered by ultra road runners looking for a softer ride on their long distance outings. The GoRun2 is soft, flexible, light, roomy and breathable. As an all-around running shoe, I’d be hard-pressed to find it any major flaw. This is the one Skechers model I have included in my personal shoe selection and will continue running in.


High points

• Resalyte is simply one of the best sole materials I know
• Roomy toebox allows for ample toe splaying
• Surprisingly grippy for winter road running
• Comfortable for both speed and long distance

Low points

• Just ditch that annoying insole

The equipment for this personal review was supplied by Skechers, free of charge, without any conditions.

Review : Skechers GoBionic

• Type : Minimal shoe
• Use : Road running
• Price : About $90

Introduction
I was left sceptical of Skechers’ ability to produce good running shoes after a first review of their GoRun model, which featured an outward-rounded midfoot section aiming to correct the landing position of heel strikers. However, I had been impressed with the Resalyte material of the sole, with the upper fabric and the overall quality of construction. So when they told me they had created a new, minimalist model using these same features, I was curious to see the result.

First impression
The GoBionic looks like a lowered version of the GoRun, but that’s pretty much where the comparison ends. At just under 6oz, it feels extremely light and features a removable insole for those wanting “as little shoe” as possible. The partly-hollowed outsole is not unlike the original Nike Free and flexes in every conceivable way. The “pod” idea is still present in the form of what Skechers calls “M-Strike Pads”, which are 8 zones strategically placed underfoot where the landing and toe-off occur. I was surprised to see that the heel area is still rounded upwards in what now seems to be Skechers’ signature profile, but the shoe is presented as “Zero-Drop”.

Road Test
I decided to take out the insole to lower the shoe as much as possible. With over 11 mm of padding, the GoBionic has plenty of material between you and the asphalt, even over very long distances. The first thing I noticed however, after taking only a couple of steps, is that the Resalyte sole material really delivers its promise; without being too soft, it offers a smooth, very comfortable ride. The grooves in the sole behaved exactly as expected and let the shoe flex and move in synch with my feet. And even though the GoBionic had that scary profile with the heel rounding upwards, it feels as good and natural as any other “Zero-Drop” shoe out there. Not bad. Not bad at all.

M-Strike pads and
grooved outsole

The more I ran in the GoBionic, the more I liked it. Until it rained. The shoe revealed its only major flaw, which spawns from the fact that the grooves in the outsole go all the way to the bottom of the midsole. Even plain damp asphalt will make your feet wet in a couple minutes, as the flexing parts in the outsole seem to literally suck the water in. Less than a dozen steps on wet grass will soak your feet instantly, making the shoe a no-no for any trail running, no matter how light. Bummer.




Conclusion
I have run more than 200 km in the GoBionic so far and I will keep running in them for my office commute and road running in fair weather. I love how they ride and their featherweight feel, and I have to add that I like how the shoe “falls” on the ground (is it the pads?) without feeling like there’s a ton of mushy material between me and the action.

High points

• Resalyte sole material really delivers
• Adapted to barefoot (no socks) wear
• Super light, flexible shoe

Low points

• Will soak your feet in seconds on wet pavement
• Not for narrow feet

UPDATE. Skechers now offers a waterproof version of the GoBionic.

The equipment for this personal review was supplied by Skechers, free of charge, without any conditions.

Review : Skechers GoRun

• Type : Transition shoe
• Use : Road running
• Price : About $90

Introduction
Before I met one of their reps at a race, I didn’t know Skechers had hopped on the minimalist bandwagon. As a matter of fact, I knew little about the company, except for the Shape-Ups models that left me dubious, to say the least. The rep explained that the GoRun was a shoe intended to help runners transition from a heel strike to a more natural, mid-foot strike pattern and suggested I try them for myself. I took a couple steps in them and was unconvinced, but curious. So I decided I would give them a real try.


First impression
This shoe has a unique design with the outsole curving upwards at the heel and 9 “pods” at the mid-foot, which elevate and curve it downwards. The idea here is that if you try to heel strike, the GoRun will correct your posture by “rolling forward” to your mid-foot, thus theoretically helping you adopt a more natural stride.


Road test
I ran two times with the GoRun. The first, a 5k commute, left me feeling very strange because of the elevated arch and the presence of the “pods”, which I felt impeded my forefoot strike. On the second run, the way back home from work, I had to take the shoes off at 3K and finish barefoot, because my arches hurt and my stride was totally off.


After discussing with the Skechers rep again, it became quite clear that this shoe is not made for runners who have a forefoot strike, which means it is not a minimal or barefoot shoe, nor is it fit for anyone running with a barefoot form. That left me with the problem of properly reviewing the GoRun, until I had the idea of asking heel strikers to give it a go at the running track, and see how they felt about it.


Track test
Without telling them my intent, I asked a range of runners to run a 400M lap with their standard shoes, than one barefoot, than one wearing the GoRuns. I wasn’t overly surprised with the results; the shoe only seemed to work well with heel strikers. They reported they could feel the shoe “roll” forward which, in turn, made them shorten their stride. They weren’t bothered with the arch section, probably because they are used to such “supports” in their conventional footwear. They were delighted with the shoe’s feather weight and with the sole material, which is very soft and flexible.


Shod runners with a natural form (mid-foot to forefoot strike patterns), on the other hand, were left dubious and reported they felt the arch section was “weird” at best, “impeding” in the worst cases. Aside from the sole, they liked the GoRun’s design and often compared it to the original Nike Free model.


Analysis
I didn’t notice a big change in the heel strikers’ postures, aside from the shorter stride. I was shocked, however, to review pictures from my natural runners, whose form was negatively altered in all cases. It seems the thickness of the outsole and its design had a negative impact on the natural runners’ form; it lengthens their stride and brings back a heel strike-like pattern, with the “roll forward” effect happening on the outside of the shoe, causing an under pronation. The example below illustrates the differences in form in a natural runner :

First, running in her usual Saucony Kinvara :


Second, barefoot :


Third, in the GoRun :



Conclusion
It became quite clear, during this test, that the GoRun is not recommendable to natural runners who have already learned to land on their mid-foot or forefoot. The elevated arch section, rounded heel and “sensor pods” will only impede proprioception and change their landing patterns.


Heel strikers, on the other hand, seemed to be “pushed” toward a shorter stride, which makes them land closer to their center of gravity, certainly not a bad thing. However, this made me wonder: shouldn’t runners learn better form themselves, instead of relying on the design of their shoes? Isn’t that exactly the same issue as with orthotics?


When all is said and done, learning good form is not only about where you land; it’s also about understanding biomechanics and making the conscious effort to kick off your shoes, re-learn proprioception and develop an improved muscular structure. But if all it takes to point you in that direction is a pair of GoRun to start your discovery of natural running, Skechers might have succeeded in creating a “transition” shoe.


High points

• Comfortable “Resalyte” outsole material
• Lightweight
• Roomy toe box
• Might help the transition of heel strikers who don’t want to learn barefoot

Low points

• A mechanical solution, similar in principle to the use of orthotics
• Elevated arch and “pods” impede a forefoot strike
• Definitely not for barefoot / minimal runners

The equipment for this personal review was supplied by Skechers, free of charge, without any conditions.