[dropcase]I[/dropcasef shoe development can be described as a footrace, Skechers Performance have been engaging in a sprint, building iterations upon iterations at a furious pace over the past 2 years. The exercise was understandable for the then-fledgling company. They need to change the serious runners’ perceptions of the brand. Having continuously enhanced the core models such as the GORun (GR), GORun Ride (GRR) and GOMeb Speed (GS), the latest versions are their best yet. I reviewed the first version of the GR back in April 2012 and how much have the shoes evolved since then. I’ve taken the latest GR4 and GS3 for a handful of very short runs and my favorite choice is already becoming clear, even at this stage.
Note: I wear a 10, so the weight shown below are that of my size.
The original GORun was Skechers Performance first model back in 2012. Until recently, the GR3 was the best version produced in the series. Now, the GR4 looks set to continue that upward progression. Revamped entirely, the shoe looks unrecognizable. The stretchy upper, which features little chevron motifs, is now made of a single piece construction. Unlike the older versions, there are very prominent reflective strips at the heel section. There are no detectable wayward seams inside the shoe. Thin overlays crisscross the upper, some fulfilling their cosmetic obligations while some reinforce stress areas. Typical of the performance models, 2 sets of elasticated laces are provided and they run through a somewhat tight tab on the moderately padded tongue. The tongue isn’t gusseted. The heel counter is now a touch stiffer towards the back but perhaps the most obvious update is the “Quick-Fit” pull tab at the collar. Replace the stock laces with bungee cords and you have your self a tri shoe.
The Resalye midsole is more sculpted than ever. Deeper grooves sweep diagonally up and backwards lending a fast look to the shoe. The GR4 has a forefoot and heel stack height of 14mm and 18mm respectively for an overall of 4mm drop without the supplied (but optional) sockliner. In terms of softness, it has a 50 durometer midsole which leans more towards the GRR4’s 47 than the GS3’s 57. The higher the number, the firmer the shoe.
On the outsole, the changes are quite obvious too. The pods (now called Power Pillars, instead of Impulse Sensors) are now more prominent and deeper. They should be more durable but we’ll see if they’re pebble magnets. The GR4 weighs in at 7.65oz without the sockliner and 8.25oz with.
I’ve since put on a some miles in them, outdoors and on the treadmill and here’s my preliminary take. The GR4 now feels (and looks) more like a traditional shoe. There’s less sock-like feel of the GR3 and depending on your preference, that may be a good or bad thing. I’ve no particular preference as long as the shoe remains light, flexible yet provides good support and cushioning for the marathon. And the GR4 certainly has those on tap. There’s more structure in the midfoot but amount of flexibility is thankfully retained. The midfoot bump is now almost non-existent and the shoe wears like a traditional performance trainer/racer in the veins of the Lunaracer 3, but without the restrictive toebox of the Nike.
The tongue secures very well and I’ve yet to encounter any slipping and sliding. There’s a little more padding here and there but there’s been no rubbing and hot spots so far. The initial apprehension on the Quick-Fit tab rubbing on the Achilles proved unfounded since I don’t run sockless. Compared to the GR3, the 4 feels a little snug in the midfoot with a tapered front. I’m not sure if it’s just the upper re-tweak or there’s been a change in the platform. I’d strongly suggest trying a half size larger before purchasing just to make sure the tapered front poses no issues.
I’ve been experimenting the shoes with thinner and thicker sockliners and found the thinner ones to work best in providing a nice blend of cushioning and responsiveness. I’ve no complains thus far and the GR4 is following me back to Penang where I’m getting some longer runs in.
The GORun 4 will be available at all local Skechers boutiques in December.
GORun Ride 4
Other than the upper, the GRR4 remains pretty much unchanged in terms of its midsole and outsole. The upper, which has been given more whizz, no longer possess a sterile look with the color gradation providing a decidedly modern feel. As you can see, it’s also given the “Quick-Fit” pull tab at the collar. There are 2 large reflective strips on either side of the tab.
The GRR4 has a forefoot and heel stack heights of 13.5mm and 17.5mm respectively for an overall of 4mm drop without the optional sockliner. While the stack heights are very close to the GR4’s, the GRR4 possesses a softer 47 durometer Resalyte midsole which is felt largely in the heel. In terms of overlays, there really isn’t much going on topside, which is kept very simple – a strip and there, that’s about it.
The GRR4 weighs in at 8.0oz without the sockliner and 8.65oz with. I’ve not run in the GRR4 but they feel roomier than the GRR3 [review here] just walking around in them. That had me wondering a bit until I did a comparison of the 3 and 4. If you look closely, the 4 no longer sports another layer of synthetics in the front lateral and medial areas (where the pinkies are). The reduced structure no longer restricts the further splaying of the foot. I hope that won’t result in the foot sliding around too much, though.
It remains to be seen if the GRR4 has a more involving feel than its predecessor. It will, however, make for a good recovery shoe or one to pull on for a relaxing 10K.
The GORun Ride 4 will be available at all local Skechers boutiques in December.
GOMeb Speed 3
The most responsive shoe among the 3 has to be the GS3. It was the shoe which Meb wore to his 2014 Boston victory. His was obviously customized to his narrower last but in the mass release version, I’m really glad that the latest Performance Fit sports a slightly wider feel than previous versions. The GS3 definitely feels less restrictive as well with a reportedly smaller DuPont Delrin stability plate in the midsole.
Like the GR4, the GS3 also has a seamless interior. I put my hand in and couldn’t feel any rough seams or stitching. As with the other models in the same release, the GS3 has a snazzy upper with added trims and highlights which look outstanding.
The GS3 has the same stack heights as GR4 with a forefoot and heel of 14mm and 18mm respectively for an overall of 4mm. However, at 57 durometer, it’s the firmest of the lot. The GS3 with its non-removable sockliner weighs in at 7.95oz which is means the GR4 sans the sockliner is 0.3oz lighter! Interestingly the GS has grown progressively heavier with each versions: GS1 was 6.75oz and the GS2 was at 6.95oz. The GS3 is a full ounce heavier than version 2! You can read the earlier review here.
Being a racing flat, the GS3 has a narrower fit throughout yet opens up just enough for the toes. There’s even some room for the toes to wiggle around. The heel is securely locked down and the minimally padded tongue doesn’t slide around nor bunch up. In my opinion, it’s the best fitting GOMeb Speed yet.
Compared to the GS2, the GS3 has a palpable softer feel, yet it retains the snappy take off of the older shoe. I suspect the softer foam has something to do with that, a really nice tuning job. Another minor tweak is the positioning of the rubber plugs, where 2 have been moved further back towards the heel. See a trend there?
Unfortunately I’ve yet to take the GS3 on an extended run around. The couple of very short runs I’ve done in them wasn’t that enjoyable due to my current fitness level. The body took a battering from the grueling 56K under the hot sun and has yet to recover. Just couldn’t shake the fatigued feeling off. Regardless, I’ll bide my recovery time and focus on strength work in the gym. Can’t wait to be back on the fast lane!
The GOMeb Speed 3 will be available at all local Skechers boutiques in January 2015, in time for your new racing season!
Disclaimer: The Skechers GORun 4, GORun Ride 4 and GOMeb Speed 3 are media samples kindly provided by Skechers Malaysia. Opinions stated are my own.
Like a bolt (ooops!) out of the sky, the soon-to-be-in-stores Skechers GOrun Ride 3 Bolt (GRR3 Bolt/Bolt) landed on my laps quite suddenly last Friday. Because it was so totally unexpected, I braved the Friday+Downpour+5pm-KL-Traffic phenomenon to fight my way to the Skechers office after work.
Let’s get on with some of the nuts and bolts (ooops again!) of, ummm, the Bolt.
You wouldn’t be wrong if you dismiss the Bolt, just by looking at the photos, that this is another example of a wolf in a sheep’s clothing. After all everything other than the eye-catching upper’s the same as the GRR3 [my review of the GRR3 here].
But then, there’s the knitted fabric upper. As it is, the upper found on the GRR3 is already well made, as with most of the Performance series’. FitKnit isn’t unlike other knitted upper that’s marketed by other sports companies and I’ve worn several of those (and liked them a lot too). It’s basically iterations of stitching technology that see a tighter weave around the stress-zones, for example, the toebox, heel counter and flex areas. The result is a single piece seamless upper that has good breathability.
In terms of weight, the GRR3 (with sockliner) sits between the Bolt with and without the sockliner. Even at its heaviest 8.9oz for US10, the Bolt is featherweight compared to Zoom Elite 7, Pegasus 31 and even lighter than the Boston Boost 5 (review coming up).
If you’ve not worn any shoes with a knitted upper before, you’d be interested to know that there are subtle differences to the wear experience. Due to the absence of overlays, you’ll discover a little bit more real estate in the toebox. Indeed, my US10 felt roomier than usual. My first run in the Bolt was a hilly 12.5K. I didn’t lace up as tightly as I normally do when I race. While my feet didn’t slide to and fro even when I hit the downhills, there was a slight sideway movement in the forefoot region. There wasn’t any blisters though, and there was room to lock down the lacing further. No real issues but I just thought it’s something worth mentioning to guide you when trying the Bolt out.
Interestingly, as opposed to other brands’ knitted uppers, Skechers FitKnit retains the stretch properties used in the mesh models like the GRR3. There’s not a stitch on the Bolt that adds to a stiff wear experience, even where the knit are most dense.
Coming into the scene late in the adoption of knitted uppers, Skechers GOrun Ride 3 Bolt expands the brand’s tradition of great uppers with FitKnit. The result is an all-round improved package for the runner in the tradition of the GRR3. Those looking for a lightweight cushioned trainer suitable for up to the marathon distance should check them out. They’ve the looks to go with jeans and will make an excellent and versatile shoe. Wherever I travel to, I’ve always packed an extra pair of running shoes for my exploratory runs. With the Bolt, it will serve as a 2-in-1, suitable for sightseeing and putting in the mileage while traveling.
The Bolt will hit the local stores from this weekend and will retail for RM419 (men) and RM399 (women).
Disclosure: The Skechers GOrun Ride 3 Bolt is a media sample provided by Skechers Malaysia. I’ve only put in approximately 20K in them but the ride is similar to the GRR3.
This is the final part of my take on the Samsung duo of Galaxy S5 and Gear Fit. If you’re interested to find out more about my usage of the devices, follow the links below:
First impressions| HRM, Distance Tracking and Coaching Functions
So after more than 2 weeks, what’s my take on the S5+GF combo? As mentioned in my earlier posts, I don’t bring along my phone when I go out running, so my time was mostly spent with the GF. Since I’m not an Android user, I stay away from delving too much into the interface. Where menus and UI are covered, it was done from the angle of usability rather than technical aspect. With that out of the way, let’s get things going.
What I like:
Could be better:
There you have it, a runner’s take on the GF. It’s Samsung’s first real dip into the lifestyle tracking segment and a decent entry at that. It’s the glaring misses, no doubt, include the lack of integration with online communities or for that matter with other exercise apps on the phone such as Endomondo, Runkeeper or MapMyRun. Having said that, there are a many fitness enthusiasts out there who run with their smartphones and who aren’t anal about tracking their exact mileage nor need perfection in their measurements. These group may find the GF a logical accessory to their Samsung smartphones. The competition in this segment is stiff, both in pricing and features. The S5 is currently going for RM1,999 (16GB LTE model) and Gear Fit RM599. Unfortunately there are no bundled pricing.
Disclaimer: The Galaxy S5 and Gear Fit were media review units courtesy of Samsung Malaysia Electronics (SME) Sdn. Bhd. No payments nor complimentary devices were given in exchange for this series of postings.
Note: I posted my first impression of the Samsung Gear Fit and Galaxy S5 here, so that could be your starting point.
I’ve since spent a week with the duo and gotten more at home using either gadget. The GF pretty much stayed on my wrist throughout the day, silently recording my steps, exercises and sleep. The function I use most often is the Heart Rate (HR) sensor as well as the Pedometer. The rest, not so much other than poking around. Prior to this head-to-head test, I wasn’t too impressed by the HR readings of the GF. The readings ranged from low to mid-50s (waking up), 70s (middle of the day), stressful meeting with the boss (70s) and while working at the desk (60s). Since the only time I ever monitor my HR is when I run, I found these readings strangely low. There’s only one way to find out – a throw down! In the mix, the Garmin 620.
I strapped on the Garmin HRM chest strap, stood in place and started the watch and GF. The following photos show the recording. Photo was taken by a bemused colleague.
Being a geek, it’s an anomaly that until last weekend, I’ve not owned nor had the opportunity to use any Android devices. So it was an opportunity not to pass up when a chance to get to know two of the latest offerings from Samsung came along. Although I’ve worn the Nike Sportband some years ago (review page), living and sleeping with not only one but two devices. Talk about two-timing!
The two in question are of course the Samsung Galaxy S5 and the Gear Fit. I need to preempt the reader that I’m not setting out to review the S5 in the manner of the experts at GSM Arena, Techradar and Trusted Reviews. If you’re curious as to what lies under the hood of the phone, you’d best click on each of the link I provided. Instead my goal is to give a fair take on what amounts to the tech giant’s first take on wearable fitness devices. You may ask why first when the smartwatch the first version of the Gear has been around for more than a year. That’s a valid question which has a simple answer. The Gear is quite simply an extension of the phone whereas the Gear Fit goes beyond the functionality of complementing the phone by incorporating much more features devoted to keeping an active lifestyle.
With that let’s get some of the (very) basic features out of the way:
The way geeks work when confronted with an entirely new gear, is to do away with any reading material or online reference. Very gung-ho, I might add! Just figure things out on our own because, you know, reading is such a waste of time! Better dig into the gear, right? After all, not reading the manuals beforehand would be akin to put the gear through a usability test. Unless, of course, we run into a wall. Common sense dictates that both devices need charging before the test drive. So both were plugged into the USB adaptor and left to charge overnight. To charge the S5, one has to peel away the weather-sealed flap of the port before plugging it into a power source while the Gear Fit (GF) snaps onto a clip. It’s a little tricky in getting a secure hold between the GF and the clip. I found that I had to press on a little firmer to achieve a good latch. Otherwise you’d find that the device wasn’t charged a single bit the next morning, as I’d found out to my detriment!
Once the devices were charged, the first thing I saw on the GF when I powered it up was the message to update its firmware, so I promptly got that done. The updates were installed speedily enough on the S5 and eventually transferred to the GF via Bluetooth. There were enough screen prompts to move me along the way. If you’re a Mac user like I am, there’s an added component you should be downloading – Android File Transfer (AFT). While not having any implication to the usage of the GF, the AFT app will facilitate the transfer of files such as photos, videos and documents between the S5 and Mac. You can download the AFT app from this link.
By this stage I was really, and I mean really, eager to start using the gear. But before that there were just a bit more to do. The GF allows for a wide range of customization when it comes to the interface from the wallpaper, vertical/horizontal orientation, page order, types of alerts to flash and more. The following screen shots give you a teaser of what you could do.
With the setup and some major poking around done, I was ready to give the gear a run out – or rather a sleep-in – because it was already late into the night! To engage the Sleep tracker function, just scroll along and hit the Sleep option and off you journey into Dreamland. Below was how I fared, when I checked the stats. Not too bad.
By the time I checked the S5, the stats were already transferred to the phone in a seamless fashion. I also wore the GF during the Larian Hijau but I bungled the tracking – instead of selecting Exercise>Running, I accidentally triggered the Pedometer function, which resulted in some pretty darn impressive numbers! The GF has no ambient light sensor (hence the screen brightness control isn’t automatic), you can manually toggle the brightness settings on the device.
On weekdays, with the GF on my wrist, I was more conscious of taking walk breaks away from the desk. I’ve observed that on several occasions there were lag times of several seconds (even if I’ve started moving) from the moment the pedometer function was started till the counting of the steps actually commenced. Otherwise the counter worked in tune with each step I took.
There are several ways to view the logs, hourly (if you’re one who micro-manages your life), daily or monthly. It would be better served if the “Hour” option be replaced with “Week”. IMHO, hourly tracking is only useful if the device is able to provide hourly alerts to, well, get off the seat and take a walk.
That’s it for now, my first experience with the S5 and Gear Fit. In my next post, I shall try to compare the accuracy of the HR recording and distance tracking of the S5-GF combo against the Garmin FR620 besides exploring the guided coaching features.
I was on the lookout for possible footwear in the weeks leading to Starlight (race report here). because, believe it or not, I didn’t have a pair that met my criteria for a road ultra: lightweight (under 10oz), breathable, not over-engineered, perfect blend of responsiveness and cushioning (meaning, not ultra soft), medium-stacked, with just a hint of structure/support to carry me as I straggle like a zombie towards the finish. Oh boy, was I in for a surprise. Little did I realize that I am that hard to please when it comes to shoes!
The original plan for Starlight was to go with 2 pairs – the GRU Nite Owl for the first half before swapping it for the Kinvara 5 Runshield for the second leg – but I finally decided to keep things simple by going with a single-pair approach. The GRU wasn’t an option as in the lead up towards the race, it caused some blistering on the top of my 4th toe. I even contemplated cutting out a hole where that problematic overlay ran over. The last time this happened was when I wore a overly small GR3. I was puzzled that this cropped up in a correctly sized GRU. The crucial question was then, “Which pair should I go with?”. The Strada and the regular version of the Kinvara 5 weren’t available as well.
With a few days to D-Day and in desperation, I’d tried on the asics Excel 33, Electro 33, adidas Revenergy Boost (photo). I found the silky smooth Revenergy too heavy (felt like over 10oz for my size 10) to be carrying over 84K, while the 2 asics just didn’t feel quite right and a little too thin on the forefoot midsole. I also checked out the several Nikes but they also felt off.
Just when I was this close *holding up my thumb and index finger* to giving up, I chanced upon the adiZero Ace 6 (aZA6). The aZA6 weighs under 9oz for my US10, which makes it lighter than the GRU, DS Trainer 19, Revenergy Boost, Zoom Fly, Zoom Elite 7, Pegasus 31 and Launch. More importantly it felt just right in the store – not too snug in the midfoot, sports a roomy forefoot (a shocker since adidas typically runs narrow) and has a little toe spring. It also didn’t feel like one with a high offset, more like between 6-8mm.
The upper of the aZA6 shares the same design philosophy as GR3 and GRR3 – simple, minimal overlays over just the necessary areas. Interestingly, there’s an area just behind the forefoot flexpoint that is a little stretchy allowing the foot to splay further. This small area is reminiscent of the Biomorphic Fit found on the DS Trainer 9. The entire upper of the aZA6 down to the laces, tongue, padding, heel counter, is likewise kept simple. In all the miles that I’ve covered in the shoe, I’ve found the ventilation to be excellent.
Midsole is typical adidas with the firmer adiPRENE®+ employed in the forefoot and regular adiPRENE in the heel for cushioning duties. Where the Boost midsole accords a smooth and cushy ride, the adiPRENE setup creates a more responsive ride. It has that snappy feel to it, though not to the extent of the GOspeed.
adiWEAR material can be found in the high-wear areas while the lighter Quickstrike in the other areas of the outsole. Sticky rubber is well deployed on sections of the outsole and I’ve found the forefoot grip to be astonishingly good. I certainly felt very assured wherever I ran, even on wet surfaces. Exposed midsole foam are evident throughout the outsole too. There’s a tiny strip of TPU which I don’t think serves any purpose due to its size. If I had a say in the design, the strip wouldn’t have found its way into the shoe. Flexibility is, however, just average.
The ride? The aZA6 is somewhat similar to the Wave Rider 17 but definitely firmer than the Kinvara 5 and Boston Boost. While I wore them over 84K, alternating between running and walking, it’s definitely a shoe that’s more suited to faster-paced running. I’ve also found that I needed to lace up tighter in order for the shoe to lock down better. Although there were no blisters post-Starlight, my feet slid back and forth a fair bit especially on the descents.Lacing up tightly wasn’t an option at that time due to foot swelling encountered over the course of an ultra. The aZA6 would definitely be more comfortable tackling quicker-paced runs and marathons than slow burns.
All things considered, the Ace 6 would find itself in the company of traditional performance trainers such as the Kinvara 5, DS Trainer 19, Zoom Elite 9, Zoom Fly, 890 v4, Launch, Wave Rider 17, Wave Sayonara 2. At 9oz for the US10, the aZA6 is the lightest of those I mentioned above. However, if you prefer an even lighter, softer and way more flexible option, you won’t go wrong with the GOrun Ride 3 (8.7oz).
It needs to be mentioned here that I’ve never taken to adidas shoes, even as a shoe geek for 15 years. I’ve found their training shoes to be too narrow, too clunky and heavy while their racing shoes too hardcore (read: ultra minimalist, firm). Lately the company seemed to have made some good moves addressing the middle ground. I’m impressed with the Boost midsole material. Its durability (my Energy Boost has logged over 300K with the outsole showing hardly any wear and tear) and that of the adiWEAR outsole is excellent. Of course, durability without a ride that fits the wearer is pointless. The Ace 6 thankfully has that. It won’t make waves in the running circle because it’s an understated shoe. Added to that, it’s not easily available.
I’ve logged over 110K in the adiZero Ace 6 and the shoe is available from the adidas boutiques in 1Utama and Sunway Pyramid for RM360. Information is scant on the Ace 6 unfortunately, but head on to the brand’s UK site and you’ll be able to see it there.
There is arguably no other shoe that’s more identifiable (read: popular) to Saucony than the Kinvara. While Saucony, a company founded in 1898 and headquartered in Lexington, may have the Mirage, Virrata, A6 and Ride in its stable, it was the Kinvara that got runners excited when it debuted in 2010 to a handful of accolades. Kinvara is Saucony and Saucony is Kinvara in my books. Saucony is also one of the very few companies to only focus on the running segment. Hence you won’t find cross-training models made by these guys.
My past experience with the Kinvara was the v2 ViZiPRO (retired and donated), followed by Kinvara 3 (K3, also retired). I wasn’t that fond of the K3, mainly due to the very tapered forefoot. I skipped Kinvara 4 entirely but reviews generally covered its issues rather than how well they performed.
I was recently reacquainted with the series, the Kinvara 5 (K5), specifically the weather resistant version called the RunShield. Unlike the dreary colors of other weather resistant versions of other brands, the K5 RunShield comes in a catchy blue-gray colorway with silver reflective trims along with orange ViZiPRO logo. Do note that I don’t have the regular version of the K5 for comparisons but the 4mm drop platform, midsole material and outsole configuration are the same as the stock version. Only the upper sees the adoption of a FlexShell upper, a polyester fabric with weather resistant membrane.
Lightweight FlexFilm welded overlays continue to be employed since the K3. This time, Saucony incorporates the ProLock lacing system to better lock in the midfoot. ProLock is similar (but not identical) to Brooks’ Nav Band, which I’m no fan of. The photo below shows how the ProLock integrates with the tongue and entire midfoot upper resulting in a snug fit around the middle. The internal sleeve reminds me of Salomon’s Endofit. I noticed that keeping the midfoot lacing a little loose works best for me. Inside, the K5 sports a RunDry lining for moisture management.
The 2 little padding on either side of the achilles in the K3 have been replaced with a thicker and plusher material, which I prefer.
The K5’s midsole is made up of single density foam marketed as EVA+. There’s an embedded PowerGrid with the foam and the K5 sees an increased use of carbon rubber plugs. Even the outer lateral side is now more filled in resulting in more ground contact. It’s clear the designers wanted to make the shoe more durable while not going overboard with added bulk/weight. Still, the K5 has gained some weight over the K3 (see below), but do note that my K5 is half a size up than the older shoe. I’m unable to confirm but the use of weather resistant upper could’ve possibly contributed to the increase. It’ll be interesting to check out the stock version of the K5 measure up.
My wear experience has been great, right from the get-go. My feet instantly feel secure when I slide them into the shoes even without tightening the laces. The ProLock definitely lends a snug fit around the midfoot area. The added bit of padding on the tongue and around the collar gave it a noticeably comfortable feel unlike the thinner and stiffer setup of the K3. Given the Runshield is a weather resistant version, I had concerns that I would wind up with soggy shoes from all that sweating after every run. Thankfully, I’m glad to report that such fears proved unfounded despite the current heatwave. Sweaty feet were largely a non-issue. Runners who leave pools of sweat on the ground *urgh* are best advised to stick to regular versions though .
It’s been ages since KL saw a downpour and I’ve not stop casting my eyes at the skies for any hints of rain clouds. When that happens, the Runshield will finally get to play in the rain. Oooh, I miss those days!
I’ve since put in 97km in the K5 RunShield and I like it a lot. Even more so when it’s my marathon PR shoe . Unlike the firm K3, the K5 provides a smoother, more forgiving ride, very welcome in the late stages of a marathon. So far, the durability has been outstanding, with negligible wear and tear. The K5 is a tad soft for trackwork – for that I rely on the GOSpeed 2 or Hitogami – but works very well on the road and gravel. With the 5, the Kinvara is definitely back and is a solid choice for anyone seeking a high mileage lightweight trainer/racer.
Disclosure: The Saucony Kinvara 5 RunShield is a sample pair provided courtesy of RSH (M) Sdn Bhd. It is expected to be available, along with the regular versions of the Kinvara 5 and Ride 7, from Running Lab, Stadium and RSH outlets in September 2014.
Portfolio inactive. Turn On Projects at Theme Panel > Projects page.