Customer Reviews

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I run every other day about 7 kilometers (4.4 miles) to 14km (8.8 miles) every other night. I run on hard pavement with the occasional leaves and branches. I've never written a review despite being a long time customer of Amazon, but this shoe is a pretty good value for its quality I had to give my one cent worth.


First off, this is my first Asics shoe. My usual running shoe is either a Nike or Adidas. My last shoe I used for running was a Nike Air Zoom 360 which was about 200 dollars. It was a coolness factor buy I admit, but before that I had their zoom running shoes which I found light and soft on impact as well.

When my Nike air zoom 360 needed retirement (the sole was one big air pocket and had been ruptured on both shoes, making it pick up rocks and dust), I decided that my next running shoe would be softer and less style over function. It had to be light but very stable ( I don't want to twist my ankle again.)

The only other shoe available at the time of window shopping was an Adidas CS running shoe, white with a yellow stripe. It was about 20 dollars less than the Nimbus 9, was lighter and cooler to run around with because of the mesh the upper part was made of but not as soft on impact. The shoe is very good for our climate which is very hot and humid and the mesh doesn't look like it will rip. It was pretty stylish as well.

I am not flat footed, I've got a regular arch and I have no qualms running around the shoe store with the shoes on to test how they feel.

After a few jogs and 3 jumps between stores, I decided on the Nimbus 9 because the soles of the shoe was notably softer than any other shoe I've had so far. Its well balanced and for about 120 dollars, was a lot less than I normally spend on running shoes. It felt like a good deal and it was pretty cool to find it outside the more common brands I'm used to.

The gel they talk about which comprises the sole is no joke. Normally, poking inside the shoe won't give you a good idea of how it'll feel on your feet when you walk, but for the first time in my shoe buying experience, the inner sole was just as soft to the touch as it is on my feet.

The design wasn't something I totally fancied, but thats subjective and for the function the shoe gives; soft cushioning for the feet, stability and fit around the ankle, you can't go wrong.

When i tried them on in the store they felt great. When i got them home and after my first run i had second thoughts. Could i have gone a 1/2 size smaller! That's what it felt like. But after 500 miles i think i did ok. If you have a high arch this is the shoe for you. It took a few runs to break them in for me. But after all the miles i have put on them i still pull them out once in a while for another run. I got a deal for 2 pairs of version 7's on Amazon.. well i wish i had just bought another pair of these.. and i guess i will end up doing that to.. great side to side motion control to.. for that body turning to see what you have for traffic in back of you..

This is the first pair of dedicated "running" shoes I've bought, and so far, they are a hit.

I've only been running seriously since the beginning of the year, when my elliptical machine broke down. Before then, I had just been alternating between a beat-up pair of skating shoes and a pair of mid-range Adidas cross-trainers. After I'd been running for a few months, I decided I needed to get some decent shoes.

The first thing I noticed was the comfort. The padding around the ankles and achilles is very soft but also quite supportive, like a foam neck-brace (bad analogy?). Other positive attributes are a well-ventilated toe and an overall snugness that I didn't get with my cross-trainers.

I'm still not entirely sure why running shoes are so expensive, but the lady at the store convinced me that these will last quite a while (over a thousand miles, I think she said, which means about 2 years for me).

I finally ran out of online sources to purchase Gel Nimbus VII last year, so I "upgraded" to the IX.
I have since put on 188 miles on these shoes. A few things I have noticed:
1) initially I got many hotspots on the shoes as these seem a lot tighter in the front than my previous ones.
2) they feel lighter
3) I have recently noticed holes appearing in the left ankle support area on both shoes.

As I have only run in Asics, I feel brand-stuck and therefore find these shoes overall decent. I think there were some mistakes with the IXs which were probably/hopefully fixed with the Xs.
If you have run in the Nimbus' before, I would use these shoes. However, if you have not been sized professional, I would not take the risk online with these.

I'm a long time jogger, average 2.5 miles per day, for over 15 years.
I bought a pair of Nimbus 9 during Christmas holiday at a local shoe store for $120 which is the most expensive running shoe I ever purchased, since I felt so good after tried it on for a little walking on the floor, and their design, color, and material all indicated a good quality.

Secondly, I was completely ignorant about the need to select a type of running shoe to fit one's foot type, and never heard words like "foot arch", "overpronate", and "underpronate". To me, all running shoes are good for running, and should have no difference for their basic functionality, except their durability, material, outlooks, and price. Based on this assumption, good and expensive shoe should at least be equally good for my daily jogging.

I couldn't be more wrong about this assumption.

For the last five months, I started to have frequent problem with my calf muscle (gastrocnemius muscle). It's kind of sour and tight at first, and progressively became pain, and then went away after a few days break on running.

During the 1st 3 months, the problem skipped my attention since I was on business travel several times during that period, and while I'm on the road I used a different pair of shoes that is preserved for my travel.

But during the last 2 months, this muscle problem of mine becomes chronically worse. And I could not find a rational explanation for its cause. As I compared my current running condition, I could not find any cause, such as change of treadmill which is the same for the last 2 years, or anything else related to my daily jogging.

That is, other than my new shoes!

To find it out, I decided to switch back to my old shoes which were worn out but still in a reasonably usable condition. That was 2 weeks ago. Magically, my calf muscle problem went away for the last 2 weeks, during which time I ran 2-4 miles every morning.

Then, this Thursday (yesterday 06/12) morning, I put on my Nimbus 9 again and did a 2.5 miles (10 laps) jogging. I went to a local community college and ran on its tracking field. Before I finished the 8-th lap, the pain started to come back again and I didn't finish the 9-th lap.

Today, I did some research on the web, and for the first time, I learned that one has to know one's foot type to select the best running shoe. I asked my daughter who's a junior in college and my son who's a freshman in high school, both are sport oriented, and they were as ignorant as me.

I then went on amazon.com to buy a new pair of running shoes. And I noticed, after several searches with various combination of words like "underpronate" and "overpronate", there is no clear information about the type of foot that one brand of running is most suitable.

If you read through the product description on this page about the Nimbus 9, it says that it's suitable for all types of foot. To quote the line here:
"... The broad supportive platform is suitable for a range of runners from underpronators to moderate overpronators."
which seems to imply that this shoes fit all types of 'pronators' except a 'overpronator' that is NOT moderate.

But this seems to be misleading since the very concept of under- and over-pronation suggests that the way of compensation the shoe could do can only be one of the two, never both, since an overpronator tends to wear the inside side of the shoes while an underpronator its outside.

[...]

Finally, here's my suggestions.

To us consumers: know your foot type and try to match it with the right type of running shoes (e.g., cushioning, neutral, etc.).

To amazon.com: could YOU and Your sellers to provide clear information about the type of foot that the running shoes are most suitable.

Almost forget to mention that I'm a non-moderate underpronator.

After previously running in Gel Kayanos, I switched to Gel Nimbus 9s when I found out the Kayanos were made to correct a foot-strike problem I didn't have. Given my size (6'1", 185), I made the move to the Nimus because of its reputation for cushioning. This shoe has lived up to its reputation. My weekly total on these shoes is about 15 miles and my first pair lasted about 14 months before I noticed it was time to replace them. I have just ordered my second pair (I thought about getting the Nimbus 10s, but as much as I liked the 9s coupled with a $30 price premium for the 10s, I went with the 9s again).

This is a solid running shoe. I am a size 8.5 and purchased them about two months ago. I am a distance runner and run marathons. These shoes are good for road or hard packed trail running, but need to be broken in for a week or two (35-45 miles). Good cushioning and solid tread make this shoe a good distance training shoe. I have put 200 miles on them and they are holding up great. I'm excited to see how many miles they last!

These are my third pair of ASICS and the quality in the higher end shoe is unbeatable. comfort, support and durabilty are key for me, and these provide all three. i would reccommend to anyone.

I have owned about 25 pair of ASICS and have never been more impressed with a shoe. I moved to Nimbus 8's then Nimbus 9's and have been VERY happy with their well cushioned ride. I run with a stiff insole (orthotic) so the shoe needs to take all the impact, and these shoes deliver. Very pleased.

I've been running in Asics for awhile and am generally very happy with their shoes. When I stepped up to the Nimbus 9, I expected a shoe that was ready to run out of the box. After a couple of weeks, I ran a half marathon and noticed their new design was a bit tight on the sides which actually damaged my outside toe nails. This was not something I noticed during my daily runs (which average about 5-8 miles a day). Unlike some other reviewers, I found the external (and inside the arch) fabric to begin to wear out substantially within the first 10 months. Although this shoe seemed abit more problematic than my previous Asics, I will most like continue to purchase them due to the fact that they keep my knees and back "pain free".