Asics Pulse or Cumulus. Scarborough hills, flats, pavements, trails

BenjyBenjy

Hiya, "they slit me gilet" had double hernia open surgery this week so bed ridden and cant bear to be indoors longer than two hours and am itching to run.

I have been using Asics Cumulus for the last ten years and I love them. Hiting the 40 age mark im more interested in protecting knees with softness for frequent long runs that being the fastest. In the last year ive done 1000 miles in 8 months and was trying to hit 1500 in 12 months Mar 16 to Mar 17 but operation has knocked out 3 weeks left with 150 miles to go, which is a gutter, but can see soft trainers are more my thing,

I change trainers every 600 miles or thereabouts butnt seeing discounts from usual sellers for Cumulus, have always paid £55 to £65, but now they seem to be around £100 everywhere.

Researching Pulse 8 they appear in print very similar and are priced £50 to £65 mark, has anybody had experience of them or can compare them to Cumulus?

Any feedback info would be appreciated as I can order some now ready for getting back in training after op recovery and for York Marathon.

Im in Scarborough where terrain is vastly varied with hills, flats, smooth and rough terrain. Did try brooks ghost once and didnt like them, very much asics gel cushioning fan.

Many thanks

Ben

BTW: Hernias were caused by foolishness not running, so dont let hernia fears put you off running

Easternyip

Surprised you didnt get away with the Ghost the latest edition is a great shoe, the Pulse is a reasonable shoe , but not a cummulus, but if you can pick it up really cheap they could be older models and the cushioning degenerates, Cumulus is a decent enough shoe , another equivalent to the Ghost/Cumulus / price point is the saucony ride which may give you a better plant on hilly hard surfaces , if the Cumulus works stick with that shoe

BenjyBenjy

Thanks Easternyip for your feedback really appreciated. The Ghost I tried were version 5, (great logo on them GHO5T, using the 5), they were not terrible by any means, they were lighter than Cumulus and perceivably faster, just didn’t feel as soft as Cumulus, probably my foot shape made a difference. A big gripe was the traction, I found them quite slippy, shady pavements with mild moss would lose footing or wet surfaces, or switching from trails to pavement, whereas the traction on Cumulus I have always found to be very strong on any surface, but they are heavy clumpy trainer in comparison.

You say Pulse are not a Cumulus, I think that says it all and probably what I was expecting/thinking, you just hope somebody screams out “Pulse are ace! Just as good as…”

I think as you say stick to Cumulus, as it is what I know and like, although I am really tempted to try the new iteration of Ghost. Just been looking at them online version 9. I can then evaluate Ghost again for Easter/Summer and then make a more considered decision between the two ready for York Marathon in October.

I just begrudge paying a third more for something in the space of a year, but then again I suppose a way to look at it, if I was in to biking, kayaking, sailing etc I would be spending far more than £100 every six months for what I enjoy doing.

Thanks again, and sorry for the typos on my first post, it was really bad reading back, painkillers to blame I say.

Ben

Easternyip

It happens with some brooks shoes, the latest Glycerin is hard work on smooth pavements, i think its an attempt to get them lasting longer, and if cummulus gets a decent grip its another reason