Mizuno's

Comments

• [Deleted User]

  November 2002

  What's considered to be wrong with the WR 2002 then? (I own a pair which I am just starting to get used to and am curious )

  0 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• [Deleted User]

  November 2002

  Probably nothing but RW posted a review in their mag saying 2002 was a cosmetic upgrade to 2001 which was a pile of tosh. They had completely changed the toe box, gullies, etc and for a wide footed, high instepped runner like me it was a disaster. I gave up on mine, begged for my money back and went back to Sauconys. However, I've heard that these Rider 6s are due out and would like to see some more detail. My Rider 2001s are hanging on in there but no use at all for long runs. So this is just my personal opinion - nothing professional but still interesting to note that they appear to have considered some customer feedback.

  0 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• [Deleted User]

  November 2002

  Twinkletoes,
  
  You heard right the Wave Rider 6 is much more in line with the 2001 shoe. To be more precise the upper fits much more like the 2001 i.e. roomier toe box and no biolock lace system, whereas the midsole and outsole is totally new.
  
  Look out for the first ad on the shoe in next months Runnersworld for a first look,and a few stores are taking them in December.
  
  Simon@Mizuno

  0 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• [Deleted User]

  November 2002

  My WRs fit me okay, but I find I have to remove Mizuno's insole - the arch support section of it is too thick and makes the shoes too small. Replacing it with another insole has given me great results so far, but of course it's all about your individual foot type.

  0 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter