Man, am I fickle when it comes to athletic footwear! Shoe manufactures continually keep us off balance by adding /subtracting features, changing materials, changing the look, the cut, the fit, the price, the model number, the name, and everything. Puh-LEEZ! All that marketing is unnecessary. We're gonna buy new running shoes anyway -- they become useless fast enough for Pete's sake! Since the manufacturers can't seem to just settle down and repeat a winning formula, I have no brand loyalty whatsoever.

Warning

The Grid Shadow 1524-1 is what I really have. It looks different from the model 1327 but Epinions doesn't list the 1524-1. Is this, therefore, an off-topic review? I'm hoping you think not. I have a different model year but wonder of wonders, they kept the name the same.

Here is a link so you can see the shoe I'm actually reviewing:

http://www.shoebuy.com/sb/s.jsp?Brand=Saucony&Page=1&Style=32987

Type of runner

I've found out that I'm supposedly a neutral or "efficient" runner. This means I don't overpronate or supinate, so I don't need any corrective doohickeys in my shoes. (But if I'm so **%@!# efficient, then why ain't I faster? Ah well, that's one for the writers' corner...) Anyway, neutral is good, because those doohickeys cost additional money.

Fits!

Even though I had a coupon for Aasics, I was sold by the excellent fit of the Saucony. I like my running shoes as big as possible without heel slippage. This is to allow for a bit of foot swelling on a long run, and also to accommodate Thorlo socks. A comparable Aasics 8 was just a bit slippy, while the 7.5 felt a bit snug. The Saucony last conformed much better to the shape of my foot, which I have always thought to be something like a duck's -- extremely narrow at the heel, but pounded out flat and wide at the toe. I was able to wear an 8, and people seem to think Saucony's sizing is true.

My shoe guy told me this was quite common, and that lots of runners -- especially women -- have commented positively on the excellent fit of the Saucony.

Performance

I've taken these guys on everything from a treadmill to rocks. They are a good all-around shoe. They don't have quite the grip a trail shoe has so I wouldn't wear them in very slippy conditions. The website doesn't list a weight, but I can tell you they are neither ultra light like my old Mizuno Alchemy's nor ultra heavy like my bricky Brooks trail runners. They are lighter than my Adidas Brahmas. I like the little scales on the shoelaces. This makes them stay tied for longer.

Feel

As I said earlier, they are a good fit for me. There is ample cushioning in the forefoot where I need it. They absorb the minor bumps in the forest service roads while still giving me a "feel" for the road beneath me.

Wear

Wear is a non issue for me. The thing that wears out on a runner, or better stated, gets smashed down, is the midsole pad (a part you can't see). Shoe bottoms nowadays are made of some kind of impervious stuff. I don't scuffle my runners like you would if you played basketball or tennis in them, so the uppers usually stay pretty nice, just not clean. On some of my older runners, I could see a wear pattern on the bottom but on my latest few pairs I can see very little.

Look

as always a matter of taste.

For comparison...

See my other running shoe and related reviews:

How to outfit yourself for running

Adidas Brahma (Trail Shoe)

New Balance 854

Mizuno Wave

Brooks Geckos (Trail Shoe)

New Balance 803 Trail Shoes

Gatorade Energy Bar

Gatorade Sports Drink

GU -- performance fuel for a working body

PowerGel -- Another brand of performance fuel





Recommended: Yes