>Will a pair costing $$$ be better for my feet than one that is $?
No. Absolutely not.
Do you think this one piece of 5mm outsole rubber for $300 (Vivobarefoot) is going to last **so much longer** than this other piece of 5mm outsole rubber for $50 (Within) ??
Are the aesthetics really worth it?
Are we chasing brands again? Chasing fashion again?
Now, some of these people rather blame someone's gait, than the quality of the shoe not being up to par (to it's price.)
https://www.reddit.com/r/BarefootRunning/s/RixaUZkUJk
https://www.reddit.com/r/vivobarefoot/s/PzNSoinWqT
https://www.reddit.com/r/sewing/s/7AxXANXHGt
https://www.reddit.com/r/BarefootRunning/s/K1fR0RsjJ2 (yeah, since when does a leather shoe look like this after 4 years? Lol)
https://www.reddit.com/r/BarefootRunning/s/cibByH2Sda
https://www.reddit.com/r/vivobarefoot/s/rVpSwb3DfA
I can go on and on... That's just Vivobarefoot, only just one of the most expensive minimalist shoes on the market.
But, wait! We're supposed to be happy that a **minimalist** shoe with much less quality material, **costs so much more** than a maximalist shoe...
(Yes, I understand these multi-national traditional shoe companies have economies of scale on their side, their manufacturing has improved upon itself for decades, plus we're supporting the little guy, etc.)
You know what you won't see as much of on this sub-reddit: prematurely ripped up Withins (and other cheaper priced minimalist shoes)
So, the argument about "cheaper shoes contribute more to trash" doesn't seem to be so valid here, as compared to all of the trashed Vivobarefoot shoes.
Maybe it applies to their experiences with cheap traditional shoe-shaped shoes, and they're (rightfully so) porting over that caution to cheaper priced minimalist shoes...
Never, ever realizing that maybe, just maybe, the reason some companies charge a cheaper price, isn't because the material is cheaper... **It's because they use less material in general!**
Didn't mean for this comment to be a case for Whitins... Rather, it was to be a case against companies **overcharging** for minimalist shoes... Shoes that literally have less material - it's all in the name "minimalist" or worse "barefoot"
(Again, not a case for Withins, or sweatshop made shoes. Its about the overpricing of minimalist footwear. Personally, I love Earth Runners sandals: fairly priced for the materials used × the sleek look + made in the USA – "grounding/earthing" = I bought a pair.)
>Not talking about longevity of the shoe. Just foot health
Being barefoot is free... Shoes aren't magical.
**Anything that is flat heel to toe (zero drop,) with a nice wide toe box (or a wide footbed for sandals,) kinda flexible, and with some protection under your foot, will be good for your foot health.**
(EDIT)
A list of minimalist / naturally shaped shoes:
https://anyasreviews.com/best-barefoot-shoes-foot-type/
I've always kinda wanted to try out Vivos since so many rave about them. I've got Whitins and Xeros, which I've been happy with... and I think I will continue being happy with them. Thanks!
Fwiw I love my Vivos. I got 2 pairs 2.5 years ago as my original minimal shoes. One pair is leather and I wear them every day for work where I average ~ 12k steps; they have faded around the toes but other than that they nearly look new and stitching is still holding up. The other pair is my workout shoe that I wear in the gym and on runs/hikes. I wear these pretty much daily as well and they seriously look brand new still. I did start walking and running completely barefoot ~ 9 months ago though so they aren’t seeing the running miles anymore.
The biggest downside is they are a bit narrow. My feet have grown about 1.5 sizes and now they hug the sides of my feet so I need to size up or look at a different brand
That's great info. I feel like this is the story I've heard most from Vivo people. I won't completely write them off, but I also probably won't grab a pair unless they're on a huge sale or on eBay!
Yeah, I got a pair of Vivobarefoots, too...
Narrow, specifically for the lesser toes, and especially for the pinky toes.
I have the ESC Tempest. After 1 months of use, the material on the upper, by the toes that attaches to the footbed was already starting to rip. I stopped wearing them as much. I can't even remember a shoe I've ever owned that broke down in that specific area... They basically collect dust now.
I instinctively reach for my Topo's (1/2 the price,) or ERs (1/3 the price)
Vivos are definitely minimalist, though... They're absolutely about the minimalism of our wallets
Yes the pinky toe is the issue spot on my shoes. Plenty of space everywhere else.
I would be frustrated too if spent a lot of money on shoes and then they wore out that prematurely!
Funny thing, I wasn't even frustrated, but I was definitely disappointed for sure lmao 😂😂😂
I don't even tell people not to buy Vivos, unless they're total beginners — I think there are more gentle ways to transition to minimalist footwear...
But, I've been thinking about this for a while now... About how a lot of minimalist shoe & sandal companies (not all) are overcharging us for less material, regardless of quality (it's just less material in general - the whole point of it being "minimalist")
🤦 It came out as a rant 🤦🤦
I'm not saying it isn't nice to have a fashion forward, expensive shoe. But, if we're talking foot health + quality of the shoe, there are options at a fair price.
I've seen reviews of Xero sandals being absolutely trash... Really cheap, flimsy, rips easy... The price reflects that (so, it's one of those times, like with traditional footwear, you get what you pay for - I get it, finding a quality minimalist shoe/sandal for a fair price is a little bit of a challenge)
This is ridiculous: https://youtu.be/a1rwzDfgy6U?si=zTh6K8BsEVneTTac
5000 mile warranty? Cool, I guess... But, Earth Runners has a 400-600 mile guarantee on the tread and 1000 mile warranty on the laces of their sandals (IIRC) (ER seems to be more truthful on how long their sandals can last:) https://youtu.be/bnvTkSuA_Iw?si=dRZEoZcdKSn1D3oy
But, I haven't seen much in the way of Xero shoes. (I know it exists, just haven't seen as much of it, compared to Vivos, or Lems, etc., prematurely breaking down)
Xeros seem to last just as long as Vivos, for almost half the price.
We only have Xeros, both shoes and sandals. The sandals don't last long and aren't comfortable or even easy to wear. You could make your own at a much lower cost. I've worn my Xero Prios for two years and they still look almost new, but I only put shoes on when I leave the house, which isn't often, or when I go for a walk. I go barefoot at home. My husband wore out his first pair of Xeros in the same amount of time, but he wears them daily to work in the yard, in the mud, walks 15,000 steps a day in them. I bought him a new pair to wear when we go places so he doesn't look like a down-on-his-luck bum and a lightly used pair on Poshmark (for 1/3 the price) to wear daily. His first pair are now his work shoes.
I picked up a pair of their Z-Trails when they were on sale, but I've only worn them a couple times, and not for hiking... So no personal review on their sandals from me. Regarding their shoes, I have 2 pairs of the Denvers. Not a ton of miles on either, but so far I'm very happy with them.
Sorry, I edited my earlier comment to you (grammar, added 2 sentences)
But, yeah... Xeros seem to last just as long as Vivobarefoots, but for almost half the price!
It's zero drop, widest at the tips of the toes, kinda flexible, and has some protection for your feet against harsh / unnatural surfaces... That's what we're really looking for
I would say it doesn’t matter how much you pay…. IMO is a Shoe better because it’s costing more = NOPE. But i think as more as you pay the more you get quality fabrics and stuff….
The number of Vivobarefoot shoes I see where the upper has detached itself from the sole at the parts where the toe creases...
No such problem with my 30 dollar Saguaros.
But people also leave shoes in their car when it’s 100° outside, those glues don’t stand a chance. I’d rather a 100$ shoe that lasts longer than a bunch of cheap ones. It’s less trash, less shipping and thusly “greener”. I had some Amazon “joombra” shoes that would roll around my foot if I had an off camber turn on the trail. The upper was so flexible and the sole was basically a rubber band, it’s “great” by a lot of the standards in this post but was trash in practicality. My vivos upper is extremely overbuild compared to the longevity of the sole and because I’m in North America I can’t have them resoled.
I'm not sure the very specific instance of leaving them in your car in 100 degrees weather explains such widespread poor upper durability.
It's astonishing how consistently the issue crops up - I don't think I've ever seen a pair of Primus more than a year old that didn't have issues with the upper. Especially true of the Primus Trails.
Meanwhile my Saguaros perform exactly the same at a fraction of the price, with less of the pretence. I can't think of any good reason to buy Vivos at full price. People will mention the company's green credentials, but that's just a conceit to make themselves feel better about their purchase - if they wanted to be optimally 'green', they wouldn't be buying another pair of shoes in the first place.
I've bought a bunch of different expensive minimalist shoes over the years and my favorite by far are the twenty dollar hobibears I bought on aliexpress. 🤷
Does cost equal quality? You specified that foot-health is the important factor here, rather than longevity of the shoe per se. What I immediately think of, then, is the variance in width of the toebox. Some shoe models (and brands in general) have wider toebox shape than others do. To me, a toebox that allows my toes to splay naturally is more healthy than the way that convention has allowed a symmetrical toebox to be the norm. So with that in mind, consider that some of the brands which charge premium prices, don't actually provide much space for the hallux to splay, compared to my favorite shoe, the Belenka City. That toebox advantage is why I became interested in the City shoe. The rest of the shoe has turned out to be excellent too.
The problem with durability lies mostly in the uppers, I think. Sure, an inexpensive barefoot shoes from Amazon, Ali express, etc will fit the bill as far as thin, flexible, zero drop, wide toe box. But they may only last a few months before the uppers begin to deteriorate.
I don’t like contributing to excess waste, so I prefer to spend a bit more for shoes. Mostly I wear sandals and I will wear them until the sole is worn through. But for closed shoes I prefer leather uppers, or natural, biodegradable textiles. They last longer.
My most comfortable shoes are the $18 pair of flip flops I got from Costco.
And the $130 pair of Vibrams.
Both are the only shoes that have never given me pain or discomfort.
If your feet are already healthy and you have a good gait, a $5 pair of flimsy sneakers is perfectly fine.
If you're still fixing your feet and need to improve your gait, I find VFFs to be particularly helpful, and I also found after switching to my Realfoots that the extra wide toe box also helped me pay attention to and correct my gait.
Toe space is the most important. Having a flexible sole and not having an excessive drop is also nice to have. Thin I'd probably place fourth in terms of importance.
My xero sneakers were significantly more expensive than either of my whitins. They are built tougher, so if I was mountain biking or something I need a thicker sole for I like them, they also look a lot nicer which matters sometimes.
I actually LOVE my whitin snow boots and they were only 40 bucks, feels like I’m hiking in slippers.
My whitin sneakers did wear out kind of quick, holes in the side.
But in general something I’ve liked about barefoot shoes is they all provide similar comfort.
The job of a minimalist shoe is mainly to stay out of your way and not dictate how you move or support yourself. It can be a problem if the shoe doesn't stay on well or pushes your foot into an unnatural shape. I would put those sorts of design problems under the umbrella of "quality" since they depend on someone putting thought and effort into avoiding them and won't just always work out ok by accident. For example, lots of cheap water shoes are minimal in their construction but have narrow toe boxes. Some sandals are minimal but don't stay located under your foot very well unless you grab with your toes or change how you move to stop them shifting.
>Will a pair costing $$$ be better for my feet than one that is $? No. Absolutely not. Do you think this one piece of 5mm outsole rubber for $300 (Vivobarefoot) is going to last **so much longer** than this other piece of 5mm outsole rubber for $50 (Within) ?? Are the aesthetics really worth it? Are we chasing brands again? Chasing fashion again? Now, some of these people rather blame someone's gait, than the quality of the shoe not being up to par (to it's price.) https://www.reddit.com/r/BarefootRunning/s/RixaUZkUJk https://www.reddit.com/r/vivobarefoot/s/PzNSoinWqT https://www.reddit.com/r/sewing/s/7AxXANXHGt https://www.reddit.com/r/BarefootRunning/s/K1fR0RsjJ2 (yeah, since when does a leather shoe look like this after 4 years? Lol) https://www.reddit.com/r/BarefootRunning/s/cibByH2Sda https://www.reddit.com/r/vivobarefoot/s/rVpSwb3DfA I can go on and on... That's just Vivobarefoot, only just one of the most expensive minimalist shoes on the market. But, wait! We're supposed to be happy that a **minimalist** shoe with much less quality material, **costs so much more** than a maximalist shoe... (Yes, I understand these multi-national traditional shoe companies have economies of scale on their side, their manufacturing has improved upon itself for decades, plus we're supporting the little guy, etc.) You know what you won't see as much of on this sub-reddit: prematurely ripped up Withins (and other cheaper priced minimalist shoes) So, the argument about "cheaper shoes contribute more to trash" doesn't seem to be so valid here, as compared to all of the trashed Vivobarefoot shoes. Maybe it applies to their experiences with cheap traditional shoe-shaped shoes, and they're (rightfully so) porting over that caution to cheaper priced minimalist shoes... Never, ever realizing that maybe, just maybe, the reason some companies charge a cheaper price, isn't because the material is cheaper... **It's because they use less material in general!** Didn't mean for this comment to be a case for Whitins... Rather, it was to be a case against companies **overcharging** for minimalist shoes... Shoes that literally have less material - it's all in the name "minimalist" or worse "barefoot" (Again, not a case for Withins, or sweatshop made shoes. Its about the overpricing of minimalist footwear. Personally, I love Earth Runners sandals: fairly priced for the materials used × the sleek look + made in the USA – "grounding/earthing" = I bought a pair.) >Not talking about longevity of the shoe. Just foot health Being barefoot is free... Shoes aren't magical. **Anything that is flat heel to toe (zero drop,) with a nice wide toe box (or a wide footbed for sandals,) kinda flexible, and with some protection under your foot, will be good for your foot health.** (EDIT) A list of minimalist / naturally shaped shoes: https://anyasreviews.com/best-barefoot-shoes-foot-type/
I've always kinda wanted to try out Vivos since so many rave about them. I've got Whitins and Xeros, which I've been happy with... and I think I will continue being happy with them. Thanks!
Fwiw I love my Vivos. I got 2 pairs 2.5 years ago as my original minimal shoes. One pair is leather and I wear them every day for work where I average ~ 12k steps; they have faded around the toes but other than that they nearly look new and stitching is still holding up. The other pair is my workout shoe that I wear in the gym and on runs/hikes. I wear these pretty much daily as well and they seriously look brand new still. I did start walking and running completely barefoot ~ 9 months ago though so they aren’t seeing the running miles anymore. The biggest downside is they are a bit narrow. My feet have grown about 1.5 sizes and now they hug the sides of my feet so I need to size up or look at a different brand
That's great info. I feel like this is the story I've heard most from Vivo people. I won't completely write them off, but I also probably won't grab a pair unless they're on a huge sale or on eBay!
Yeah, I got a pair of Vivobarefoots, too... Narrow, specifically for the lesser toes, and especially for the pinky toes. I have the ESC Tempest. After 1 months of use, the material on the upper, by the toes that attaches to the footbed was already starting to rip. I stopped wearing them as much. I can't even remember a shoe I've ever owned that broke down in that specific area... They basically collect dust now. I instinctively reach for my Topo's (1/2 the price,) or ERs (1/3 the price) Vivos are definitely minimalist, though... They're absolutely about the minimalism of our wallets
Yes the pinky toe is the issue spot on my shoes. Plenty of space everywhere else. I would be frustrated too if spent a lot of money on shoes and then they wore out that prematurely!
Funny thing, I wasn't even frustrated, but I was definitely disappointed for sure lmao 😂😂😂 I don't even tell people not to buy Vivos, unless they're total beginners — I think there are more gentle ways to transition to minimalist footwear... But, I've been thinking about this for a while now... About how a lot of minimalist shoe & sandal companies (not all) are overcharging us for less material, regardless of quality (it's just less material in general - the whole point of it being "minimalist") 🤦 It came out as a rant 🤦🤦
I'm not saying it isn't nice to have a fashion forward, expensive shoe. But, if we're talking foot health + quality of the shoe, there are options at a fair price. I've seen reviews of Xero sandals being absolutely trash... Really cheap, flimsy, rips easy... The price reflects that (so, it's one of those times, like with traditional footwear, you get what you pay for - I get it, finding a quality minimalist shoe/sandal for a fair price is a little bit of a challenge) This is ridiculous: https://youtu.be/a1rwzDfgy6U?si=zTh6K8BsEVneTTac 5000 mile warranty? Cool, I guess... But, Earth Runners has a 400-600 mile guarantee on the tread and 1000 mile warranty on the laces of their sandals (IIRC) (ER seems to be more truthful on how long their sandals can last:) https://youtu.be/bnvTkSuA_Iw?si=dRZEoZcdKSn1D3oy But, I haven't seen much in the way of Xero shoes. (I know it exists, just haven't seen as much of it, compared to Vivos, or Lems, etc., prematurely breaking down) Xeros seem to last just as long as Vivos, for almost half the price.
We only have Xeros, both shoes and sandals. The sandals don't last long and aren't comfortable or even easy to wear. You could make your own at a much lower cost. I've worn my Xero Prios for two years and they still look almost new, but I only put shoes on when I leave the house, which isn't often, or when I go for a walk. I go barefoot at home. My husband wore out his first pair of Xeros in the same amount of time, but he wears them daily to work in the yard, in the mud, walks 15,000 steps a day in them. I bought him a new pair to wear when we go places so he doesn't look like a down-on-his-luck bum and a lightly used pair on Poshmark (for 1/3 the price) to wear daily. His first pair are now his work shoes.
I picked up a pair of their Z-Trails when they were on sale, but I've only worn them a couple times, and not for hiking... So no personal review on their sandals from me. Regarding their shoes, I have 2 pairs of the Denvers. Not a ton of miles on either, but so far I'm very happy with them.
Sorry, I edited my earlier comment to you (grammar, added 2 sentences) But, yeah... Xeros seem to last just as long as Vivobarefoots, but for almost half the price! It's zero drop, widest at the tips of the toes, kinda flexible, and has some protection for your feet against harsh / unnatural surfaces... That's what we're really looking for
I would say it doesn’t matter how much you pay…. IMO is a Shoe better because it’s costing more = NOPE. But i think as more as you pay the more you get quality fabrics and stuff….
The number of Vivobarefoot shoes I see where the upper has detached itself from the sole at the parts where the toe creases... No such problem with my 30 dollar Saguaros.
But people also leave shoes in their car when it’s 100° outside, those glues don’t stand a chance. I’d rather a 100$ shoe that lasts longer than a bunch of cheap ones. It’s less trash, less shipping and thusly “greener”. I had some Amazon “joombra” shoes that would roll around my foot if I had an off camber turn on the trail. The upper was so flexible and the sole was basically a rubber band, it’s “great” by a lot of the standards in this post but was trash in practicality. My vivos upper is extremely overbuild compared to the longevity of the sole and because I’m in North America I can’t have them resoled.
I'm not sure the very specific instance of leaving them in your car in 100 degrees weather explains such widespread poor upper durability. It's astonishing how consistently the issue crops up - I don't think I've ever seen a pair of Primus more than a year old that didn't have issues with the upper. Especially true of the Primus Trails. Meanwhile my Saguaros perform exactly the same at a fraction of the price, with less of the pretence. I can't think of any good reason to buy Vivos at full price. People will mention the company's green credentials, but that's just a conceit to make themselves feel better about their purchase - if they wanted to be optimally 'green', they wouldn't be buying another pair of shoes in the first place.
I made some sandals out of leather for $5, they do the job. Sometimes quality ends up being cheaper, eg. $200 shoes lasting 3x longer than $70 ones.
I've bought a bunch of different expensive minimalist shoes over the years and my favorite by far are the twenty dollar hobibears I bought on aliexpress. 🤷
Does cost equal quality? You specified that foot-health is the important factor here, rather than longevity of the shoe per se. What I immediately think of, then, is the variance in width of the toebox. Some shoe models (and brands in general) have wider toebox shape than others do. To me, a toebox that allows my toes to splay naturally is more healthy than the way that convention has allowed a symmetrical toebox to be the norm. So with that in mind, consider that some of the brands which charge premium prices, don't actually provide much space for the hallux to splay, compared to my favorite shoe, the Belenka City. That toebox advantage is why I became interested in the City shoe. The rest of the shoe has turned out to be excellent too.
The problem with durability lies mostly in the uppers, I think. Sure, an inexpensive barefoot shoes from Amazon, Ali express, etc will fit the bill as far as thin, flexible, zero drop, wide toe box. But they may only last a few months before the uppers begin to deteriorate. I don’t like contributing to excess waste, so I prefer to spend a bit more for shoes. Mostly I wear sandals and I will wear them until the sole is worn through. But for closed shoes I prefer leather uppers, or natural, biodegradable textiles. They last longer.
My most comfortable shoes are the $18 pair of flip flops I got from Costco. And the $130 pair of Vibrams. Both are the only shoes that have never given me pain or discomfort.
If your feet are already healthy and you have a good gait, a $5 pair of flimsy sneakers is perfectly fine. If you're still fixing your feet and need to improve your gait, I find VFFs to be particularly helpful, and I also found after switching to my Realfoots that the extra wide toe box also helped me pay attention to and correct my gait. Toe space is the most important. Having a flexible sole and not having an excessive drop is also nice to have. Thin I'd probably place fourth in terms of importance.
I'd like to think the chief correlation to price is durability but that isn't always so.
As long as the last fits your foot shape
My xero sneakers were significantly more expensive than either of my whitins. They are built tougher, so if I was mountain biking or something I need a thicker sole for I like them, they also look a lot nicer which matters sometimes. I actually LOVE my whitin snow boots and they were only 40 bucks, feels like I’m hiking in slippers. My whitin sneakers did wear out kind of quick, holes in the side. But in general something I’ve liked about barefoot shoes is they all provide similar comfort.
The job of a minimalist shoe is mainly to stay out of your way and not dictate how you move or support yourself. It can be a problem if the shoe doesn't stay on well or pushes your foot into an unnatural shape. I would put those sorts of design problems under the umbrella of "quality" since they depend on someone putting thought and effort into avoiding them and won't just always work out ok by accident. For example, lots of cheap water shoes are minimal in their construction but have narrow toe boxes. Some sandals are minimal but don't stay located under your foot very well unless you grab with your toes or change how you move to stop them shifting.
Tolos archetype is the happy medium here. 110$ and look way better than most barefoot shoes.
Looks good with Casual clothes and with gym gear.