I have 10.5 EEEE feet. Ducks follow me around as if I'm their leader. Birkenstocks fit me well, but otherwise, I have to seek out wide-specific shoes. I can also stand on one foot until I'm tired or bored, so super wide feet do have their advantages!
I'm in the process of getting the last few hundred miles out of my Shimano SPD-compatible "walkable" shoes. Can't remember the model, but they would be sold as "mountain bike" shoes, in that there are lugs and stuff to get grip. I have Ritchey SPD pedals on my Riv and Ibis, so I guess my 28mm-tired Riv is a "mountain" bike! ;) Anyway, when these give up the ghost and/or REI has a sale, I'll try whatever cheapest Shimano shoes they have that come in wide. The Stomp Lox look intriguing, but they don't make the longer sizes in wide too, which is too bad. On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 9:02:33 AM UTC-7 J wrote: > I feel like I've been banging my head against a wall with this question > for a couple years. I have one regular width foot that can tolerate just > about any shoe I put on it and one twice broken foot that can't tolerate > anything even slightly constricting in the toe box or pointy. So I normally > go with 12EE width equivalent shoes for the forgiving width and volume for > everyday use and wear approach shoes and flat pedals for on bike use. I can > no longer wear Vans of Converse that made up most of my non work footwear. > Any time I'm in a bike shop that has cycling shoes that I like the look of > I try them on and haven't yet found something that fits. As ugly I think > they are, Stomplox may be the only shoes voluminous enough. > > I once tried a friend's pair of very broken in (discontinued) Giro > Republic LX and they were a pretty nice fit but I needed a half size > bigger. > > I've been stuck on trying a pair of Quoc but they wildly varying opinions > on whether they fit wide or narrow always keeps me away from them. Now that > Rei is carrying them I may just get a chance to figure out sizing in person > the next time I need to make the 2 hour drive to the closest Rei. > > I have a friend with EE high volume feet and loves his Giro Empire VR90 HV > (HV discontinued) the HV stands for high volume. I think they look fairly > classic as well once you take a black sharpie to the lettering. The non HV > pretty classy left alone but I seriously doubt they'd fit. > > The concept of good fit is hamstrung by the fact that brand new leather > shoes aren't going to fit the same after breaking in. For the last 10+ > years I've immediately soaked a new pair of leather work boots until the > leather was saturated then wore them around wet for a few hours to get the > leather started breaking in, then letting them dry before ever wearing them > to work. Same goes for Brooks saddles, contrary to popular opinion. > > > > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 10:14:13 AM UTC-4 Ted Durant wrote: > >> On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 3:30:12 PM UTC-5 eric...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> Are there any proper cycling shoes out there that accommodate serious >> width? >> >> >> Thanks for jumping to a new thread ... I probably should have done that, >> myself. >> >> Should we start with a definition of "proper cycling shoes" ? :-) >> >> I have found the proliferation of pedals with large platforms to help me >> rethink what I am looking for in a cycling shoe. Of course, that also >> corresponds with retirement and never doing rides on which I feel the need >> to have my feet securely attached to the pedals. On the contrary, I am >> finding that being able to shift my feet around is significantly improving >> foot comfort on longer rides. It also has been helping me subtly alter the >> pedaling dynamics which is recruiting different muscles, which also reduces >> fatigue on longer rides. I did a 200km ride Saturday and being able to >> change my foot position was very helpful. I think that it's not just having >> a wider toe box, but also a more flexible sole that's important to foot >> health on long outings. My "theory" is that stiff soles, which are great >> for shorter rides with higher power output, are more damaging in the long >> run because they don't require the muscles (and attachments) in your feet >> and ankles to perform their usual stabilization and support functions. I'm >> not a PT/OT/MD, though, so take that for what it's worth. >> >> Still, I appreciate the advantages of stiff soles and secure pedal >> connections. Unfortunately, I have yet to find cycling shoes that allow my >> forefoot to spread as much as it wants to, and the result has been painful >> bunionettes. My Lake MX-1 shoes, on their MX competition last, sadly >> discontinued, have been the best I've found. It also helps that they are >> tradition lace-up shoes. Well, helped ... apparently there's no market for >> that feature anymore. >> >> Top tip for checking shoe fit. Pull out the insoles and stand on them. >> You'll immediately see the difference between the shoe shape and your foot >> shape. It's kind of scary, though ... fair warning! >> >> Ted Durant >> Milwaukee, WI USA >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/63e9b99d-2294-4ecb-8cf6-800f7a34917cn%40googlegroups.com.
