1. Regarding the Heel-Toe Offset
In my earlier post criticizing the heel on the Free Run+, I stated: “The Nike Free Run+ appears to sport a bigger heel than on either the 3.0 or 5.0 – I could be wrong, but just look at the comparison picture to the left and see if you agree.”  Turns out I was wrong – Ernest points out in the Runner’s World thread in response to similar speculation about the large heel on the Free Run+ that “It’s important to note that the height of a midsole as visible from the side-view of a shoe is not necessarily indicative of its thickness under the foot.” He goes on to say that “In the case of the Nike Free Run+, the actual height of the midsole under the heel of the foot is 1 mm lower than it was in the Nike Free 5.0 v4. The forefoot height has remained constant, which means the differential in height between the forefoot and heel–what we call the heel/ball offset–is also 1 mm lower than it was in the 5.0 v4. The net result is a more barefoot-like feel.“

So the heel of the Free Run+ does sit lower to the ground than the Free 5.0, I admit my mistake. However, I’m still confused as to why Nike states when introducing the Free Run+ on their website that it has “more cushioning for an exceptional ride” and “increased support under the arch for improved stability.” And why do they state the following on the Nike Free Run+ product page on on the Nike Store: “The Nike Free Run+ Men’s Running Shoe pulls from elements of the Nike Free family in order to deliver a shoe that’s more flexible, more supportive and more cushioned than ever” and “If you’re ready for the benefits of barefoot training but require a shoe with a plusher feel than others in the Nike Free line, don’t overlook this shoe’s heel design – a new addition to the series – which delivers a cushioning experience that won’t compromise your flexibility.” More cushioning and stability than what? I had assumed that meant the 5.0 since that seems to be the most comparable shoe in the line. What’s more, the proper heel design for a barefoot-like shoe is no heel at all, so it is hard to “overlook the shoe’s heel design.” I’m still a bit uncertain on this one. Irregardless, a 1 mm reduction in drop hardly makes this a barefoot-like shoe in the vein of the Vibram Fivefingers, or even most racing flats, and the last time I looked at a bare foot it didn’t have any external arch support.

My problem is not so much with the Free Run+ as a shoe, because I do think it’s a whole lot more minimalist than most shoes on the market (which is a good thing), and it’s a fine choice for those wishing to transition into minimalist running. My problem is with it being marketed as barefoot-like, and as a shoe that might encourage a barefoot-like gait. In my opinion, no shoe with a pronounced heel can make this claim. Of all of the factors that have moved humans away from the mid-foot/forefoot strike of our ancestors and those who are habitually unshod (see Daniel Lieberman’s paper in Nature), I suspect the presence of a cushioned heel is most important, and that is why I have a problem with the barefoot-like claims about this shoe. I think the Free Run+ is better described as a transitional minimalist shoe, but I doubt that’s going to be a winner in a marketing campaign.

2. Regarding the Discontinuation of the Free 5.0 and 3.0
My basis for assuming that the Free 5.0 and moreso the 3.0 were being discontinued was twofold. First, a post on the Running Warehouse blog stated “For Summer ‘10 the Free 3.0 and 5.0 combine to become not the Free 4.0, but instead, the Free Run.” I took this to mean that the 3.0 and 5.0 were going away. My other reason was that the 3.0 has been nearly impossible to find anywhere in stores or on-line, including Nike’s own on-line store, for quite some time (this was also noted on the Runner’s World thread and by numerous people I know who have been trying to buy them). I was alerted just the other day that some stock of the 3.0 had appeared at the on-line Nike Store, which is good news.

On the Runner’s World thread, Ernest indicates that both the “Nike Free 3.0 and Nike Free 7.0 will continue to be available in some channels and markets.” I’m not sure what this means for the future of the 5.0, or where specifically the others will continue to be available, but I’m happy that the 3.0 seems to have at least some life left. Maybe all of my grousing about the Free Run+ is just because I liked the Free 3.0 so much and was afraid that a good thing was going away (hence the ridiculous # of posts I’ve written about this new shoe!), but I still think that if the Free Run+ is the future of the lineup, then Nike is making a mistake.

So after all of this, what do I want? I’ve made it clear on this blog that I’m a big fan of the Vibram Fivefingers as a barefoot-like shoe. I don’t run in them everyday, but the strengthening benefits they provide goes farther than anything even the Free 3.0 did for me (my soleus muscles let me know that right away after my first Vibram run). What I’d like to see from Nike is a Free 2.0 or 1.0 – keep a minimalist upper like that on the 3.0, and create a shoe that has a heel-toe offset of 0, or as close to 0 as is feasible. If they do that, I’ll be the first one to tout the shoe as barefoot-like, and I’ll be first in line to try them out.

Update 10/27/2010: I have now posted my own Nike Free Run+ review. Check it out here: https://runblogger.com/2010/10/nike-free-run-review-nice-transitional.html.

As you can see, the Garmin Forerunner 310XT sports a sleeker new look when compared to the Forerunner 205/305 models, and in addition to the cosmetic makeover, it features the following:

1. Waterproof to 50m – I don’t swim (except floating and doggy paddle), so this won’t matter for me unless my dog pulls me into the Merrimack River after spotting a squirrel while trail-running. Also, I run in the rain with my Forerunner 205 all the time with no problem.

2. ~20hr Battery Life – no more running out of juice in the middle of a 15 miler, which, although rare and totally my fault for not recharging, is incredibly annoying.

3. Wireless Sync w/ Computer – I like this a lot!

4. Four Data Screens – vs. three in my 205.

5. Works with a Waterproof Heart Rate Monitor – this would be great for triathletes.

6. Syncs with a Small Foot-Pod – this will allow it to track distance on a treadmill (kind of like Nike+ I’d guess – the treadmill is really the only place I have continued to use Nike+ – you can see my review of it here).

The 310XT has created some positive buzz amongst triathletes on forums that I frequent given its waterproof design, and reviews have generally been positive. For more, check out the Garmin preview video on YouTube:

Here’s a commercial Garmin has put out for the 310XT:

Looks interesting, and the tech junkie in me really wants one, but the price will have to come down a bit from the list of $349.99 before I ditch my reliable old 205.

Update 4-11-09: Looks like Garmin is dropping prices on the older Forerunner models. The Garmin Forerunner 305 (w/ heart rate monitor) can now be had on Amazon.com for around $160.00 (it fluctuates daily – see link below for exact price). The Forerunner 205 is only about ten dollars less (which makes me wonder why anyone would opt for that model now when the price is so close). I’m almost tempted to Ebay off my 205 and buy the 305 to take advantage of the heart rate tracking (though my wife might have a thing or two to say about that idea – she “tolerates” my love for new gadgets only to a certain degree). Anyway, you can read my detailed review of the Garmin Forerunner 205/305 GPS wristwatches by clicking here.

I have also posted a review of my experience with the Nike+ system here.

Below are links to various Garmin Forerunner products on Amazon. The last two are accessories that sync up with the Forerunners (check individual watch specs for compatibility). The Forerunner 405 is a smaller-profile watch with similar functions to the 205/305, though it is considerably more expensive.

Amazon offers free shipping for any order over $25.00, which would clearly apply to most of the items below.

About a year ago my wife found the item pictured above on the internet. It’s called the Visionaire Peter Potty Toddler Urinal, and it has to be one of the most ingenious inventions I have ever seen (and the reviews on Amazon back this up). Now, a year later I came across the Peter Potty on my Amazon Wish List (yes, I am a huge fan of Amazon), and am very tempted to give it a try (I mean, for my son to give it a try, really…). My only concerns are whether or not he is too big for it now, and how much cleaning it requires, but the latter can’t be any worse than the work currently required to clean the toilet seat, toilet tank, floor, walls, magazine rack, and anything else within a 3 foot radius of the commode. Anyway, if I take the plunge with the Peter Potty (no pun intended), I’ll be sure to let you know how it goes (when my son uses it of course…though it is named after me).

Update 4/5/09: Now, I never really expected to be updating this post, but thanks to my sister I have to do so. She checked out the Peter Potty and informed me that Amazon has another great potty tool that might better suit the needs of our five-year old. It’s called Flippee the Toilet Shield, and as the name implies, Flippee is a big plastic shield that flips up and down to block any potential messes. I have to give the inventors credit – not only is the name awesome, but the logo is hilarious (see above – I love that turtle), and Flippee himself might just work, though he has a really awful job when you think about it. If nothing else, go to Amazon and read the reviews – they’re really good for a laugh! You can see Flippee in action below…

Update 7/1/09: Since I originally posted this, I now am the proud owner of a Flippee, and I’m happy to say that it works as advertised. It fits nicely on the toilet, stays out of the way when it folds down, and creates an effective blocking shield when my son is doing his business. After finishing, he enjoys spraying it down with a water bottle for a quick clean. Now if only I can get him to remember to use it on a consistent basis…maybe a height detecting automatic flip-up feature could be incorporated into a future release???

Below are links to both of these items on Amazon.com.