Yesterday was a put new stuff through its paces day in my dog walking time slot. Every once in a while (read: more regularly than I care to admit) I check to see what Lululemon has in its We Made Too Much section. Recently, I found the Run with Rover pant there.
Why yes, I am reminded of MC Hammer when I first glance at them, but don’t judge; the inside is velvety soft and wicks moisture, and the outside is water and wind resistant. The extra fluff around the last area women want fluff actually sports deep, really functional pockets, front and back, left and right.
It just so happened by late afternoon yesterday, it was quite windy and still damp from the rain earlier in the week. I’m waiting for the black to get marked down even further. They also have the same inner “legging” and outer looser design in the same fabrics in the Dog Runner pant, but at $118 I don’t see it happening. (I can’t repeat what Santa said when I sent him a link. It was profane and questionned my mental health.) I also think that despite the weird fluff at the hips, I like the Run with Rovers better, because I don’t have to have those hemmed, don’t have excess fabric to slosh in the mud and muck, etc.
I also broke my own rule and wore my new trail shoes on a 4-mile walk. I had a pair of Teva sandals years ago and literally wore them out, and I’m not at all happy at the comparatively low mileage I’m getting out of both pairs of trail runners I bought in August. I usually get at least 600 miles out of running/walking shoes, and as I rotate between 2-3 pairs, even at 20+ miles per week, that means a pair lasts at least 8 months. Wrong. Both my Rykas and my Brooks are shot on the soles. They’re slick as snot already. I don’t know if it’s because to get to my trails, I cover tar and gravel and a section of cement-paved road or what, but 4 months is TOTALLY unacceptable.
Anyway, I found the Teva Genea on super-sale at 6pm.com, so I’m giving them a try. After wearing running shoes for those four months, the sole is really stiff, but the cushioning/comfort factor is quite high, and the shoes felt great on the trail, gravel and in the fields. They were definitely too firm on the harder surfaces, so while I did run in them yesterday a bit to see how they fared, I will reserve them for the days we do more real “hiking”.
Given my tendency to get blisters, I’m happy to report that even in my usual spots with the broken-in shoes, I had no blistering. The shoes are about twice what I paid for them now on 6pm.com but they’re still a bargain at less than $60 if you like a firm-soled, well-cushioned hiker in the fur-girls signature colors.
The Brooks Cascadia remains the trail shoe love of my life… as long as I can find them drastically marked down. I do have a second pair of them stashed, so when I either fall and regret not retiring the first pair sooner, or when the sole springs a leak, I’ll still have two solid performers in the dog walking rotation. I’d pay full-price for them if they’d last longer…
Are my price points and expectations out of line?