3 ms·
OK, I'm convinced. I should at least try out less on my foot. I'm not willing to go barefoot though because I live in a concrete (and broken glass) city and eve
by ggruschow 18y ago
OK, I'm convinced. I should at least try out less on my foot. I'm not willing to go barefoot though because I live in a concrete (and broken glass) city and every business would turn me away at the door. So.. on to find a simpler shoe.
One would assume that putting less on my foot would cost less, right?
http://www.vivobarefoot.com/ http://www.vivobarefoot.com/ - looks nice, but at multiple times the price of my current shoes.. ok thinking back to summers as a kid, let's go to walmart:
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=10824696 http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=1082469... - Not pretty, but 8% of the price.
And for that matter, what about something like these:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0002TW8A4 http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0002TW8A4 - $15 + shipping seems fair, and they seem to resemble the description elsewhere.
Is there some significant difference (well, aside from the sheer ugly of that walmart example) that I should expect?
- papersmith 18y agoHmm, I wonder if aquasocks could do the trick (they're fairly inexpensive), though durability comes to mind.
- shard 18y agoThis reviewer on barefootrunner.com really liked water shoes: http://www.barefootrunner.com/2009/03/review-wateraqua-shoes/ http://www.barefootrunner.com/2009/03/review-wateraqua-shoes...