Hi-tec Shoes

[achilleus]

OK, now is there that big a difference between the Hi-Tec blades and their original squash shoe?

They look remarkably similar in form and function to the blades with a big price difference. If you look to get these shoes on Ebay, you can pick them up for under $40, not including shipping...

And, when sold in stores, they ain't much more than that either.

[keith]

Originally Posted by achilleus

OK, now is there that big a difference between the Hi-Tec blades and their original squash shoe?

They look remarkably similar in form and function to the blades with a big price difference. If you look to get these shoes on Ebay, you can pick them up for under $40, not including shipping...

And, when sold in stores, they ain't much more than that either.

Well yes there is alot of difference - but I'd probably go back to the hitech squash shoes.

Can't say the the blades are more supportive or better padded and the 'stability whatsit' takes getting used to.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by keith

Well yes there is alot of difference - but I'd probably go back to the hitech squash shoes.

Can't say the the blades are more supportive or better padded and the 'stability whatsit' takes getting used to.

Wow, the Blades don't have more support or padding than those $40 shoes?

So, what's the big difference then (besides $60...)?

[Zilverzmurfen]

Originally Posted by achilleus

Wow, the Blades don't have more support or padding than those $40 shoes?

So, what's the big difference then (besides $60...)?

The fancy colour..?

[keith]

Originally Posted by achilleus

Wow, the Blades don't have more support or padding than those $40 shoes?

So, what's the big difference then (besides $60...)?

well the soles will probably stand up better - but I've not been using them long enough to know how much longer. I also used to be quite good at separating the soles from the uppers on the squash shoes, again not enough time to know if that will be a problem with the Blades but they do seem to be better put together.

So the blades are probably better build than the squash shoes. There is definitely not more padding in the sole which is a good thing since the lowness of the squash shoes is one of the things that makes them good fencing shoes.

The one thing I am not sure about is the extra width on the base of the shoe (at the ball of the foot) - the stability thing. It does provide more piste contact and hence grip but it gives the shoe an odd feeling, as if it was to large.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

What everyone needs to understand is that fencing shoes are nothing special. They are poorly designed shoes, made from cheap materials. They're made for a low budget sport, and the companies have to charge outrageous amounts just to be able to sell them.

Take the adistar fencing shoe for instance. Its made from cheap, non durable ****, and they charge $180 for it. The reason people buy it is because they assume its the best since it costs more money. For $85 I can buy the worlds most popular squash shoe, the adidas stabil 6, which has better traction, better support, better padding and better durability. If I'm gonna pay $180, it better be for something better than a frickin moccasin.

Fencing shoes exist because you, the consumer, are willing to put up with the disgusting prices.

[telkanuru]

Frankly, to expect R&D $$$ or good prices is slighly unreasonable considering the size of our sport. That being said, having a bit more would be nice...

[sabreur]

Years ago, Hi-Tec used to make a squash shoe that had a 360 degree roll-over-- a ripple sole that wrapped up all the way around the shoe and was sewn through--it was a great squash shoe and a great fencing shoe--unfortunately, they don't make it anymore.