Adidas Dartagnan II
I've had two generations of D'artagnan IIs, and in those 3 or 4 years I never had any problem. They wore down after 1,5-2 years of solid service, and I still use them for playing football. If you want a reasonably priced shoe but not the cheapest, this is a perfect compromise. It also looks good, something I honestly can't say of the D'artagnan III, nor of the court shoes that eveyone wears. A small step down in style from the D'artagnan I, though, but even so, one of the more stylish and reliable shoes out there.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
1 out of 2 people found this review helpful
Summary: Like thin slippersApril 13th, 2007
The D'Art II's represent all the basic neccessities of a fairly traditional fencing shoe, but they don't go the extra mile, or even the extra inch, on anything. They are SO not worth it when there are better choices out there.
Fit:
Way too big in the toe box, even for my wide feet. They leave you with the infamous "Ronald McDonald" look, with the toe area looking puffed out and in addition to looking silly, not gripping your foot as well as could be desired.
Support:
MINIMALLY supportive. Gives enough padding for the lunge, but they used to leave the ball of my back foot awfully sore from the impacts of footwork. In addition, I turned my back ankle painfully several times while retreating with this shoe. Part of the problem was that in a short amount of time, it came to feel as though the sole of the back shoe was displaced towards the inside side by the upper's having stretched (during lunges I guess), such that when I was retreating it was unpleasantly easy to roll off the back edge of the sole and turn my back ankle.
Durability:
The sole, for me, lasted quite well, no complaints. But as for the rest, as stated above I felt that the upper of the back shoe stretched in such a way as to make them unstable and unsafe for quick retreating footwork. Visually they still looked great at that point though, with no obvious damage unless you turned them over and looked at how the front and back shoes' soles aligned differently from the uppers, the back sole having laterally displaced a bit from the stretching of the upper.
Grippy-ness:
Strictly average.
Overall, if you like really minimal, traditional fencing shoes, these would be great. If you want anything extra like better grip or support, keep looking!
Fit:
Way too big in the toe box, even for my wide feet. They leave you with the infamous "Ronald McDonald" look, with the toe area looking puffed out and in addition to looking silly, not gripping your foot as well as could be desired.
Support:
MINIMALLY supportive. Gives enough padding for the lunge, but they used to leave the ball of my back foot awfully sore from the impacts of footwork. In addition, I turned my back ankle painfully several times while retreating with this shoe. Part of the problem was that in a short amount of time, it came to feel as though the sole of the back shoe was displaced towards the inside side by the upper's having stretched (during lunges I guess), such that when I was retreating it was unpleasantly easy to roll off the back edge of the sole and turn my back ankle.
Durability:
The sole, for me, lasted quite well, no complaints. But as for the rest, as stated above I felt that the upper of the back shoe stretched in such a way as to make them unstable and unsafe for quick retreating footwork. Visually they still looked great at that point though, with no obvious damage unless you turned them over and looked at how the front and back shoes' soles aligned differently from the uppers, the back sole having laterally displaced a bit from the stretching of the upper.
Grippy-ness:
Strictly average.
Overall, if you like really minimal, traditional fencing shoes, these would be great. If you want anything extra like better grip or support, keep looking!
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
2 out of 6 people found this review helpful
Summary: Ok shoes, a little priceyMarch 24th, 2007
I have wide feet, and these are narrow shoes. For some reason they still hug my feet well. I just have a little room in the toes. I like the color scheme. They're fairly light without a lot of support, which I like.
The tread has lasted pretty well (one year of fencing 5-6 hours a week). The rear shoes hasn't fared as well, though. I roll my back foot when I lunge sometimes (show me someone who doesn't), and it has really eaten at the leather and sole by the ball of my foot. After 3-4 months, the leather and sole were already starting to detach. I just glue it back occasionally, but I wasn't impressed with the durability.
I like these shoes the best of all the shoes I've fenced in so far, but I don't like them enough to buy another pair without shopping around for something better.
The tread has lasted pretty well (one year of fencing 5-6 hours a week). The rear shoes hasn't fared as well, though. I roll my back foot when I lunge sometimes (show me someone who doesn't), and it has really eaten at the leather and sole by the ball of my foot. After 3-4 months, the leather and sole were already starting to detach. I just glue it back occasionally, but I wasn't impressed with the durability.
I like these shoes the best of all the shoes I've fenced in so far, but I don't like them enough to buy another pair without shopping around for something better.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
1 out of 3 people found this review helpful
Summary: Not that special...December 30th, 2005
Previously wore Adidas Asymmetricals, and the orginal D\'artagnans before that. My major complaint about the Dartagnan II is that it is an inferior shoe when compared to the older adidas, especially the asymms. The major complaint I have is the complete lack of cushining: The Dart II\'s have no removable sole, or even really a sole at all - it\'s like fencing in wooden sandels. Also, the front heel is not well rounded (for when your lunge lands). After several lunges my front heel became very sore, so I switched in my still-usable front Asymm (as only my rear one had been fully worn out). Granted, this is still a better-constructed shoe than the bargain basement BG or starfighters (in which I used to wreck my feet long ago), but at $110 or more, it\'s just not worth it.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
For the first few months, i had no problems with the shoes, great traction, and a snug fit. I then competed at JO's in texas, and the strips wore away at my shoes like sandpaper. After that, things only went downhill: every time that i put the shoes on, no matter how loose they were, they were way too thin soled. I couldn't fence more that one DE without having to take them off to try and save my feet. Also, since the sole is so thin, i kept turning my ankle over when i was retreating, and needing to wear a brace and thick socks for my feet. Overall, if you have thin feet, you will be very pleased with these shoes. I, however, do not, and am going to try the new Blade shoes by Leon Paul.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
For the first few months, i had no problems with the shoes, great traction, and a snug fit. I then competed at JO's in texas, and the strips wore away at my shoes like sandpaper. After that, things only went downhill: every time that i put the shoes on, no matter how loose they were, they were way too thin soled. I couldn't fence more that one DE without having to take them off to try and save my feet. Also, since the sole is so thin, i kept turning my ankle over when i was retreating, and needing to wear a brace and thick socks for my feet. Overall, if you have thin feet, you will be very pleased with these shoes. I, however, do not, and am going to try the new Blade shoes by Leon Paul.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
These are my first pair of true fencing shoes. I made the transition after one year of fencing wearing basic court shoes. The Dart II's are much lighter than court shoes. They are comfortable. I purchased them in Jan 2005 and have worn them twice a week at the club plus four tournaments so far this year. The shoes are durable and show no significant signs of wear. The reason for a good rating instead of excellent is my addition of a separate heel protector. I starting to experience some minor pain on the heel of my front foot in July. The heel protector has helped significantly. If there was an option to buy high tops I would have done so. Overall I am pleased.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
A decent shoe, but flawed (at least for my foot).
Typical Adidas quality, which is good. Minimal wear in the usual places (Used 2 or 3 times a week for 7 months).
I find the sole to provide excellent grip on gym floors. The traction is significantly better than the Adidas Equipment shoe on wood floors (enough better that the Equipment shoes stay in the bag unless there are rubber or metal strips).
The problem I have with the shoes is the fit. There seems to be too much shoe material in the toe area. The sole is not too wide, but the material on top bunches up when laced (gives the shoe a Ronald McDonald look - every pair I have seen looks this way to varying degrees). This construction allowed the front of my foot to move too much inside the shoe. A second pair of socks solved the problem with fit.
The fit & feel of the Equipment shoe is almost perfect, it just doesn't have great traction on wood floors (which most of us fence on most of the time). The Dartagnan II has great traction on wood floors, but falls short in fit. Adidas should start making the Equipment again and offer a choice of the 2 soles.
A well constructed shoe and probably worth the money (was $100). It just seems like it could have been a great value if it had been designed just a little differently.
Typical Adidas quality, which is good. Minimal wear in the usual places (Used 2 or 3 times a week for 7 months).
I find the sole to provide excellent grip on gym floors. The traction is significantly better than the Adidas Equipment shoe on wood floors (enough better that the Equipment shoes stay in the bag unless there are rubber or metal strips).
The problem I have with the shoes is the fit. There seems to be too much shoe material in the toe area. The sole is not too wide, but the material on top bunches up when laced (gives the shoe a Ronald McDonald look - every pair I have seen looks this way to varying degrees). This construction allowed the front of my foot to move too much inside the shoe. A second pair of socks solved the problem with fit.
The fit & feel of the Equipment shoe is almost perfect, it just doesn't have great traction on wood floors (which most of us fence on most of the time). The Dartagnan II has great traction on wood floors, but falls short in fit. Adidas should start making the Equipment again and offer a choice of the 2 soles.
A well constructed shoe and probably worth the money (was $100). It just seems like it could have been a great value if it had been designed just a little differently.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
2 out of 3 people found this review helpful
Summary: Your feet will thank youMay 5th, 2005
My previous shoes left my feet aching after I fenced regardless of what kind of insert/arch-support I used in them. I bought the Dart II's and my feet have stopped aching. Good traction and excellent fit. Snug where they should be and loose where they need to be. The tongue attaches to the sole with elastic - cool!! The laces stay tied. The heel is rounded. After having used them for several weeks, they show NO signs of wear or tear.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-
![KShan5[PrFC]](http://www.fencing.net/forums/customavatars/avatar1334_12.gif){kind=avatar}
5 out of 9 people found this review helpful
Summary: SpectaculisticApril 19th, 2005
I love these shoes...although I will have to say that this may not be a good assesment of the shoes. I had BG $35 shoes for about a year and a half, and for the last 9 monthes they had holes and no soles...so I used duck tape. These fit perfectly, the cushioing ins great, and the traction is beautiful. I spent $115, so alittle pricey, but still amazing.
Was this review helpful?
Review Ratings
- Overall Rating
-
- Value
-
- Fit/Style
-