I can see both sides. I have grown frustrated by some running shoe companies for NOT making changes even when reviews, customers, feedback, will indicate that there is a problem. For instance, I love Altra running shoes. Love the concept. But they have failed to make any significant changes to their Paradigm shoe in over two years. This is despite critics saying their shoes wear out way to fast and cushion goes out after only a 100 miles of running.
Hoka on the other hand seems to be doing quite the opposite. They listen to feedback and release new shoes or update shoes based on the feedback. Many people have complained their shoes are far too narrow so last year they released a wide version of the Bondi and the new Clifton 3 is even as wide and the wide Bondi.
Reebok seems to be the worst when it comes to reworking their shoes. You'd think six versions in, they would have known by now what people want.
Nike so far has been pretty good. Small but good incremental changes to the Metcons have made me a big lover of the Metcons. For me, each shoe offers something different. (nano v metcon)
But yes, sometimes I look at Nike and Reeboks' product line and get dizzy with all the flavors, designs etc.
Quote History Quoted:
It is amazing the dramatic changes these companies will make to a shoe's size and fit and still call them the same thing. Mizuno seems to be the worst about it.
View Quote