The Ecco BIOM
The reason for my recent trip to Denmark was the Ecco BIOM, a new running shoe engineered on the principle of natural joint motion. In recent years it has become increasingly accepted as fact that conventional running shoes alter the natural kinematics of the running stride in ways that increase injury risk and reduce performance. Biomechanics experts such as G.P. Bruggemann of the University of Cologne have called for manufacturers to develop footwear that allows the joints to move more naturally during running so that injury risk will be reduced and performance will increase. Ecco hired Dr. Bruggeman as a consultant for the development of BIOM, which emerges a manifestation of his ideas about what a running shoe should be.
Perhaps the most important characteristic of the BIOM is its low heel. Lowering the heel reduces the amount of ankle supination and the degree of ankle dorsiflexion on initial footstrike, as well as the rate of ankle plantar flexion and pronation as the footstrike phase transitions into the stance phase. All of these changes make the stride more like that of barefoot running.
Another interesting characteristic of the BIOM is a shank in the midsole that provides lateral stiffness in the heel and midfoot to facilitate the efficient transfer of forces from the heel to the forefoot during the ground contact phase of the stride. This shank branches and opens up in the forefoot to allow the forefoot freedom of movement for a more powerful pushoff. A wide toebox that permits the toes to spread slightly when applying force to the ground, as they do in barefoot running, as facilitates a more forceful toe-off.
I’ve now run in the BIOM twice. The first things I noticed about its feel were its closeness to the ground and the stiffness and hardness of its platform. Because of the latter, the BIOM is less comfortable than the Nike Free, another minimalist shoe that Dr. Bruggemann had a hand in developing. Yet in this regard the BIOM actually feels more like barefoot running. When I run barefoot on sand, for example, I am conscious of really tensing up the musculature of my lower legs and feet to absorb impact and capture and reuse energy from impact. In the BIOM I have much the same feeling. The soles of these shoes are so hard and stiff that they make a click-clack sound on pavement, but I am also conscious of a lightning-quick forward transfer of energy. Although I’ve never worn them, I imagine that the BIOM is a bit like those stiff sprinter’s shoes that are designed to minimize energy dissipation and ground contact time.
I expect many runners to not like the feel of the BIOM, and that’s their right. But I have a feeling that the BIOM is the kind of shoe that one can learn to love. Its makers at Ecco are very upfront about the need to give the body time to adjust to the feel of running in the BIOM. Ecco-sponsored professional triathlete Torbjorn Sindballe says it took him several months. I am interested to see how I feel about the BIOM after I’ve been wearing it for a few weeks. I plan to add it to my regular shoe rotation with the Nike Free 3.0 and the Nike Lunar Lite Racer. Perhaps the most telling indicator of how much I like the BIOM will be how much I look forward to my BIOM runs versus my Free and Lunar Lite runs.
The one thing I don’t like about the BIOM already is its weight. It weighs nearly twice as much as my Lunar Lite Racers. That’s a consequence of Ecco’s decision to use plyurethane instead of EVA in the midsole. PU is denser, which is what allowed Ecco to get the heel so low to the ground, but it’s also heavier. I’ve already told the Ecco folks how I feel about the weight and I expect that they will be able to reduce it in future versions.
A final note: The upper of the Ecco BIOM is made of yak leather. It’s everything you need the upper material of a running shoe to be–light, thin, comfortable and breathable–but most of all, it’s a conversation starter.Â
December 12th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
I ran in nike free 3.0’s for the first time today (6 miles) and feel they are the closest I’ve ever felt to barefoot running while wearing a shoe. The feel of the road and dirt was outstanding. I’ve converted to them from 5k flats and love the feel. From your description, I’m a little hesitant to try the BIOM’s. It seems like they’re over-engineering something that should be quite simple. I like the idea of the heel being low to the ground, but doesn’t the stiffness take away from the foot’s natural range of motion and flexibility? I like the aspect of simplicity in the Nike Free 3.0. It seems like a bare bones shoe. Also, how is the Lunar Racer? I own a pair of the trainers and love/hate them. I love the cushion for long runs, but feel like it’s a little too much at times. The heel also seems to be quite high as well.
December 12th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
The foot is actually quite rigid from the heel to the midfoot. It’s the forefoot for all of the mobility is found. The design of the BIOM mirrors this strucure. It is rigid only in the heel and midfoot, quite flexible in the forefoot. I love my Frees, but it’s possible that this reinforcement of the foot’s structure does a better job of transfering forces productively through ground contact. I don’t know.
I love the Lunar Racer too. It’s just so damn light, but more cushioned than other racing flats, and I believe that Lunar Light on pavement is more like a bare foot on grass in terms of the degree of muscle tension it demands, and any shoe characteristic than makes the stride more natural is good.
December 12th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
That sounds interesting. I may look for the BIOM’s after all. When is the release date? And I’ll certainly look into the Lunar Racers! Thanks again for all the great info!
Cheers!
Dave
December 13th, 2008 at 10:41 am
Hi Matt,
I am the General Manager of ECCO Performance here in the US. Sorry I wasn’t able to join you for the trip to our headquarters in Tonder, Denmark. I read your comments about BIOM with great interest.
In your short exposure to BIOM, you have certainly captured the essence of our objective with the concept. But, your fresh eyes and words shed new insight on the product for me. Thank you.
As you know, it took two and 1/2 years for ECCO, Bruggemann and Sindballe to develop BIOM. In the 6 months since we have begun to launch it to retailers, we have shown it to 100-150 of the best running specialty stores in the US. We have been humbled and honored by their response. Your readers will be able to find BIOM in 50-75 of the premiere running specialty stores across the country in March 2009.
In the interim, we are disseminating around 100 test pairs of shoes to elite runners, who work for some of the 100 plus stores to which we presented. We have provided with each pair; a BIOM guide to explain the concept, a training schedule regarding running in BIOM and a web link to provide their personal testimony & feedback. This should allow us to receive additional information about the concept. As you probably know, Bruggemann is also conducting one of the largest studies ever on running biomechanics using two test groups of runners; one running in their favorite shoe and the other running in BIOM. The results should be interesting and allow us to further develop BIOM.
Again, thanks for your review of BIOM. We want the running community to hear everything about this new concept.
Happy BIOMing,
David Helter
December 14th, 2008 at 5:08 am
Matt,
The shoe sounds great along with the concept, but as a runner and consumer I am not sure that Ecco should be asking for $250.00 in the first go a round as a brand new retailer in the business and sport of running ? I may be quoting a wrong price, but that is what Warren Greene from runners world said in his review. I would love to try it but not if that is the price, I think I will stick to the Frees.
December 14th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Matt,
Which shoe did you wear in Dec. 13’s 5K? For a race, I usually wear Nike Free 3.0s. I’ve also worn Nike LunaRacers and, based on a recommendation of a reader of this blog, Adidas Adizero PR.
I wonder if the suppleness of the Free 3.0s slow me during my finishing kick. Last week, I listed to a discussion of sprinters shoes on a podcast. Dan Toon with the sports technology institute at Loughborough University is quoted as saying, “If we look at the ankle joint by increasing the stiffness of the shoe what you’re essentially doing is increasing the lever length about the point of application of force generation in the foot about the ankle joint itself. By making a shoe stiff you’re increasing the lever length and therefore they can generate energy more efficiently.
…
“. . . [W]hen we look at a comparison with a barefoot condition by optimising the stiffness you can probably expect to double the amount of mechanical energy you can generate at the ankle. It makes a substantial difference to getting from A-to-B in a sprint run.”
Distance running was not brought up during the discussion, but over the last 400 to 500 meters of a 5K race, a shoe’s stiffness might make a difference.
The text of the interview is at
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/interviews/interview/943/
December 15th, 2008 at 11:02 am
David,
Thanks for the interesting comment. I wore my Free 3.0’s for the race. Normally I race in the Lunar Lite Racers, but I just felt like wearing my Frees.
Sprinting is a very different beast from distance running. If you wore sprinter’s shoes in a road race, you would almost certainly lose more in the first 3 miles, 6.1 miles, or whatever than you gained in the homestretch. Indeed, I seldom get all the way up on my toes even in the homestretch of a road race.
That said, most runners probably race in shoes that are not as stiff as they should be even for distance running.
Matt
December 15th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Matt,
I’m curious about what shoes you wear to race your marathons and long runs. As I got used to the Nike Free 3.0, I now find it increasingly difficult to run in anything else. I raced my half-marathon in them and felt great but I chickened out and used my LunarTrainers for my training runs over 30 km and my marathon.
I’m now starting another marathon (actually a 50 miler) training cycle and I alternate between my 3.0 and “winterized” (I put some hex screws in the sole) 5.0. Do you see any reason NOT to run marathon or ultra distances in the 3.0? I don’t want to do anything stupid, but they feel so darn good.
December 15th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
I’m with Bruce on the cost of the shoe. When you first mentioned going out to test the shoe, I did some snooping around, and I found an unsubstantiated rumor that in addition to the $230-$250 shoe that you currently have, they were tossing around the idea of having a more “everyman” style shoe running closer to the $100 range, without the Yak leather and with some other cost saving things. I was just wondering if they mentioned anything about the alternate version when you were there learning about the shoe. I’d be much more tempted to go for something I was unsure of if it was more equally priced in comparison to other shoes. As it stands, though, I’ll probably be one of those to spend $250 on a couple new pair of Frees and wait until the second go-round to see if the price drops.
December 17th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Hi Matt,
At the risk of becoming a “regular” on your site, I wanted to comment on a few of the messages you have received regarding BIOM. I have attached a copy of the Runner’s World website where Warren Greene previews ECCO BIOM. I checked it to make sure he was correct on the pricing. He quotes it correctly. When BIOM hits the market in March, there will be 6 models; BIOM A men’s leather, BIOM A men’s textile, BIOM B women’s leather, BIOM B women’s textile, BIOM B men’s leather and BIOM B men’s textile. All leather BIOM will be $220 US and all textile BIOM will be $195. While BIOM will be the most expensive running shoes on the market, 2009 prices increases from other brands/styles, like Nike Air Max 360 @ $165, Newton Gravity @ $175 or Asics Kinsei 2 @ $180, will close the gap between those top end styles and BIOM.
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1873859330/bclid1873806684/bctid1898293202
It has been interesting to read the blog comments. It looks like the running community is very open to the whole minimalist movement or natural motion platform. Can’t wait to get feedback on our test product being sent in out into the field.
Happy BIOMing,
David Helter
December 19th, 2008 at 11:59 am
David,
You listed prices of the Kinsei 2, Air max 360 and the Newton shoe. But they are not considered minimalist shoes , plus who actually runs in the Kinsei ?? That is fashion shoe that Asics promotes as a combination of cushioning and stability. Nike Free 3.0 can be as low as $85.00 and does the job, so why try something that costs $220.00 ? Especially in these economic times. I like Matt Fitzgerald’s books and thoughts on the subject, but I politely disagree that the cost of the Biom should not be an issue. I think it is, just my opinion. Time will tell.
January 17th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Those don’t look that minimalist to me. I’m a runner (2:38 marathon PR) who now runs mostly in the Nike Katana Racer and the Vibram FiveFingers. The Biom’s weight and thick heel seem to take them out of the minimalist category, but I’ll be interested to try them, and I applaud Ecco for the effort.
January 17th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
The heel may look thick but it’s not. It’s the lowest heel of any training shoe I’ve ever worn. There’s an optical illusion created by the fact that the outsoul bleeds into the upper. The folks at ECCO gave me the specs on the shoe at one point but I don’t have them handy. I’ll track them down and post them to prove that the heel is exceptionally low, because apparently y’all don’t trust me. I would like to point out that creating a shoe with a low heel was really the entire point of creating this shoe. The folks at ECCO would have to be some of the stupidest people on earth to set out with this purpose and then fail to actually create a running shoe with a low heel, don’t you think?
Finally, the BIOM is not promoted as a minimalist running shoe. It’s promoted as a natural joint motion running shoe.
January 20th, 2009 at 7:34 am
This was a very interesting read.
When it comes to the rather high price of the shoe; do they last longer than your average running shoe? (1000-1500K)
Let’s say that they have, due to the different material, twice the lifespan of a normal running shoe, than the cost would be about the same. But who can answer that question?
January 20th, 2009 at 10:50 am
The Ecco BIOM does in fact last longer than your average running shoe. This is because the PU midsole material compresses more slowly than the EVA that is used in other shoes. But they don’t last twice as long–it’s more like 15 percent longer.
February 8th, 2009 at 1:18 am
Thank You Matt!
I’ve also become an experienced and educated fan of Nike FREE and the Lunar products… And with GOOD REASON - THEY WORK!
And yeah, after all of the previous discussions here around comparing the BIOM to Nike FREE and LUNARs - I had to laugh (LOUDLY) when David Helter chose to compare the RIDICULOUSLY HIGH PRICE OF THE BIOM, to a shoe like the Nike Air Max 360, which is a shoe that, for one: has had nothing to do with the discussions here - and, for two: happens to be one of the most expensive running shoes in Nike’s line (and it’s not even an actual ‘go-to’ running shoe anyway, for any ‘runner’. WEAK MOVE David.)
In my experience, Nike FREEs are fully capable of running WELL OVER 1000 MILES (largely due to the conforming nature of the articulating outsole, which obviously doesn’t fight against the road surface OR the natural motion of the human foot…)
In fact, I’ve never truly ‘worn out’ the outsole of a pair of FREEs, not like conventional running shoes anyway - that end up with ground down flat spots in the high contact areas…
In fact, I usually just get tired of looking at my FREEs after that long, and I recycle them…but I am still always amazed at how the articulated outsole seems to disperse point pressures more evenly across the foot, much differently from conventional running shoes. It’s awesome!
BTW - It’s not necessarily the material that always determines the wear of an outsole - design and how the chosen material ‘yields’ to the surface will also play a significant role in it’s lifespan.
And we all know that FREE moves with finesse along the road surface - and as described here, the BIOM sounds like it moves like a brick!
CLEARLY, I could easily find Nike FREEs on line somewhere, on sale, and literally buy THREE PAIR OF NIKE FREEs FOR THE PRICE OF ONE PAIR OF ECCO BIOMs. Why would I waste money like that on the Biom? Just to try something new that so clearly sounds like it runs like a turd? NO THANKS!
The BIOM is EXPENSIVE. It’s HEAVY. And it sounds like it RUNS LIKE A BRICK (”Click Clack” Are you sure that Ecco didn’t partner up with Under Armor on this project Matt?)
No thanks, I’ll opt to keep training happily and regularly in my FREEs - which clearly give me healthier, stronger feet, and optimized lower body stability; and I’ll keep racing in my LUNARs, with great results and NO ISSUES - thank you very much!
- GREAT BLOG MATT! Thanks much for the report! (I will give Ecco one thing - the Bioms ‘look’ pretty cool. But looks aint everything - and they don’t mean squat after 20 miles…heck looks don’t mean squat on a 5k for that matter!)
JK Out.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:54 am
Hi Matt,
Very interesting review, especially as I am a native of Tonder in Denmark, now settled in Ireland and working with the Irish Mountain Running Association.
I’ll be particularly interested in the Trail version that is forecasted for later in 2009 on the BIOM project website.
-Rene
February 24th, 2009 at 4:40 am
Dear Matt,
after reading your explanation of the Ecco Biom I like to add some clarifying comments.
The Biom running shoe shows features of the natural motion concept which was elaborated a couple years ago at the German Sport University. But there is some misleading information in the footwear scene which has to be corrected.
Dr. Brüggemann was not hired by Ecco as a consultant for the development of the BIOM shoe. As a biomechanist and not a footwear designer he was not involved in the technical development, which seems to be a strong and successful collaboration of Ecco designers and the top athlete Sindballe.
At the German Sport University Cologne research on natural joint motion was conducted over the last years. The natural motion concept was published for the first time in 2006 and 2007 (e.g. Natural motion: aim or origin of future footwear design) and presented at different scientific conferences. The early idea of “the preferred movement path†of a joint was already presented by Dr. Nigg (Calgary) in a paper published in 2001. In this context the wording “natural motion” occurred first in the biomechanical literature. In the meantime many groups and also manufacturers were very interested in the idea and asked for more details.
So far Dr. Brüggemann did not conduct a large intervention study with a specific running shoe. We are very interested in the relation between footwear and the occurrence of physical activity related injuries, but up to now no larger prospective study was carried out by our research group at the Institute of Biomechanics and Orthopaedics.
Regards
G.-P. Brueggemann, Prof. Dr.
Institute of Biomechanics and Orthopedics
German Sport University Cologne
February 24th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Dr. Brueggemann,
Thank you so much for your clarifying comments. It’s an honor to host you in this space! I must say that I am disappointed to learn that Ecco staff mislead me in telling me that you were undertaking a prospective injury study involving the BIOM.
Matt
March 6th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Hi JK,
W - O - W. That was some commentary on the new ECCO running collection, BIOM. You certainly are passionate about natural motion. Glad to hear you like Free and are open about the whole concept of natural motion.
Did you know that BIOM is based on the same study mentioned above which elaborated a couple years ago at the German Sport University? The same study reference by Nike when developing Free.
The reference I made to the pricing of BIOM and comparison to the Air Max 360 and other high end shoes was simply a benchmark to retail prices of the top of the line for several companies. It did not serve to compare techonolgies in each of these styles.
Regarding your comment “BIOM sounds like it moves like a brick!,”I am not sure of your reference point on this comment. Have you had the opportunity to try BIOM or see a pair in person or speak to anyone who has run in BIOM? Hopefully you will get that opportunity in the few weeks when BIOM is introduced to the running market. We obviously hit a niche as it will be featured in 40 premiere running stores across the country.
Thanks for your comment “I will give Ecco one thing - the Bioms ‘look’ pretty cool.” We humbly agree!
Get BIOMized……
David Helter
March 6th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Matt,
Sorry to monopolize your blog site but just in case runners like JK are interested in natural motion and want to learn the real deal with BIOM, please have them check out;
http://www.thebiomproject.com/
David Helter
March 11th, 2009 at 10:14 am
Hi Matt,
I’ve really appreciated your blog on the Ecco Biom and all the contributors’ comments. I’ve spent the better part of my running career in the quest for the holy grail of “natural motion,” and I can truly appreciate Ecco’s desire to offer a shoe design that caters to those wishing to improve their biomechanics to be more efficient.
As I see it, there seem to be two approaches that running shoe companies are moving toward: 1. designing shoes that “help” the runner to learn better biomechanics by making the runner’s body adapt over time to the conditions presented to them by wearing the shoes.(ie. Ecco’s, Newton’s, MBT’s) and 2. designing minimalist shoes that work well for runners who either already have reasonably good, economical running technique or are willing to use a minimal shoe as an aid to discover for themselves how to improve their biomechanics (Nike Free’s, Adizero’s, Nike Luna’s, Five Fingers, NB 790’s, and most racing flats). As you can see from some of the posts to this blog, the minimal shoes are very unforgiving, so they force you to run well or suffer the consequences.
After doing my best for 10 years now to help promote better biomechanics, I must say I’m thrilled to see that some shoe companies are finally coming on board and starting to offer alternatives to the current paradigm of shoe design (more cushioning, higher heels and generally overbuilt shoes) And, I might add, we have yet to see a scientific study showing that the commonly accepted shoe designs of today have ever had any effect on lowering the incidence of running related injuries.
I’ve always encouraged runners to improve their technique and then find a shoe that “fits” their changing technique, rather than trying to find a shoe that requires their body to adapt to the shoe as a way to improving their technique.
I think that the ideal shoes are the ones that best allow your body to move in the most efficient way possible without hampering the flow of energy from your torso to your toes, and do not restrict your “natural motion” in any way.
Keep up the great work! It’s a hot topic.
Danny Dreyer
March 11th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Danny,
Thanks so much for your post. Folks, Danny Dreyer’s Chi Running has sold more copies than all of my books combined!
Matt
March 18th, 2009 at 9:21 am
Wow, Danny Dreyer! I’m reading Chi Running right now. I feel priviliged to post right after him. Haha. Would you recommend the Biom for a triathlete?
March 19th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
I’ve never tried on a pair so I’m really unqualified to give you a well-informed answer. For myself, I naturally gravitate towards less of a shoe. Hey, if the shoe fits…
Danny
March 20th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
I am interested in the BIOM but it is not yet available here in Boulder, Colorado. I currently wear the Elixir 3’s for runs of all distances, including marathons. I am also using last years Karhu M1’s, and a few older pairs of DS Trainer 7’s. Since I have been wearing stability shoes, are any of the shoes mentioned above like the Nike Free, Luna Racer, Adizero, etc. appropriate for me? I am definitely interested in the Free’s and the Luna Racer’s but they are listed as Neutral shoes.
I should mention that I prefer lite, minimalist shoes where possible.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Michael,
There is no evidence that stability shoes reduce injury risk. Minimalist shoes are actually more stable because they are lower to the ground. I’d give them a try.
Matt
March 20th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Thanks Matt, Just curious, would you try the Free’s first or the Lunarlite Racer’s? I generally hate Nike’s but perhaps I need to put that aside as the minimalist in me is very interested in both shoes. I will also check out the BIOM’s when I can try them locally. Thanks again for the feedback.
March 21st, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Danny Dreyer,
Thanks for your words of encouragement to ECCO, “I’ve really appreciated your blog on the Ecco Biom and all the contributors’ comments. I’ve spent the better part of my running career in the quest for the holy grail of “natural motion,†and I can truly appreciate Ecco’s desire to offer a shoe design that caters to those wishing to improve their biomechanics to be more efficient.” Please touch base with Matt and he can put you in touch with me. We would love to provide you witha pair of BIOM to test. Maybe you will finally find your “holy grail” of natural motion. You could also provide us with great expertise and feedback.
Get BIOMized…………
David Helter
General Manager - ECCO Performance
March 23rd, 2009 at 10:33 am
Michael,
I suggest you find a store that carries both, try them on, and purchase the pair that feels most comfortable.
Matt
March 25th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Message for David Helter:
David, do you know when the Ecco shoes will be available in Colorado? I live near Boulder and would love to try them but don’t want to until I can try them on in person. Also, I buy lot’s of shoes (usually close to 25 pairs in active rotation and have previously wear tested another manufacturers shoes so if you are able to make a test pair available that would be great, although I understand that me not being an elite type runner, I might not fit the profile for wear testing. Either way, I will try them once they are available here in Boulder. They look very interesting.
March 31st, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Hi Michael,
Please call Boulder Running Company and ask them for BIOM. They are “on the fence” regarding launching BIOM. Any calls from interested runners like youself will help them decide to support our BIOM launch.
Get BIOMized……….
David Helter
April 1st, 2009 at 10:13 pm
David and Matt,
I have really enjoyed getting your perspectives on the BIOM. I have been running competitively now for about two years. Leading up to the time I have always run in stability shoes due to low arches (i.e. Brooks Trance, Asics Kayano). However through much work I now feel more comfortable in a neutral shoe. Finally after getting injured toward the end of my cross country season for a small division III school in the northeast, I have decided to try a more natural approach. I signed up on Ecco’s website to be a wear tester, but couldn’t wait. I had to drive down to Baltimore today and buy a pair of BIOM A’s. I wore them most of the afternoon and went for a short run in them. First take…I love them. I look forward to going through the recommended process and getting plenty of use out of them. Currently my race shoes are the Brooks T5 and Saucony Type A2. So I can’t give any comparison to the other minimalist shoes that have been mentioned.
However I do work at a running specialty shop and starting in May we will be carrying the Vibram 5-fingers, so I will be able to give some comparison feedback at that time. Thanks again for all the info so far.
If you don’t sweat you’re not running…
Matthew
April 4th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for your purchase of a pair of BIOM A running shoes. I am glad you are enjoying your initial experience with BIOM. The sales for the first two weeks the shoes have been in stores have been fantastic.
Please let me know in what running specialty shop you are working. We would be glad to come and present the BIOM technology to the shop owner.
David Helter
April 8th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Hey Matt or David, what are the specs (heel and forefoot heights) on the Bioms? As I mentioned previously, I run in the Five Fingers (specs about 1mm/1mm) and Katana (about 14/7?) and sometimes the Universe (about 12/6?; nice, but the shoe is a bit soft for my taste). If the Bioms are meant to feel like barefoot, you land on the forefoot, not the heel, right? Then why do they seemed designed for heel landing (with crash pad, etc.)? And, while I applaud what seems to be a very interesting design, I have to ask, why do we need to pay so much just to get the shoes out of our way so we can run “barefoot” but with some protection? My questions are out of curiousity and sincere interest, not to argue. Thanks.
April 15th, 2009 at 8:43 am
Hi Eric,
Here are the specs on our current BIOM collection.
BIOM A men’s - heel 20mm, forefoot 12mm
BIOM B men’s - heel 24mm, forefoot 14mm
BIOM can be worn by runners who heel strike, midfoot strike or forefoot strike. Therefore there is a soft PU pad in the heel to accomodate heel strikes. BIOM is the only running shoe made with the direct inject process of manufacturing. It is also the only running shoe in the industry utilizing a midsole made entirely of PU vs. EVA.
Regarding the cost of BIOM, there has been 2 1/2 years of R & D to develop BIOM. IN addition, the direct inject process and materials increase the cost of production. BIOM is premium footwear and not for everyone.
Thanks for your curiousity and interest. Ihope you have the opportunity to experience BIOM. While it will certainly be a different experience than either Five Fingers, Katana or Universe, I believe you will find it unique from the host of stabilty and motion control shoes dominating the current market.
Get BIOMized….
David
April 21st, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Matt,
Okay, here is my take on the Biom A Yak. I have been in them for just over 3 weeks that I have been in them. I have also been rotating between it and the Nike 3.0 and the Saucony Fastwich. Long story short, the Biom is not working.
I have been following the schedule and the shoe is very comfortable to wear during the day. I wore them everyday for a half day as directed without any problems. However, within 10 minutes of starting my runs I get knee and hamstring pain. I have even tried running on rubberized tracks as well to no avail. When I am in the free 3.0 or the fastwitch I have no pain. I was out for a 6 mile run this weekend and it felt great.
Now for the bad part. Unlike the Newtons, Ecco doesn’t have a very customer friendly return policy. I inquired directly to Ecco about returning them, and the response was; it sounded like I gave it a good try, but they don’t take returns and I should try to return them to the store. That would be great, but the store won’t take back worn shoes.
So give them a try, but if they don’t workout then be prepared to have a $220 pair of comfortable everday shoes. It was a valiant first attempt.
April 28th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Hi Matthew Stoakes:
I work with David Helter at ECCO USA. I’m disappointed that the BIOM A is not working for you. A couple of things to consider; everybody has a different adjustment time to this shoe. You are strengthening mechanisms and satbilizers that may simply require more time. Remember, pain is weakness leaving the body.
My advice is listen to your body and don’t push yourself when you are too tender. Muscles and tendons adjust much quicker than legiments. Give it the full six weeks and then see where you are at. If things do not work out, let me know.
April 29th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Keith,
Thank you for your response regarding my situation with the BIOM A. I will add it back into my rotation and give it the full six weeks. I have been using the Nike Free 3.0 and Lunaracer for the past two and half weeks with much success. I also rescently added in the Vibram KSO. Additionally I am phasing all my “traditional” running shoes even for daily wear, so hopefully I will have a better second time around with the BIOM A. Like I said before, I really like the shoe and it is very comfortable, just haven’t been able to get the running miles in it.
I will keep you posted. Thanks again.
By the way Matt,
Great Blog, I have gotten a lot of great information going through your site. Thank you.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Thank you folks for your great comments. I’m a fitness runner, new to the whole debate between natural motion and minimalist shoes. However, I was sucked into the Biom Type A Yak, running in them for four weeks now…and boy…they exert ‘tough love’.
It was probably a combination of the Type A’s look, and it’s advertisment of natural motion fused with the latest technology that sold me to shell out $200+
But a frequent complaint I’m been hearing from the retailers and from my own expererience is: the top sole of the shoe is TOO narrow. If the Type A came out with at least EEs for us wide footed runners, it would be worth the price. But it’s comfortable everywhere, EXCEPT my toes feel a bit crunched.
Just a caveat for those fitness runners, who are dispelled by the under-par looks of the Type B and are considering the Type A. (On that note, can wearing the Type A actually do ‘damage’ to a fitness runner who is no where near a pro/marathon pace????)
May 29th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Hi Matt, I read your book “the complete triathlon book” and I enjoyed it, really useful for a sort of marathoner (PR 2h 58′) thinking about his debut as a triathlete. I am forty and I started running 4 years ago, since then I have always used high-heeled running shoes and I have always suffered from Achille’s tendinitis. I’m really interested in trying Bios or Free and I have some questions:
Can I use them for both my long runs and my speedworks?
Can I use them on dirt, asphalt, concrete and track?
Can I use them to race on any distances from 10 km to marathon?
Do you have any special suggestions for race shoes?
Can I use my orthotics?
thank you…and sorry for my English
Marco (Italy)
May 30th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Marco,
Thanks for your message. No need to apologize for your English–it’s a lot better than my Italian!
The Nike Free 3.0 is a much lighter shoe than the Ecco Biom and is therefore more suitable for speed work and races. I have worn the Free 3.0 in every type of workout (including long runs) and for races ranging in distance from the 5K to the marathon and have found it performs well in the full gamut. Because of its weight, I only use the Biom for base and recovery runs.
The Biom is more durable than the free and can therefore be used on a wider range of surfaces. Pebbles are easily trapped in the “Flex Grooves” of the Nike Free, so I don’t like to take it off road.
Matt
May 31st, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Does anyone happen have any feedback on the sizing of the Biom A? I typically run in a U.S. size 12.5 - 13 running shoe. The Biom A’s largest size is 45 which looking at most conversion charts appear to be too small. The Vibram KSO’s I run in are 44’s, but do not need the thumb length of room between the toe and end of the shoe.
Unfortunately there are no Biom stores near me (despite being in NYC) hence I’m somewhat fearful of ordering the size 45’s off the internet and finding out they’re too small. I’m less interested in the Biom B’s, which do come in size 46, as my typical pace is much more in-line with the A’s.
June 1st, 2009 at 9:20 am
I wear 11.5’s and 12’s. I have the size 44 Biom and it fits perfectly.
June 1st, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Hi Matt, I have one more question…what about trail? Have you any suggestions for trail shoes? In summer I like running on mountain paths….
June 1st, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Got them, have run in them twice, little 3 1/2 mile breezes - seems very nice to me, but I am a novice compared to some of the commentators here, I am sure. I got the “B” model and am a Clydesdale type athlete, but keeping my stance narrow and weight forward led me to a smooth, comfortable stride. I do have experience running through parks barefoot weekly when I was in high school, and this is different, but I find running more forward in these is better than “laying back” like I seem to in my Mizunos.
June 3rd, 2009 at 9:10 am
This message is for David Helter. Actually, anyone who has an informed opinion. I am a marathon runner and recently injured my heel (stress fracture). I suspect over training - I run 6 days/week. My Podiatrist suggests orthodotics, but I don’t want to do that the rest of my life. I have seen some sports injury websites suggest inserting a rubber heel pad in the shoe. Seems that the BIOM may not be the best solution for returning from such an injury. Or, maybe they are perfect? Also, what about the heel pad, does that defeat the purpose of “natural running”? Thanks!
June 9th, 2009 at 8:03 am
Hi Chris K.,
Thanks for your inquiry about BIOM. Sorry to hear about your injury. Nothing more frustrating to a runner than not being able to run! Your questions are tough as they are taking BIOM into some unchartered waters.
BIOM should be a great shoe as a training tool to allow you to restrengthen your foot’s muscles and ligaments. That is the main objective and benefit of the natural motion concept on which BIOM is based. However, based on the fact that the entire midsole of BIOM is made from PU vs. EVA in all other running shoes, BIOM provides a fairly firm ride, both in the heel and forefoot.
I would like to offer your questions to my colleague from Denmark, Alexander Nicolai, who has headed up the development and launch of BIOM. He is also a competitive runner (placed 39th overall in the Ford Ironman), has been a running coach and has a degree in biomechanics.
Please send me a detailed email to my business address, dahe@ecco.com, and I will forward to Aex for his expertise.
In the interim, best wishes for a quick recovery and a return to good runs.
David Helter
General Manager
ECCO Performance
P.S. - For all of Matt’s interested bloggers, thanks for your interest in and support of BIOM. It was launched in the US market on March 15th in more than 40 premiere running specialty stores across the US. The initial sales results have been incredible. We have been swamped with both consumer and retailer interest in BIOM and are trying to keep up with all the requests. I apologize for the frustration of the interested consumers who can not find BIOM in their respective markets. ECCO is a newcomer in the running industry and the natural motion concept is quite a shift of the current paradigm of motion control and stability. We are in the process of rolling BIOM out to more premium running specialty stores in the US. If you are interested in BIOM and it isn’t carried in your market, please call your local running store and tell them to inquire about BIOM. Last exciting BIOM news is that we will be launching BIOM C and BIOM Walking for Spring 2010!
August 2nd, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Matt,
I thought I would use this site as a chance to give some feedback on the ecco Biom. I searched everywhere for reviews before purchasing my Bioms but all I found was people asking questions. I think I am uniquely qualified to comment on the Biom due to my injury history and size. Here is the brief summary:
I have been out of running due to injury for about 10 year (primarily patella femoral syndrome and plantar fasciitis).
I have slightly lower arches and had orthotics prescribed and have paid for 4 pairs of custom orthotics and have wasted a small fortune on over-the-counter inserts.
I am a big man. I was 275 lbs went I started running again, and currently weigh 240 lbs.
I am a heel striker, but have survived because I consciously shortened my stride and land softly, and for all those that say pose is the only way, just try running on your forefoot at 240 lbs.
Needless to say, the running stores instantly try to put me in their heaviest, most rigid and durable shoes available. My first observation in these work boots (Brooks Adrenaline) is how hard it is to land softly and how laboured my gait was (I was already running in a basic neutral trainer, but chose to change to conventional wisdom). I quickly injured my achilles tendon in the stability shoes. My next trip to the store I had to aggressively pursue a shoe with a lower heel and less stability and ended up with a pair of Mizuno Nexus. They were a big improvement, but still aggravated my achilles tendon after about 4 km.
I purchased a pair of Biom B’s two months ago. They were firm but comfortable with a great go fast feel. The faster I went the better they felt. I neglected the advice to ease into them slowly and was out racing my dog on the street that night. I must have thought I was Asafa Powell or something. Can you say plantar fasciitis? Fortunately it wasn’t a bad case and I started my gradual transition.
I don’t run very much in them. I walk a lot in them and wear them on the elliptical, however, I did wear them in a 10 km race yesterday. I completed it in 54:33, chopping 7 minutes off my previous fat man personal best (my PB is 43:01 but that was a different life and a different body). My feet ache a little the day after I do a longer run in them, but it is muscle soreness rather than something plantar fasciitis or achilles tendonitis. They do not bother my achilles tendon, which is the reason I chose them for the race over my Mizuno’s. So, I guess I am still transitioning to them, but to date I would say they are worth every penny. My form is better, my pace is faster, my nagging injuries don’t seem to nag me as much when I wear them. I would have to say that if someone my size, with my injuries can successfully use these, they have to be on to something. Just don’t forget to slowly transition into them.
Thanks and sorry if this was too long.
September 22nd, 2009 at 10:56 am
Hi Phil,
Glad to hear you are having a good overall experience in your BIOM. I am currently in Denmark at our global headquarters previewing our Fall 2010 product line. We are launching BIOM C and BIOM Walk. You will have to check out the BIOM Walk when it hits stores.
Stay BIOMized….
David Helter