Discussion: Entry Level Shoe

I have 4 kids ages 9-15 interested in orienteering. Assuming their interest continues, I am wondering what would be good entry level shoes for them. Most of their orienteering will be done in the desert southwest.

Normal running shoes are fine for starting out. When my kids first wanted to be competitive, I let them wear their soccer cleats for off-trail footing help (I assume cleats would be a good choice for the "desert southwest", but I haven't been there, yet). My oldest son now wears his X-Country spikes, which are about 1/3 the price of O-shoes, and are great for most Orange courses. I'm not sure they are a good choice for advanced courses in rocky, or other ankle-busting terrain.

Salamons are always good as they are pretty hardy in rough terrain and take more of a beating an other shoes. Some ppl even wear field hocky boots for O as they too have rubber spikes like the enty level Oshoes

Specific Orienteering shoes seem to be becoming more obsolete outside of the Scandinavian swamp.

I recently bought a pair of these:
http://www.grayshockey.com.au/brands/grays-hockey/...
am yet to try them out in the forest, but they were $65 Australian (about $59 US?)

That Australian hockey footwear looks very interesting. Here in Canada all our hockey footwear have steel blades on the underside. They are murder on the forest cover and rust in the swamps so only the very hearty wear them for orienteering. The Ottawa juniors were to use them for a training event this week. http://www.ottawaoc.ca/junior_program.shtml

But as to 'O' footwear for kids, if your local terrain and their course level does not take them in to the wetter parts of the forest then don't bother with special 'O' shoes. The major advantages of orienteering shoes are that they are lightweight and shed water easily. If the later is not a problem there are plenty of other lightweight shoes around.

Who is this Kate Hollywood?

The one feature of orienteering shoes which is important, and should be taken into consideration when looking to buy other shoes, is that they are built on a low profile, keeping your foot close to the ground. The thicker the midsole (like normal running shoes) and the higher your foot is away from the point of contact with the ground, the less stability you have and the greater the risk of ankle injuries. Running shoes also generally tend to have a softer, mesh upper which again has less stability and increases the chances of ankle injuries.

so would a trail running shoe be better, or do they have the same characteristics of regular running shoes?

They do tend to have outsoles designed with the possibility of running in mud in mind so they generally give better traction in terrain than shoes intended exclusively for running on pavement.

what about the profile, do trail running shoes have a lower profile and a stiffer upper than regular running shoes thus giving more stability??

That depends very much on the shoe. Trail shoes made by companies that market to trail runners tend to have thinner and lower midsoles. The offerings by the major manufacturers are a lot closer to regular running shoes with a beefier tread. I expect that, as with SUV's, the majority of buyers never take them off road.

As an example, I wear adidas Response on the road and adidas Response TR(ail) off road. They are pretty much the same shoe but the TR is heavier and has a more radical tread.

and what are the companies that market to trail runners?

Montrail, Salomon, and Vasque would be three prominent examples.

Getting back to the original thread - I think this discussion is largely academic in the case of kids. They aren't heavy enough that midsole construction is particularly important and traction is not the key to success on a Yellow course. Let 'em wear whatever is comfortable.

I think midsole construction is relatively unimportant and spending much money on kids shoes can be a waste but if I was looking for a shoe to be used for orienteering i would look for a priority something which helps decrease the chances of acute injuries.

Generally specialist running shoes are expensive, have poor grip and give poor lateral support, something like a grass sport shoe or fell shoe is likely to be cheaper and offer much better support and lower chances of injury.

For the SW, a trail running shoe will probably be fine. It gives a bit more traction than a road shoe. If you can find one with less thick sole cushoining, that is better, but this is more of a concern in the rock strewn NE. Soccer cleats might work if they are comfortable enough. I would think they wouldn't last long on rocks, and would not have much traction on bare rock.
We all started with trail/road shoes in our family.

I recently acquired a pair of new balance WT800's (MT for men), they are an aggressive light-weight trail shoe (oriented towards racing). The grip on the bottom is quite impressive (this is what originally attracted me to them). Also, they have quite a low heel. Still not as much grip as o-shoes with metal spikes... but so much more comfortable for trainings (no blisters!). Oh, and the price tag is not bad either for a decent pair of runners!
http://www.newbalance.com/running/trail/WT800/

Several SLOC juniors have had good success in soccer cleats. They hold up very well. Only downside that I can see is that they have poor grip on wet rock.

Trail shoes or soccer cleats are fine out here. Sometimes it's nice to have the extra cushioning of a trail shoe on the hard ground. And it's not often wet enough to worry about slippery rocks or soaked mesh...

yes, I'm thinking that in southern Arizona, a trail shoe would be preferable because of all the hard ground and also loose rocks