Okay, here’s one for you. I have a dilemma. It’s about shoes.
When I got my shoes two years ago (is it that long already?), I made sure to get size 44s, instead of the 42s I normally wear on the street (Yes, speaking metrically makes me feel veddy continental). The theory is that since my feet swell up during exercise, the extra room in the shoes would keep them from squeezing my feet too tightly, causing hot spots, numbness, and a whole plethora of other bad things that happen to feet on a long bike ride.
My wife has been complaining about her shoes, too. She’s had hers even longer than I’ve had mine, and they seem to have served her very well. Both of use have Specialized shoes, which aren’t cheap. They have carbon soles, so we get no flex when pedaling hard. But in warm weather, her feet get pinched, and cause her a lot of discomfort (I’m bringing up warm weather in December, because our winters are pretty mild compared to the rest of you folks, and her most recent complaint about her foot was within the last two weeks).
I bring this up now, because recently I was reading an article — I forget if it was in print or online, but as I recall, it came from a source I regard as reliable — that said you don’t need to allow for extra room. In fact, it said biking shoes should fit snugly.
About five or six years ago, when I bought my last pair of running shoes (before I stopped running), the sales clerk told me to get a larger than normal size to allow for the swelling my feet would do while exercising. I did, and they worked out great. I’ve even started buying street shoes a half size larger than normal. But since seeing that article, I’m confused. Should she stick with the shoes she has, and look for other means of relief? Or should we go shopping for new shoes, and do what I did — get a couple of metric sizes larger?
Readers — what’s your take on this?