Are High-End Shoes that much better than Mid-End Shoes?

Solarris

Solarris

Regular Member
Going to invest in actual Badminton shoes, (yay). I already slightly hurt my ankle, so, decided I better get some. I narrowed it down, as many others, to
SHB03, 65z (High-End)
Or some Asics/Mizuno/Cheap Yonex (Mid-End)

My question is: Do the high-ends really produce that much difference in a competitive game/tourney?

An alternative is investing in a mid-end for practices, and the high-end only for competitive games. Good or bad idea? (Usually play on gym floor, not real badminton court.)

Finally, what are the differences between all the models of SHB03, like SHB03z (red/orange) or the SHB03EX (whiteish), and etc?
 
I've only had experience with Yonex shoes, but the answer is a big YES for me. I've only owned high end models (Aerus 1&2 and SHB01), but I've tried on some mid end ones before since I liked the colour. A few things I noticed:
  1. It's stiffer and clunkier
  2. Cushioning isn't as good
  3. Not as comfortable
  4. Noticeable difference in grip quality
For me, it all came down to price. The high end shoes weren't that much more expensive, so it made sense to just get the higher end ones.
 
Alright. Thoughts on getting cheap shoes for practice and high-end shoes for games?

And again, different between red and white SHB03 models?
 
Cheung said:
Interesting suggestion.

Do you use a cheaper racquet and strings for practice and a high end one for games?
Click to expand...

I've never had a "cheap racquet" per say. I've always been using racquets like JS10, BS12, Arc11, etc. I guess you could say top end racquets.

I've always used the same racquet for practice/training and for games, because I don't want to always have to switch back and forth between different racquets. I'd rather have the same string and racket for both situations. In the end you're still playing badminton whether it is for training/practice or real games/tournaments etc.
 
iAsianGuy said:
I've never had a "cheap racquet" per say. I've always been using racquets like JS10, BS12, Arc11, etc. I guess you could say top end racquets.

I've always used the same racquet for practice/training and for games, because I don't want to always have to switch back and forth between different racquets. I'd rather have the same string and racket for both situations. In the end you're still playing badminton whether it is for training/practice or real games/tournaments etc.
Click to expand...
I think you just answered yourself on the shoe issue. :)
 
I went from £100 shoes to £50 shoes in one session and was slipping after i changed. So IME grip gets better if you pay more.

Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
 
Use cheaper shoes, causing fatigue to your leg, injury to your knees and ankle. Shortening your badminton life span. I'm already 55 and still actively in the game with high end shoes . Good shoes are the most important gear in badminton.
 
Alright thanks guys! I settled for SHB03z. I didn't know the difference between z and EX so I chose the better looking one imo ;).
I thought cheaper shoes could be more durable, guess not...
 
Personally I dont believe in low end shoes, thats why I always buy high end high quality shoes. More expensive but saves me from injuries due to better grip and cushion.
 
Leemarc28 said:
Use cheaper shoes, causing fatigue to your leg, injury to your knees and ankle. Shortening your badminton life span. I'm already 55 and still actively in the game with high end shoes . Good shoes are the most important gear in badminton.
Click to expand...

Based on personal experience and often testing shoe fit in shops, high-end shoes is inappropriate for beginner-average players since the cushioning is often so thin. Ive tried two high end shoes that feels harder to my feet and shin, compared to cheap ones which are pillowy in nature. Durability wise neither low-high end lasts longer so its probably just a matter of user weight and performance level.


I believe the often low-profile and thin nature of high end shoes caters to the advanced, somewhat low bodyweight type of player. While cheapo ones have overall poor build quality compensated by excessive cushioning for the beginner player of the average population weight.

Just an opinion.
 
What i noticed is that, the difference in types in high end shoes is really clear. When we see yonex shoes, the difference between aerus, the 65z and comfort tour (As an example), is quite big. The cheaper ones? I feel they just slap the name of the expensive ones and make a general indoor shoe with about the same shape with the high ends, and probably more colorways... But the differences between them is not so big. It just provides around the same cushion, grip, and durability. Whereas the high end.. the cushioning between Aerus and Comfort tour is very clearly different (And also marketed for different group of players)
 
I have Aerus 2 and SHB35. The difference in the designs is obvious but the elements that make the cheap 35's feel worse are
The inner sole is flat.
The sole is thicker yet softer and less stable, especially the arch area.
The toe area is wrapped in a material that stretches too much so my lunges end up causing my feet to slide forward and squash my toes.

The grip level feels the same. The fit is fine but a little loose but I am not really comparing shoes designed for the same purpose. Aerus are light and firm, 35's are not. Given the choice between cheap badminton trainers and expensive gym/running trainers I would 110% go for the 35's and change the insoles. High end yonex shoes are better than low end but also offer choice to suit your own requirements - comfort, speed or a balance of both. What you want is not always what you need.
 
cueteachme said:
Based on personal experience and often testing shoe fit in shops, high-end shoes is inappropriate for beginner-average players since the cushioning is often so thin. Ive tried two high end shoes that feels harder to my feet and shin, compared to cheap ones which are pillowy in nature. Durability wise neither low-high end lasts longer so its probably just a matter of user weight and performance level.


I believe the often low-profile and thin nature of high end shoes caters to the advanced, somewhat low bodyweight type of player. While cheapo ones have overall poor build quality compensated by excessive cushioning for the beginner player of the average population weight.

Just an opinion.
Click to expand...

agree to this.

i got 4 pair of shoes..
2 were cheap ones but really very comfortable.. no longer suitable for wooden flooring games..
mid range, good and comfortable, probably its only few months old?
high end.. thin cushioning.. friction looks poor.. not gonna last in long run
 
Just like rackets, there are brands that specialize in cheap shoes. Do not buy mid or low end shoes from Yonex
 
Cesium said:
Just like rackets, there are brands that specialize in cheap shoes. Do not buy mid or low end shoes from Yonex
Click to expand...
actually from what my group uses...yonex mid is quite decent....yonex low are trash....while yonex top depends on the model
as for other brands it also varies....
personally i just buy whichever i like which is NOT old stock a.k.a. always buy new model ...due to glue problem...
and also buy the ones with good cushioning....not the one marketed to have good cushioning....so just try them on yourself one by one before buying...
 
I consider that because high-end shoes improve stability in your ankle, it's not the case to wear other types, especially you've already had issues with your ankle. I guess you understand well the significance of keeping your ankle away from traumas. Human ligaments after sprains aren't perfectly regenerating, and in the long run, you could quickly get an articular instability. For instance, I'm wearing these Adidas because of their coziness, even if the price is entirely imposing. I wanted to point out that the most crucial thing isn't about price but, in your case, ankle security.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top