How far would you drive for a long run

I don't usually drive my long runs. I just run them. It's a bit better for the legs.

If I lived in a city and had to run on sidewalks Monday through Friday, I'd probably drive 90 minutes each way. I'd make it my Sunday escape - out the door by 8 am, running by 9:30, home by 12:30. Not so bad I guess.

Since I don't have to do anything like that, the only reason I drive to trails now is for variety. For that purpose I'd probably regularly drive 20 minutes. Maybe once a month 45 minutes for a cool, exploration-type run.

Every once in a while I drive an hour each way to Rockefeller State Park in Sleepy Hollow, NY. Miles and miles of carriage trails. It's worth it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Typical_Rockies_Trail.JPG

I live in an urban-ish area and never run from my house. A few times a week I drive 10 minutes to a small park with about 3 miles of trails and do a few easy loops. Other days I drive to the track. Sucks but what can ya do.

You could move.

max 45 mins

I drive 25 minutes each way on Saturday mornings to a nature preserve for my weekly long run. Then Sunday recovery days are a social run in various places that require driving anywhere from 10 to 30 minutes away. Well worth it. The rest of the week is from home.

Move? there's more to life than running and other considerations to make. obviously you're not an adult who understands that.

I've drove up to an hour one way for Saturday long runs. I see no problem with this. Ladies drive further than that just to shop & try on a new outfit.

I used to regularly drive approx. 60 miles from Eugene to the McKenzie River Trail. Long, windy, beautiful two lane highway out to one of the truly great running trails in America.

I will drive 20-25 minutes to run on a couple rail-trails.

Shutterfly wrote:

Every once in a while I drive an hour each way to Rockefeller State Park in Sleepy Hollow, NY. Miles and miles of carriage trails. It's worth it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Typical_Rockies_Trail.JPG

I live in an urban-ish area and never run from my house. A few times a week I drive 10 minutes to a small park with about 3 miles of trails and do a few easy loops. Other days I drive to the track. Sucks but what can ya do.

I'll make the trek out there sometimes too. Nice trails, but I have this bad habit of getting absolutely lost in there.

I drive about 45 - 60 minutes each way every Sunday to run on the C&O Canal. It's well worth it too because since I've done all my long runs this summer on soft surfaces my legs don't feel beat up at all.

I wouldn't go over an hour though for the most part. I still gotta be home to spend Sunday with the fam.

I don't like to drive too far, but like most of you, I AM committed to finding good trails/surfaces to run on. If there was a great one 30 mins away, and that was my best option, I'd do it.

However, I have some really nice grass fields nearby (my only nearby option of that sort), and do a lot of running on that. No travel time, but a lot of loops. I prefer that over a long drive to a slightly better option (let's say trails without having to loop as much).

Now where is that clown (forget which poster it was) who needs to chime in and say that running on soft surfaces is a "fetish" without any logic?? Clown.

A trail 30 minutes away already adds an hour to your run.

It's hard to leave your house and come back 2 1/2 hours later to get in a good run.

Especially if you have kids.

I use to have a decent trail that I could get to from my house. Now I am about a 20 min drive from a decent trail for a 10 mile run.

In the past I had no problem with the time commitment. Now things are different.

I rarely if ever drive for a run. 15min max and I've lived in a number of cities.

Running takes enough time and my car smells bad enough.

Sir Lance-alot wrote:

Now where is that clown (forget which poster it was) who needs to chime in and say that running on soft surfaces is a "fetish" without any logic? Clown.

I believe it was "Off the Grid", but the worst part is you just called malmo a clown too... rut-ro...

malmo wrote:

I've run up to 178 miles in a week, 99 percent of it on roads. I've run long stretches in the 120 - 150 range, again almost all of it on roads. I wouldn't want it any other way. On roads your foot-plant is predictable and firm, no roots or rocks to trip over, and no holes to step in.

I never drive further than my long run will be. So if I run 20 miles I won't drive further than 20 miles. I will however drive further for a group track workout.

Kevin52 wrote:

I believe it was "Off the Grid", but the worst part is you just called malmo a clown too... rut-ro...

I've run up to 178 miles in a week, 99 percent of it on roads. I've run long stretches in the 120 - 150 range, again almost all of it on roads. I wouldn't want it any other way. On roads your foot-plant is predictable and firm, no roots or rocks to trip over, and no holes to step in.

[/quote]

yeah, offthegrid, thanks for the info. He was indeed being a clown.

As far as malmo, malmo has done LOTS of stuff that others could not do without getting injured. Doesn't mean it was/is right for most of us. And not disagreeing with malmo on ANYthing is hard to do (he has a lot of strongly held opinions on a lot of subjects).

I usually go about 30-45 mins, there are a couple nice parks. But I'm looking for justification to go a bit further away, just seems like such a long ways to drive though, especially when tired. Anyone else care to chime in?