I'm usually around 2:55-3:00 for the marathon in my training shoes. I'm considering the Nike Zoom Streak but I don't want to invest $120 in shoes that aren't worth it. There has to be a trade off between the advantages of lighter weight and the disadvantages of more pounding absorbed by the body due to less cushioning. I'm worried 26 miles may be too much pounding and negate the weight advantage. Are racing flats worth it for the marathon for someone in my time range?
You should only run in racing flats for all your runs.
What are you running in now? You might be better with a shoe like the Boston 7 or Zoom Elite 10.
I'd always wear flats for a marathon. Spikes would be really uncomfortable on the road.
If they are comfortable on long runs....
You focus on a marathon and drop more change than that just with the entry fee, not to mention travel costs.
So why would you be such a cheapass saying you don’t want to waste $120 on shoes that will help you.
I doubt you’ve broken 3:30 let alone 3.
to flat or not to flat wrote:
I'm usually around 2:55-3:00 for the marathon in my training shoes. I'm considering the Nike Zoom Streak but I don't want to invest $120 in shoes that aren't worth it. There has to be a trade off between the advantages of lighter weight and the disadvantages of more pounding absorbed by the body due to less cushioning. I'm worried 26 miles may be too much pounding and negate the weight advantage. Are racing flats worth it for the marathon for someone in my time range?
The Zoom Streak 6 fine is for the marathon.
The LT streak wouldmy be advised
You can usually find streak 6 on sale for 60-80. Try them out on some long runs, use them in workouts. If you can't handle them for long runs, worst case you have a good workout and short race shoe. Should be worth it for you in the marathon.
Streakeroni wrote:
You can usually find streak 6 on sale for 60-80. Try them out on some long runs, use them in workouts. If you can't handle them for long runs, worst case you have a good workout and short race shoe. Should be worth it for you in the marathon.
Also if you have a nike factory outlet I found the flyknit version of the streak 6 for $31 a pair.
The marathon is all about maintaining energy output. Having less weight on your feet helps you sustain energy output longer. Sub 3 is certainly fast enough to justify wearing a racing shoe.
The additional pounding is not significant, especially if you are running on a relatively new pair of races. I would only be concerned about pounding if you have an unusually heavy frame for a sub 3 runner (180 lbs+).
I read long ago that only sub-2:40 types should be worrying about flats for a marathon. I'm a bigger runner, so never wore racing shoes beyond about a 10 mile race. Did all of my marathons in lightweight trainers.
Sand Dunes wrote:
You should only run in racing flats for all your runs.
+1
to flat or not to flat wrote:
I'm considering the Nike Zoom Streak but I don't want to invest $120 in shoes that aren't worth it.
That's not investing. It's just spending. One of my pet peeves is when people confuse the two. They are not interchangeable terms.
I always run in racing flats- training and races. However for some reason the elites nowadays where those vaporfly shoes and they aren’t flats- they are cushioned as f.
Like he said nike outlet. Sometimes you can get the old models for less. Most of the sales people at nike outlets don't have a clue what racing flats are. That's what makes the shoe cost more at a good running store.