I know that all the experts say not to put more than 300-500 miles on a pair of shoes. I've pretty much stuck to that throughout my running career. However, I have a college teammate that's put over 2000 miles on one pair of DS Trainers and over 1000 miles on a pair of Nike Frees...and never gotten injured. Is he stupid, lucky, or just amazing? Also, have you ever heard of anyone putting more mileage than that on a pair of shoes?
lucky. very lucky. The wear on a shoe is influenced by a number of factors including body weight and running style. I honestly think your friend has been very lucky. I would suggest changing shoes every 4-500 miles for lighter guys and 300-400 for slightly heavier.
I had a pair of asics back in high school, not sure exactly what they were called, but they were my favorite shoes up until this point (i'm 23 now) and I had over 10,000 miles on them. No joke. I wore them up until sophomore year of college until I got a new pair. Once it started hurting my feet because I could feel the rocks through the bottom I decided I had to do it.
In high school I put around 2000 miles on a pair of New Balance 636es. Not even a real quality shoe, but I was running low mileage and that was about 2 years worth of running. In college, I assumed I could still wear shoes for that long and my first time running 70 mpw, I was rotating between 2 pairs that both had 1000+ miles. I got a stress fracture and was out for 4 months. Your friend, like I was in high school, is lucky. I never go above 600 now (which still may be a lot to some, but I'm 130 pounds).
I suspect he's "lucky" in his genetics. He most likely also has good form- does not pronate or supinate significantly so the sole wears down evenly.
I go 600-1000, but I wear orthotics and run probably 80% on dirt.
over 2500 miles on one pair of streak vapor racing flats
I can agree that I am genetically blesses and biomechaniclly blessed thus contributing to the ability to run 2500 miles on a pair of vapors
I can get more miles out of flats (1000+) than I could ever get out of trainers (400-500). The reason is because you land lighter, there's less material to break down and affect how you feel, and you learn to run more economically (~no supination, no overpronation to wear down one side of the shoe/midsole). I was an overpronator in trainers, but in flats I've developed a bit of an arch and no longer overpronate. Being a high mileage gals, I've definitely saved a lot of money switching to flats.
jaguar1 wrote:
I can get more miles out of flats (1000+) than I could ever get out of trainers (400-500). The reason is because you land lighter, there's less material to break down and affect how you feel, and you learn to run more economically (~no supination, no overpronation to wear down one side of the shoe/midsole). I was an overpronator in trainers, but in flats I've developed a bit of an arch and no longer overpronate. Being a high mileage gals, I've definitely saved a lot of money switching to flats.
I could not have said this better.
I get two pairs of trainers each year.
On average over the year I do 70mpw, more during cross, less during track, etc. Make it a conservative estimate of 65mpw.
26 weeks for half the year.
Which makes about 1690 miles per pair.
Not too bad.
No injuries to speak of. If your body mechanics are good you really don't need to be switching shoes every two months, as long as the foam's thick enough to keep rocks from hurting your feet you're golden.
Besides, shoes feel the best after about 1000 miles, it's only then that they're perfectly moulded to your feet.
jaguar1 wrote:
I can get more miles out of flats (1000+) than I could ever get out of trainers (400-500). The reason is because you land lighter, there's less material to break down and affect how you feel, and you learn to run more economically (~no supination, no overpronation to wear down one side of the shoe/midsole). I was an overpronator in trainers, but in flats I've developed a bit of an arch and no longer overpronate. Being a high mileage gals, I've definitely saved a lot of money switching to flats.
Yup, me too. I am definitely not biomechanically gifted either.
i put 500000000000000 miles on a pair of those plastic sandles.........
sucks
oh yeah, and as for your "teammate", he's probably just a big cheap piece of crap who never buys new shoes because hes so cheap
EK
Ah, I see you're in the 500trillion range. Might need a new pair of sandals... make that RUBBER sandals. Haha.
Not everybody needs a lot of cushioning, which is the thing on a good running shoe that wears out at the 300-500 mile mark or so. A neutral runner with a good stride may be able to wear a shoe 'till the rubber's gone and the upper is ridden with holes... The most important function of a running shoe is to protect the feet from cuts and bruises, etc... and a good running shoe can perform this function for thousands of miles.
I once had a pair of sandals that ha over ten thousand parsaot on them. Needless to say, I am genetically blessed.
do you know that back in the good ol' days you could easily run up 800 miles on virtually every pair of running shoes sold in shops?
Why i remember the old waffle soled internationalist and the early Pegasuses ,never seemed to wear out apart from a bit of uneven wear on the outsole cos they were blown rubber to help cushioning and not that brick hard carbon rubber they use now.
I see from my training diaries that i bought a pair of Pegs
in 1987,ran them in tandem with a pair of Reebok (didn't note the name pale grey with red logo) and between the two of them they logged about 1400 miles, the boks weren't new either cos i'd already run 2 marathons in them.These shoes cost about 20 dollars or so at the time, not too many gadgets and gimmicks but they didn't hurt your feet (or anywhere else) and they ran for miles and miles.I think there was just the air in the heel of the pegs.
Then why don't shoes today last as long? They cost a lot more and have better technology than the old waffles or other retro running shoes.
I have EASILY been putting at least 1500 to 3000 miles on pairs of shoes, and not only shoes I do ALL of my training in racing flats. Im approaching 2k for a pair of Nike Spectrums, I've put 1500 on a pair of wal-mart knock offs of the Nike Free's and about 2000 on another pair. 2 years ago I was training in the Nike Zoom streak xc and put 2 marathons on them and got up to about 3k on them.
I do this partly because I'm cheap but also because I can get away with it, I strike with my forfeet and turnover a lot
Wornout Sneakers wrote:
Then why don't shoes today last as long? They cost a lot more and have better technology than the old waffles or other retro running shoes.
Too soft? Feel like moonshoes!