Lunar Trainer makes me run slow?

I had the same feeling about the Lunar Trainer - I love the shoe, but I not only felt like, but my HRM seemed to verify, that I had to run a bit harder in them to achieve a given pace. I feel like the cushioning isn't terribly responsive and absorbs a good bit of impact rather than returning it. However it is a small price to pay for just how damn good they feel. I swear my legs feel better afer a run in the Lunar Trainer than in anything else I have run in. Plus the are amazingly stable for being a "neutral" shoe - I have a foot that points outward when I run, leading to excessive pronation on that side (my other foot is neutral) and I can usually see medial wear after a few hundred miles, but my Lunar Trainers are still perfectly level.

Yes, all...I also like the way the shoe wraps my foot esp the lateral (outside portion) of my foot

I agree. Nothing made me run as fast or jump as high as my new Kedz when I was 5. It's gotta be the shoes.

Yeah, it's cause the Lunar Trainer sucks. I work at a specialty running store, and I NEVER recommend it to anybody. The fact is, it has 0% support and is so "soft" in it's material and bottom padding that it makes you feel GREAT when you first get it, but it lasts about a month, if that. As it gets worn down it loses the springy, good feeling and just feels a bit like mush. Whomever sold you those shoes was a fool and knew, most likely, very little about what they were doing. also included in this category is the Nike Free, and by "in this category" I mean bad shoes to train consistently in.

I don't know about the lunar trainer, but I train regularly in the Lunaracer, and it's one of the best shoes I've ever worn in my opinion. The exception is that it isn't good for speedwork, like mile pace stuff or faster. It is too soft to be great for sprinting (though I do it sometimes anyway).

I have also experienced very little of the "wearing down" effect changing what the shoe feels like. Many of the rubber nubs on the bottom have worn off (though they reinforced these in the Lunaracer II), but it doesn't feel like the structure has broken down like I've felt with normal trainers.

Some people (I think more than most think) don't need "support," so it can be a great shoe despite having a flexible last and a uniform sole material.

So, yeah, unresponsive, but comfortable, light, and great cusion while still very flexible. In my opinion, the lunaracer is definitely worth a try.

For what it's worth, I train mostly in lightweight shoes (currently cycle through lunaracer, gel speedstar, and new balance 757), I run 70-100 miles per week, and I haven't been injured in years, part of which I attribute to the switch to lighter, less "supportive" shoes. Knock on wood.

I train in the lunar racer and I like the fit a lot. I was actually thinking about this the other day because I cycle between the Lunar Racer and the Adizero CS's and I'm telling you, adiprene and adiprene + are way faster than the lunar foam although the lunar foam is more "cozy." I do my fast days in the Adizeros.

I have 5 or 6 pairs of Luna Racers. Love 'em!! I use them for all hard training except for on the track.

I HAD one pair of Luna Trainers. The best run in them was the first one, and then after that I felt like I was working against the shoe because the cushioning just sank in like a old mattress in a cheap Chinese hotel. I threw them out in a motel in Beatty Nevada.

Nike needs to bring back the 2000-2001 era Nike Streak Ekidens (the kind that Catherine Ndereba uses).

the only good racing flats you can get are the hard responsive ones. Unfortunately you cannot really get these any more. Apparently Japanese versions of Asics shoes (not the same versions you can buy in the US or europe) are much harder and responsive and therefore better. Unfortunately you have to order these straight from Nippon and they only go up to size 8 as Japs tend to be small. These shoes are comparible to the type of shoes people used to wear back in the day. (do you think all the greats from the 70's and 80's wore pillow soft trainers?) If you think about it logically humans are genetically designed to run in bare feet- try it, its very hard to run on your heels. So why do brands insist on making shoes with ridiculously good cushioning on the heels? Bring back the hard trainers. All real runners should mid/ forefoot stike anyway- lets keep the soft heal cushioning is for obese joggers!

You are incorrect about the sizing. They do go up to size 10.5 or 11.0 (for some models).

Asics flats from JP tend to fit about 0.5 size too big, so order down half a size.

In the past I offered to bring back Asics flats from Japan at cost plus 50 bucks (free shipping) but I was accused of being greedy, but I still had two customers (letsrun peeps).

The offer is still on.

Jason

Shoe Salesman up in here wrote:

Yeah, it's cause the Lunar Trainer sucks. I work at a specialty running store, and I NEVER recommend it to anybody. The fact is, it has 0% support and is so "soft" in it's material and bottom padding that it makes you feel GREAT when you first get it, but it lasts about a month, if that. As it gets worn down it loses the springy, good feeling and just feels a bit like mush. Whomever sold you those shoes was a fool and knew, most likely, very little about what they were doing. also included in this category is the Nike Free, and by "in this category" I mean bad shoes to train consistently in.

Umm... I guess it depends on how you define sucks and for what purpose you are using them for...

I try to have a stable of shoes (stable in the horse sense of the word) and when I had the opportunity I bought 2 pairs of the trainers and use them for warm ups and off-day/long day running. I like them a lot for this purpose. They allow you to get up on your toes and they fit really well. I wouldn't want to be doing much more than tempo type workouts with them because I like to use flats like the adizero ace's for that kind of thing.

I would consider myself a relatively serious runner and I would recommend these shoes to other serious runners who are into the whole minimalist approach to running.. granted they are extremely cushioned but they are also very neutral and a good price.

So what would you recommend for a shoe with a similar fit/feel with out all of the mush? I had no idea this thread would get so bitter but I do appreciate the information.

Shoe Salesman up in here wrote:

Yeah, it's cause the Lunar Trainer sucks. I work at a specialty running store, and I NEVER recommend it to anybody. The fact is, it has 0% support and is so "soft" in it's material and bottom padding that it makes you feel GREAT when you first get it, but it lasts about a month, if that. As it gets worn down it loses the springy, good feeling and just feels a bit like mush. Whomever sold you those shoes was a fool and knew, most likely, very little about what they were doing. also included in this category is the Nike Free, and by "in this category" I mean bad shoes to train consistently in.

MAYEROFF wrote:

You are incorrect about the sizing. They do go up to size 10.5 or 11.0 (for some models).

Asics flats from JP tend to fit about 0.5 size too big, so order down half a size.

In the past I offered to bring back Asics flats from Japan at cost plus 50 bucks (free shipping) but I was accused of being greedy, but I still had two customers (letsrun peeps).

The offer is still on.

Jason

i got shoes through jason and was pleased with his effort.

hope all goes well jason.

I don't feel as though they are soft at all. Soft is the Vomero!! The LT is an great shoe and I'm sad to see it go. I use it for everything. Run 15 miles and feel better each mile vs. the elite which literally makes me work so hard I'm dead by the end.

Shoe Salesman up in here wrote:

Yeah, it's cause the Lunar Trainer sucks. I work at a specialty running store, and I NEVER recommend it to anybody. The fact is, it has 0% support and is so "soft" in it's material and bottom padding that it makes you feel GREAT when you first get it, but it lasts about a month, if that. As it gets worn down it loses the springy, good feeling and just feels a bit like mush. Whomever sold you those shoes was a fool and knew, most likely, very little about what they were doing. also included in this category is the Nike Free, and by "in this category" I mean bad shoes to train consistently in.

Support is a myth, take the insole out of a "supportive" running shoe, all you see is the pancake flat insole. Also, the lunar trainers are way more durable than you say they are. I easily got 500 miles out of my pair, and the thing that was going was the upper, not the midsole.

The Lunar Trainer is very supportive - it just uses a different support concept - instead of having a denser medial side or a post, it just has a very widely flared midsole/outsole. A friend of mine who supinates called the show too supportive for him on these grounds and I doubted it until i tried it. I usually destroy neutral shoes on my right foot - After a few hundred miles I can sit my right shoe on a flat table and it leans noticeably medially and the midsole material is badly pinched on the medial side. 200 mile sin Lunar trainers and they still sit perfectly level with no medial crushing at all. I will withhold final judgement for a few hundred more miles, though.

The cushioning is quite soft, though - I am not sure I would want to race in that material, but lots of folks seem to disagree - I have never run in the Lunar Racer, but since its midsole/outsole doesn't flare out, it would be too neutral for me. There are lots of concrete roads/trails where I live rather than asphault and the Lunar Trainer has made them much mroe bearable.

I like them too. If the shoe works for you then it does. If it doesn't then it doesn't. The fit is fantastic but it runs a half size small.

rail trail runner wrote:

i got shoes through jason and was pleased with his effort.

hope all goes well jason.

Things are going ok, and I hope that all is well with you too.

Jason

Everybody says it runs a half size small, but I fit fine in an 11.5 in the Lunar Trainer whereas I sometimes feel snug in 11.5's in some other shoes. I have to wear a 12, for example, in the Brooks Racer ST and my 11.5 Adizero CS's are quite snug.

People say it fits a 1/2 size small because it has the shallowest toebox of any shoe I've seen since the old Waffle Racers. It's flat and pointy like elf shoes! So a size 11 is really just as long as a normal size 11 but that last 1/3 of an inch or so is really hard to get your toe into, so it will feel tight compared to an 11 with a more boxy toe.

I love my Lunar Trainers BTW and they seem like an almost perfect blend of cushion and light weight. And despite an almost total lack of conventional stability structure (rigid heel cup on the inside) they seem to solve my moderate pronation, probably due to the fancy arrangement (I don't remember what they call it) of more-dense and less-dense cushioning on each side of the midsole.