Why do runners gripe about shoes lasting "only" 400 miles?

Run trails, don't replace the shoes until the upper starts to rip (can actually get an extra 50 miles or so out of them if you take the time to stitch the upper, but my stitches never seem to hold very long).

I usually get around 2,000 miles on a pair of shoes. But I use really thin soled racing shoes. There's nothing to them and therefore nothing to wear out.

If you're doing any sort of serious mileage a shoe that's gone at 350-400 miles and costs in the neighborhood of $100 is going to cost you some serious money. At one point I'd have needed a new pair every three weeks if I was only getting 350-400 miles per pair and I was not making anywhere near the sort of money I'd have needed to do that.

Shoe Swapper wrote:

I'm admitting up front that this is nothing more than a pet peeve, but why do runners gripe about shoes that last "only" 350 or 400 miles?

Every time I read an online shoe review, someone invariably writes something like "It was a great shoe for 400 miles but then it wore out". Gee, no kidding. They have EVA midsoles and blown rubber outsoles. What the hell did they expect?

I've been running for 30 years and I don't think I've EVER worn a shoe for more than 300 miles before I start to mix in a new pair. And by 350 miles they are grass cutting shoes. If someone is getting 500-600 miles out of a shoe, then they must weigh 100 pounds and have perfect biomechanics.

running 6k+ miles a year, I could never afford 20 pairs of shoes in a year, I easily get over 1000 out of the average pair.

If you're swapping shoes at 350, you must not be running a lot or have more money than you know what to do with.

I've always had terrible mechanics and still got 800-900 miles on the old original Nike Pegasus in 1983-1985 when they sold for $40. Now I seldom get over 350 miles on anything I try, even with recent weight loss. It's about selling lots of shoes. If they last too long, it's just less profit for the shoe companies and less money to all the professional athletes they sponsor. Not too tough to figure out.

basically the solution is wear flats. i get well over 1000 in streak IIIs

NO ONE NEEDS SHOES. ITS A PHYSCHOLOGICAL FALLBACK WHEN AN INJURY CREEPS UP. GERRY LINDGREN RAN OVER 5000 MILES ON SAME SHOES. JUST WRAPPED DUCK TAPE AROUND THEM. I PERSONALLY HAVE RUN OVER 1000 MILES ON NIKE LUNARS AND PROBABLY CAN GO 1000 MORE.

Ok, this is turning into a bit of a pissing fest, but I'll join in anyway. I get at least 1,000 miles out of my shoes, I don't even wear flats (Asics DS trainers) AND I am BMI overweight (see handle). Getting only 400 miles out of a shoe seems absolutely insane.

If shoes last you more than 2 weeks you need to increase your mileage.

I am still running in a pair of Onitsuka Tigers from the 70s. The f*ckin' 70s man!

This is me when I get a new pair of running shoes about every 500 miles.

I get 100,000 miles out of each of my pairs. This is very impressive, and I hope that you like me for it.

Well Rockefeller, it's a crock that they only last that long

'and blown rubber outsoles.' This is always going to last longer then a few months unless you run weird

'They have EVA midsoles' All the footwear companies are constantly giving marketing bs about their new developments in shoe design. Do I have to state the obvious about the area they need to work on!

Next what about air cushioning surely that should last longer or is just a waste of time

I always seen to get injured on new shoes rather than old. At best you've got a few weeks getting used to them - then you are supposed to chuck them after another few wks?

By the way for all those who think running on roads does no more harm than grass, well the padding on grass surface never wears out

By the way in 30 years did you ever have a day off from being an 'I'm so perfect' jerk?

I have wondered about this myself. The 400 mile rule seems to come from running mags, but I've noticed in other endeavors that you have to take what you read in mags w/ a grain of salt. He who pays the piper calls the tune, and from the mags' perspective 'he who pays' is advertisers.

How do you tell when a shoe is too worn? For me the cushioning under the ball of the foot goes very quickly, like two weeks. I'm not going to discard a $100 pair of shoes after 2 weeks. The rest goes very slowly.

I have bought 2 identical pairs and run in one for say six months. After six months I pull out the new pair and compare. I put them on a flat surface and try to detect a difference in lean angle, etc. I can't see where the old shoes are going to magically cause an injury.

I guess I avg. about 50 mi per week so 6 months=about 1200 miles, or 3 times the recommended amount. I run almost all on grass/dirt, and treadmill. True, I did have a stress fracture last year, but I don't think shoes were the primary cause.