Help Me Choose a Marathon Flat

Haven't heard much good about the boost line. But there is a V2 coming out.

If you want to stick with nike I have used the lunaracer 3 with good luck. Some say it's too soft but I liked them. Even for over distance training runs.

I should mention that the marathon in May 31, so not a lot of time to wait. I've had a couple pairs of the Lunaracer 3, but they still seem to make my right foot hurt after I wear them a lot. Just ran a half this weekend in them. I felt okay during the race, but the next day, my foot hurt in the usual spot and my left hamstring has been hurting since. I know I can't only blame my shoes, but this isn't the first time these issues happened after racing in this shoe model.

Do you have any experience with the Saucony A4 or A5s? By far the most incredible show I've ever worn.

I guess my first question is do you really need a racing flat for the marathon? How fast do you intend to run it?

I'm also a fan of the Mizuno Ronin. If that show fits you perfectly right out of the box, it sounds like that would be your best bet. It's not a super light flat, so won't beat your legs to hell over 26.2 miles.

Have you looked at the Brooks Racer ST at all? That might be another good option.

Haven't seen you at the Sunday SBUX run in a while...

Awesome shoes wrote:

Do you have any experience with the Saucony A4 or A5s? By far the most incredible show I've ever worn.

I've thought about those in the past, but never tried them. I don't know if they'd be cushioned enough for a marathon.

imarunr wrote:

I guess my first question is do you really need a racing flat for the marathon? How fast do you intend to run it?

As long as you intend to run it as fast as you can why not?

Get the Mo Farah Super Shoes. He would have run 2:10 without them.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Awesome shoes wrote:

Do you have any experience with the Saucony A4 or A5s? By far the most incredible show I've ever worn.

I've thought about those in the past, but never tried them. I don't know if they'd be cushioned enough for a marathon.

I love the A5 but for me they are not enough for a marathon...in fact I myself would not run a half in them. I would say go with the Kinvara but if you want something even more substantial and still light go with NB 890 v.4. (I only really know NB and Saucony models)

I want a flat because I train in lightweight shoes and flats and have for years. I want to run around 3:20-3:30, but I don't believe there is a set pace where I person should wear a flat or not. I want to run as fast as I can, so I want a shoe that is going to help me do that.

imarunr wrote:

Haven't seen you at the Sunday SBUX run in a while...

I've been running long on Saturdays recently because a training partner (Adriane) has another obligation on Sunday mornings.

Definitely go to a store and try on either the A4s or A5s.

I have found them to feel more cushioned than a lot of shoes. Also, plenty of people have run marathons in them. They're fairly durable. If you do decide to, though, you need to get in some good 18 milers to make sure you're comfortable with it.

Definitely go to a store and try on either the A4s or A5s.

I have found them to feel more cushioned than a lot of shoes. Also, plenty of people have run marathons in them. They're fairly durable. If you do decide to, though, you need to get in some good 18 milers to make sure you're comfortable with it. Like any shoe.

Definitely go to a store and try on either the A4s or A5s.

I have found them to feel more cushioned than a lot of shoes. Also, plenty of people have run marathons in them. They're fairly durable. If you do decide to, though, you need to get in some good 18 milers to make sure you're comfortable with it. Like any shoe.

If you like the Kinvara, try the Saucony Fastwitch. I've raced in them in a marathon before and liked them a lot.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

I want a flat because I train in lightweight shoes and flats and have for years. I want to run around 3:20-3:30, but I don't believe there is a set pace where I person should wear a flat or not. I want to run as fast as I can, so I want a shoe that is going to help me do that.

I thought your last marathon was over 4 hours last year. You should be thinking of running with trainers. Overall you will be faster. If you want to run as fast as you can ,keep your legs as fresh as possible. If you are worried about fitness and think shoes will help , it won't. If it matters, Frank Shorter said, flats for a 10k race are worth about 2 seconds per mile at 5 minute pace.( for him )

1) she wasn't saying what her last marathon was, she said her goal for this one.2) if she trains in minimal shoes and flats, it would make sense to also race in those for her race as well.Txrunnergirl: if you train in lightweight trainers and flats, why wouldn't you use what you have been training in for your race as well? Or are you looking for a pair to buy for workouts and your race?As a side comment, some people are asking "how fast do you have to be to wear racing flats instead of trainers? I think this is actually a valid question. You have to be going fast enough to run with good form with minimal to no heel contact. This is simply for injury prevention. This of course would depend on the individual. Some people might not be at that point until sub six minute mile pace or faster, while some people might already be up on the balls of their feet at 8 minute miles. For me, I always needed the faster end to get in proper running form, so for an out of shape 10k I would wear trainers since I would only be going six minute pace or so. In shape races I would wear flats or spikes (if on the track). Just thought it worth mentioning, since some people seemed to be overly quick to defend wearing flats for the sake of "running as fast as you can." Keep in mind your career doesn't end at the finish line, you gotta keep using those same legs and feet for the rest of your life, so don't be too proud and just end up iniured. Thatbeing said, a woman running 320 to 330 may very well be running with proper form and justify flats. I dunno, I have never seen her run.j

ruffus ruff wrote:

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

I want a flat because I train in lightweight shoes and flats and have for years. I want to run around 3:20-3:30, but I don't believe there is a set pace where I person should wear a flat or not. I want to run as fast as I can, so I want a shoe that is going to help me do that.

I thought your last marathon was over 4 hours last year. You should be thinking of running with trainers. Overall you will be faster. If you want to run as fast as you can ,keep your legs as fresh as possible. If you are worried about fitness and think shoes will help , it won't. If it matters, Frank Shorter said, flats for a 10k race are worth about 2 seconds per mile at 5 minute pace.( for him )

Nike Zoom Streak 5 - only Nike shoe that you list. Don't want you running afoul of "nikeman" or the Beaverton mob.

I'm not sure how this went from asking for help deciding which flat to get to justifying me wearing flats at all. But if some more information is helpful...

2011 - Eugene Marathon 3:44:16 (Saucony Kinvaea)

2012 - Houston Marathon 3:34:01 (Nike Lunaracer 3)

2013 - Boston Marathon 3:59:28 (Nike Lunaracer 3)

Before Boston, my training and lead up race times indicated I was in shape to run ~3:30, but that course chewed me up and spat me out. I cramped up and crashed at mile 10, then jogged/walked the rest.

To explain how I'm not pulling my goal time out of my ass, this January, I got my blood checked and discovered that my ferritin was low. Since supplementing with iron, my running has improved:

February 15K in 1:07:32

March 8K in 33:32

April Half Marathon: 1:38:29 (uphill last 5 miles)

I'm a neutral mid-foot runner. Maybe I'll just stick with the Lunaracer. I really want to try the Streak 5, but it's so new that I haven't seen or heard many reviews, such as how it feels compared to the Lunaracer.

I just ordered a pair of Streak 4's and also NB1400. I also have a pair of Hyperspeed.

The Hyperspeed are definitely "one degree" lighter and more minimal than the other two. Of the three they are my favorite, but (big but) they have less cushioning, more than a tad, but not a huge amount. They have a great fit, are super light, and have the right mix of responsiveness & stiffness.

I ran in the NB1400 yesterday. They have a similarly good fit, but kind of a funny toe box and annoyingly short shoe laces. The cushioning is nice though. They are still light weight but they offer a tad more cushoining underfoot. They aren't quite as responsive as the hyperspeed.

I briefly ran 100m or so in the Streak 4's. These shoes are really stiff. They have a big chunk of plastic in the mid foot and don't flex laterally. They also have a significantly higher heel to toe drop. They are fairly firm, but still offer protection which is nice. Definitely would be responsive and fast. In essence, they are the perfect marathon shoe for a neutral, heel foot striker, who also likes firm shoes. Given the lack of flex and heel to toe drop, they are a very different shoe than the Lunaracer. If you like the Lunaracer, I don't see why you would like the Streak. There's nothing the same about them, except for maybe the lack of support/control, and the brand...

Side by side comparison for you:

Lunaracer is soft, Streak is firm

Lunaracer has a lot of flex, Streak does not

Lunaracer = no plastic in sole, Streak plastic under arch

Lunaracer moderate heel to toe drop, Streak the highest of any flat I've worn.

A couple side notes to help narrow down:

I've had a pair of A4s and in my opinion the A4 and the Hyperspeed are almost the same shoe. So you can just lump those two together for decision making.

Stay away from the fastwitch, if you need a 100% neutral shoe.

People I know have liked the racer boost shoe. A lot of trained in many of the above shoes as well and liked the boost more.

Last question, what minimalist/lightweight shoe are you currently training in? That would also be a good start in terms of picking a shoe to race in.