There has to be a crossover point when it becomes more efficient to walk than run, right? I did some searching online and couldn't find anything as far as studies that had already been done on the topic.
So what do you say, letsrun? 500 miles? 1000 miles?
about 6 mph?
Pure running versus pure walking? Probably a few hundred miles.
less than 50 feet
Walking is more efficient than running at all distances.
Look at the ultras. Few of those have pure running like a marathon, most end up doing some "speed hiking" up hills because the energy used to run up slowly is better reserved for later.
Ozzie Strawman wrote:
less than 50 feet
This ^
Blah Blah. wrote:
Walking is more efficient than running at all distances.
And that ^
HR shows that walking in easier than running various slow paces and inclines on the treadmill.
2200 miles.
Appalachian Trail: Jennifer Pharr Davis sets all time record walking/hiking the trail
A year or two later Scott Jurek runs the trail and breaks the record by only 3 hours.
Scott Jurek is both a male and an eltie ultrarunner and beat a phenomenally strong but not as aerobically gifted female hiker (super hiker) by only 3 hours. So I'd say right around 2200 miles.
ultrawalking wrote:
2200 miles.
Appalachian Trail: Jennifer Pharr Davis sets all time record walking/hiking the trail
A year or two later Scott Jurek runs the trail and breaks the record by only 3 hours.
Scott Jurek is both a male and an eltie ultrarunner and beat a phenomenally strong but not as aerobically gifted female hiker (super hiker) by only 3 hours. So I'd say right around 2200 miles.
In the absence of any other evidence, I'm inclined to say that this seems like the best answer.
So if you were to do a TransCon "run" you'd be better off walking? ~2800+ miles.
we saw it happen in Scott Jurek's Appalachian trail record attempt.he could have just power-walked most of the trail and gone just as fast. perhaps run 6-8 miles a day and walked the rest to really beat the recordit was fairly obvious running burned out his body
Hobby Walker? wrote:
There has to be a crossover point when it becomes more efficient to walk than run, right? I did some searching online and couldn't find anything as far as studies that had already been done on the topic.
So what do you say, letsrun? 500 miles? 1000 miles?