Consistent training minimum 10 hours per week for about a year. Get as aero optimized as you can afford on the bike. Get a wetsuit that fits well. Run at least 30 miles per week and be able to run an open half marathon under 95 mins. The 70.3 distance is the one where you can get away with the least amount of swim training since its the only distance that doesn't double the swim length moving up from OLY.

Don't over bike.

Obviously it's very individual, but for me 30min swim would be a standalone PB by a mile, yet 2:30 bike meant I had 3 punctures, 2 wrong turns and a chat, but 1:45 run is just over what I did for a 4:42. So I don't think you can be specific in the times, but perhaps especially for swimmers and cyclists, it's keep your powder dry or you'll easily blow 20+ mins on the run.

But my comment on the bike is that I'd done faster bike splits in the past, but never run a 1:4X. Indeed was running 2hours. And dialing the bike back by 5-10 mins took nearly 20 off the run. It's so easy to get sucked into riding over your right pace by chasing power meter figures, or the mental game of continually moving through the draft zones (especially for those of us coming into transition when only half the bikes are left....).

Do it while you are young.

Fight through the suck.

Find a course that fits your style

Find a course with "short" transitions. They can vary greatly.

Constantly do the math in your head on what pace you need on the run and "go deep" into the well if you need to.

Contrary to the above post, When I went sub 5, I didn't run more than 25 miles per week leading up to it (most were under 20), rarely trained more than 8 hours per week (but had done 7+ for over 10 years).

How about the two most unpopular opinions from both extremes:

1-The absolute biggest thing stopping most people is body weight. You think you're light? Get lighter. You think you're mostly muscle? Get lighter. BMI is the number 1 performance predictor in marathons. It's important in tris too

2-Target a low but not too low VlaMax/anaerobic capacity. 5h is short enough that you need a relatively robust anaerobic system to go fast enough but not so much that you burn through carbs. For most people this means more VO2max workouts and less threshold. Misty people aren't disciplined enough to do threshold work properly

For me, the first year I went sub-5hrs I did most weeks at 6-8hrs, a few 8-10. I’ve rarely run more than 25 miles, and I’ve never run a half marathon which wasn’t at the end of a 70.3.
I found swimming more helped as a 32min swim didn’t fatigue me at all. Biking 2:30 is doable for me on <75% FTP, and a 1:40 half is comfortable if I’m on a good day.
As someone has already said, this is very specific to the individual.
I agree that not going too hard on the bike is key - that’s where your training focus should be if you’re not already a strong cyclist.

I don't think you have to nail your nutrition in a 70.3. There's a lot of room for error and still go sub 5 hours. A weekly 14 mile hill run shouldn't be exhausting so build until those are normal long runs. Train with intensity in the pool and be swim fit for your race so you aren't gasping for air running to T1.

---

http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com

This is the way. Weight is the secret sauce. The key to a 5 hour 70.3 is the run, and the singular best way to solve the run is weight. The swim is almost irrelevant. The bike can be improved by spending money. The run almost solely determines the outcome.

And age. Get younger. It is exponentially easier to break 5 in your 30s than in your 50s.

Did it with a 33 minute downriver swim, a sub 2:20 bike off of 220 watts (73% FTP), and a 1:45 run.

So I'd say it's all about the bike. As fast as you can easily do it.

Very interesting

What course was this?

To prove it's not always about the bike, a 34 minute swim, 1:40 bike, and 1:31 run will also do it. There's more than one way, but the comment about weight is pretty accurate. You can't really run a half decent 13.1 while being overweight/heavy/whatever you want to call it.

You're just going to get so many different opinions... You should be able to get an idea of how you're going to go by doing OD races e.g if you're only holding 5min/km pace in an OD, you won't hold that in a 70.3. Do semi regular testing CSS for swim, FTP, 3km TTs etc, so you know where you're at. You don't want to be on the start line questioning whether you can make the times or thinking everything needs to go perfect for you to go sub 5 (cos it won't). So roughly to make your times you should be able to swim 400m in 6.30 (50m pool, bathers), ride 90km at 36km/hr, run a HM at 1.38-.140. People set themselves unrealistic goals and if they did the testing and anyalsed their training they would know whether their goals are realistic or not. And you don't want to be in 5 hour shape, you want to be in 4.45 shape. That gives you 15min of coping with adverse conditions, mistakes, bad transitions, badly measured courses etc

15 minutes off, excluding transitions.

Even if you're 90kg, sub 1:30 is possible. Weight matters a lot to get those last few minutes for a sub 4, but less so for sub 5. If the weight is mostly muscle, it'll potentially help W/CdA on a flat course. I've had several 1:25-1:27 runs in 70.3 races at 85kg, and I'm no exceptional athlete.

Yup.
I ran a spring half marathon in 1:20 at 88kg.
Then a 4:27 70.3 as 30/2:25/1:28 (transitions were 3mins combined)

No secret sauce. Just gotta do some training.

That either means I wasn't heavy at 86 kg for 180 cm (which is 191 lbs for 5'11"), or that 1:29:09 is not a half decent half marathon for a guy in his early 40s with no sports background (and no carbon shoes dear Slowtwitch, LOL).

---

"FTP is a bit 2015, don't you think?" - Gustav Iden

I went 5:06 off a 39 min swim, 2:27 bike and 1:52 run. So a 1:45 half or 1:47half and 37min swim would have gotten me there.
This was on a super fast course (Turkey), so my tip #1 is pick a super fast course!

8 weeks leading into race week looked like below. Note 1 week of no training (1h) due to cold 3 weeks before. Other than that pretty pathetic training numbers. Averaging 5 hours per week i guess? So little extra run training would have easily have made me make it. This will haunt me :D


6 (week before)
7
1
4
7
3
6
6 (8 weeks out)

I’m trying to figure this out at the moment as I have a PB of 5.07 and would love to get sub-5. I have individual PBs within a 70.3 of 35 min swim, 2.35 bike and 1.40 run….just not all in the same event, unfortunately. So as long as my transitions are relatively swift I think I can do it, I just need to string it all together.

I’m a female, early 40s but I feel confident I can keep getting faster over the next few years (women peak later for endurance, right??)

I’m focussing a lot on the bike over winter as I think I’m much more likely to shave off a few minutes here than the swim or run.

What is your personal best? You can go from 5:10 to under 5 but I doubt you can go from 5:40 to under 5.

Hi. My PB is 4:48 this year at the grand old age of 49 and I’ve gone sub 5 in 3 of my last 5 70.3’s (my two slower ones were one pre knee surgery and one post surgery). I’ve learned a lot along the way, but this post was never about me - it was to try and help others. It’s those people that go 5:40 and dream of going sub 5 that we can collectively help. Pat.

Chattanooga.

there are a few good books about half distance triathlon training; they all provide training plans for athletes of different levels and suggestions about equipment and nutrition. if you're dedicated enough to stick to the book, pretty sure you're going to reach your full potential, regardless it's 4, 5 or 6 hours

"Practising transition, nailing the nutrition, identifying areas that need improvement - such as how far off is a realistic 30 minute swim, 2 hours 30 bike and 1 hour 45 run)."


Realistically, work on making these realistic!
Mostly the S,B,R.

All these different opinions on weight are interesting. I’ve no argument that lighter usually equals faster for running, but for me a reduction in bodyweight is invariably linked to increase of or consistent running volume. By extension, I can’t guarantee my performance improvements are directly linked to being lighter, as it may be simply a result of being better trained.
For context - 192cm, 88kg on a good day.

I disagree here; yes lighter body mass can make you go faster; but only when weight is lost in a healthy, sustainable manner, and only if you are overweight as a starting point. The issue of being underweight in all endurance sports is massive, and to state is an irresponsible statement to make even if quoting an unpopular opinion from an extreme.

I get the sentiment that eating well/training well/not binging on junk all the time will make you faster as you get lighter from fuelling as required not beyond, but in a world where ED's are a real issue wording it as above that lighter will always be better no matter what seems irresponsible.

Not that it should matter; but for context I'm 70kg (up from 63kg two years ago), 21 and 4:13 PR. Would say I'm faster now I'm heavier but that would be a poor example as someone improving generally through training/getting older at the moment anyway.