I’ve been running almost exclusively in the Lunaracer (original & 2) for the last 18 months or so. No issues, really. I love their light weight and ample/soft forefoot cushioning. However, as my long run mileage increases in prep for an upcoming marathon, I’m starting to find that they may not be quite enough shoe for me for 26+ on the pavement.
I did a 19-miler on a crushed limestone trail in the Lunaracer, and they were fine. But, the same mileage on the road has me questioning them for 26+ on the harder surface.
So, I’m looking for something that’s just a bit more shoe, but still fairly light and neutral. And, due to some ligament issues, I require a good amount of soft forefoot cushioning. Firm cushioning (Mizuno, for example) does not work for me.
From reading reviews, it sounds like the Brooks Launch would be a good choice. And, I have run in the original Brooks Ghost, which is also built on Brooks’ Universal Platform.
So, for anyone that has experience with both shoes, would you agree with my thinking? And, could you give me a quick rundown of the fit comparison?
Fit is going to be roomier then either Lunaracer throughout the shoe, especially in the toebox. Not wide by any means, but if you like your shoes really, really tight, the Launch probably won’t cut it. They’re also a fair bit heavier, but very cushy. If the Lunaracers are almost enough, the Launch will probably be more than enough to get you through a marathon. As long as you aren’t worrkid about a couple of extra ounces on your feet, I would say they’re a fine choice.
These are very different shoes. That said, given what you describe as your needs/wants…give the Launch a go. I’ve worn out 3 pairs now and love them. They are not terribly minimalist or flat-heeled. But they are more shoe than the Lunaracer. I like them for long runs down to long tempo runs. They are responsive enough for faster training, but below long tempo distance I’ll usually opt for the Green Silence or a racing shoe like the Lunaracer or T-6/7s.
Compared to the Ghost, which I’m also using for long, steady or easy training runs, the Launch feels more like a well-cushioned racing shoe, particularly after a few runs. If I’m “just out running”, I’ll tend to use the Ghost. If I have any kind of harder or faster effort in the run, I like the Launch. I do not like the Launch at the track…too much shoe. I would not race 26.2 in them either unless I were a big guy. I’m 5’9" and 155-160 in race trim.
Compared to the Ghost, which I’m also using for long, steady or easy training runs, the Launch feels more like a well-cushioned racing shoe, particularly after a few runs. If I’m “just out running”, I’ll tend to use the Ghost. If I have any kind of harder or faster effort in the run, I like the Launch. I do not like the Launch at the track…too much shoe. I would not race 26.2 in them either unless I were a big guy. I’m 5’9" and 155-160 in race trim.
So, if the Launch “feels more like a well-cushioned racing shoe”, why wouldn’t you race a marathon in them? Simply because there are better shoes for you for that distance?
Can you compare the fit of the Launch to either the Ghost or the Lunaracer?
The Launch is the only shoe mentioned in which I’ve not run. Of those, the original Ghost was my favorite, even up to 24 miles. The Lunaracer is a great halt of 10k shoe, but is kind of uncomfortable when approaching or going beyond 20 miles.
Following disappointment with the Ghost 2, I switched to the Green Silence for my shoe of choice. After 13 months, the first pair is till going strong (I would alternate with Nike Free 5.0s). A new pair of the GS arrived last week, and I am anxious to get them broken in.
the launch is a very nice shoe. you should be good in it for the distance you are looking to run in them. the lunar racer doesn’t really fit my foot well. i loved the weight and the feel, but i always had a very bad spot on my big toe that would be a real bother after about 7 miles. i could do a 10k in them but nothing longer without an issue. i finally donated them to a local high school b/c i only had about 50 miles total on them.
The Lunaracer is a great halt of 10k shoe, but is kind of uncomfortable when approaching or going beyond 20 miles.
Not sure what a “halt of 10k” is but my Lunaracers+ (original) and I have two Boston qualifying times (and one actual Boston) races under our collective belts that disagree with you. Also, judging by the number of people I saw wearing LRs1+ at Boston in my wave, I would not bet on the same horse as you.
They might be uncomfortable for you, with your running form, with your level of fitness, with your foot morphology.
Ah, Slowtwitch! The place where blanket statements come to gather!
“So, if the Launch “feels more like a well-cushioned racing shoe”, why wouldn’t you race a marathon in them? Simply because there are better shoes for you for that distance?”
Yes. Given a preference, I would race a marathon in the T7 or Green Silence. They are more responsive and lighter. I would and have raced ultras in the Launch.
The Lauch fits me the same as the Ghosts. It is only during the actual stride motion that I start to feel the difference, mostly since the Ghost has a higher heel. I wear 10.5 in both. I also wear 10.5 in the Lunaracer.
I’ve been tempted to give the Green Silence a try ever since they came out. But, from reading some of the initial reviews, it seems the cushioning is more firm than the Lunaracer. So, I haven’t bitten the bullet. As someone that’s run in both, what are your thoughts?
I’ve toyed around with KSwiss Blade Light Run, Lunaracer, Saucony Fastwitch 3, Saucony Kinvara, Brooks Ghost and Launch, and one other Asics that I can’t recall the name over the past year.
I like the Blade Light Run for IM marathons, the Launch for marathons, and the Lunaracer, Fastwitch and Kinvara for races under marathon.
I actually think Lunaracers have a bit more bounce to them over the Launch, but I don’t like the Lunarcers uppers enough for the full marathon. They seem to rub me wrong after 2 hours. Launch fit like a glove, with more wiggle room in the toe box.
I’ve put a 20 miler on my Launch and they seemed good. They are likely my shoe for Boston. But I plan on the Kinvara’s for an upcoming half marathon.
The Launch is definately not as cushy as the Lunaracer foam. I previously did the majority of my training and racing in the Lunaracer 2 and loved the cushioning but the toe box was just too low and narrow. I ended up fighting some nasty blisters from my toes being cramped together so I finally gave up on it. Sizing up wouldn’t have worked either. The other thing that I did not like about the Racer was that when wet it seemed to absorb even more water than I would have expected (even when just wet from pouring water on my head). For ME the fit of the Launch is much better (especially if trying to also fit an orthotic in there). As noted it is a bit firmer and slightly heavier but I find it to be a good all purpose shoe that is way more durable. One thing I would warn you about though is that in my experience it is not a good shoe for sockless running. Both of my little toes got torn up pretty bad from exposed stitching on just a 4 mile run (granted I do have baby soft feet). Anyhow good luck!
The Nikes are too narrow for me, so I’ve not worn them aside from a try-on… That being said, I’ve gone through two pairs of the Launch and ran in the Ghost before that.
I found the launch to be much softer underfoot (but not squooshy) than the ghost. Wider in the forefoot, as well. They are DEFINITELY wider than the Nikes…although I would probably call t hem “roomy” as opposed to wide.
They were lighter (and felt lighter), than the ghost, as well…but at the same time I felt like they were more “stable” (not in terms of a neutral versus a stability shoe…just in terms of foundation, I guess).
