I know there are a few people on this forum in the running show industry. I have a quick question…What are the benefits of switching fromm a heavier support training shoe like the Saucony Hurricane or Asics Kayano to a lighter shoe like the Asics DS Trainer or Saucony Tangent? I know I save a few grams per shoe but does the weight actually lead to better race performance? For the record, I have low arches and overpronate in both feet. Are the benefits, if any, worse any increased risk of injury?
Lightweight shoes make a HUGE difference for me. I am training/adapting my feet to run all distances in what are essentially 5k racing flats (Puma H Street). They weigh less than half of my “normal” running shoes. When I run with them, my form is better, my heart rate is lower, and I can run much faster. It is a slow transition though- you can’t just go from heavy shoes to running marathons in these things. It takes time to adapt. I wear them everywhere and also do barefoot walking to strengthen my feet and arches.
I work in the running shoe industry. Stability is your biggest concern. The DS trainer does not have the stability that the Kayano has. If you need the stability level that the Kayano provides and switch to the DS and use it as a training shoe you will put a lot of stress on your shins, knees, back, ext. Asking to be sidelined. They are lighter. Use them to race in if you are trying to break 35 minutes in a international split or 2:45 in a marathon, otherwise the weight WILL NOT make a significant difference in your time, you are ONLY risking injury.
Stability is your first priority, and based on your description of your feet my advice would be not to change your shoes.
Adding weight to the foot is equivalent to adding 2 to 4 times that weight to the body as a whole. So, lighter shoes will make you faster. As you point out, though, that weight loss may translate into a less supportive shoe which may be inappropriate for a runner with poor mechanics. The only way to find out is probably to experiment…however, I really would not bother unless you are really looking to pick up a few extra seconds for a win or something. If you run in the wrong shoes, and get hurt, and spend time recovering, you will end up impressively detrained and much slower than you started.
Phil
I work in the running shoe industry. Stability is your biggest concern. The DS trainer does not have the stability that the Kayano has. If you need the stability level that the Kayano provides and switch to the DS and use it as a training shoe you will put a lot of stress on your shins, knees, back, ext. Asking to be sidelined. They are lighter. Use them to race in if you are trying to break 35 minutes in a international split or 2:45 in a marathon, otherwise the weight WILL NOT make a significant difference in your time, you are ONLY risking injury.
Stability is your first priority, and based on your description of your feet my advice would be not to change your shoes.
Yeah, you do sound like you work in the running shoe industry.
This whole industry mantra about stability and support just baffles me. The body adapts to stresses. Shoes that direct the foot to encourage or prevent some motion in particular seem to me to only add another form of stress.
Please consider making a shoe that doesn’t interfere with natural mechanics instead of one that provides “stability” and I will buy it. In the meantime, I probably won’t be helping put your kids in their morning Cheerios.
"Please consider making a shoe that doesn’t interfere with natural mechanics "
I have such shoes: Puma H Streets. I’ve also got some Nike Waffles that are pretty good, but not as light or flexible as the Pumas. I use the Nikes for rainy days because they have more tread. The Pumas are the next best thing to going barefoot.
I work in the running shoe industry. Stability is your biggest concern. The DS trainer does not have the stability that the Kayano has. If you need the stability level that the Kayano provides and switch to the DS and use it as a training shoe you will put a lot of stress on your shins, knees, back, ext. Asking to be sidelined. They are lighter. Use them to race in if you are trying to break 35 minutes in a international split or 2:45 in a marathon, otherwise the weight WILL NOT make a significant difference in your time, you are ONLY risking injury.
Stability is your first priority, and based on your description of your feet my advice would be not to change your shoes.
isnt it true that u should let ur feet do the stability and not the shoes? If u run efficiently and mechanically sound, wouldnt ur feet take care of the stability then?
Maybe trying a step-down approach may work for you, instead of jumping from mega stable cushioned trainer to racing flat/performance shoe. If you’ve never tried the Mizuno line, you may want to look at the Inspire or the Maverick (soon to be discontinued). Both are moderately stable, midweight shoes with adequate cushioning. Both pair weigh at least a full oz. less than the Kayano or Hurricanes.
I don’t know anything about support or mechanics, but I agree with Greg in that lighter shoes make me a lot faster. I believe the general wisdom is ~1-2 sec/mile for each ounce lost. I find that my performance increases MUCH more than than when I switch from my Asics 2100s to my Asics DS-Trainers.
But, that increase on race day, and only on race day, is one of the major benefits, in my mind. It’s like training on 32-spoke box rims and then riding a disc in a race. So I wonder what the point of doing ALL running in the light shoe is? The same thinking has me wear my fuel belt, full, for EVERY run, and then leave it at home for the races. I just feel light and fast.
-C
I have been running 50+ miles a week in my Saucony Fasttwitch. I’ll probably hit 70 miles this week. Been injury free for years.
People put stress on thier shins/knees/back because they have poor form, not because the don’t have some ultra-supportive, over-engineered shoe. However, these same people have a hard time correcting thier form because of the ultra-supportive, over-engineered shoe.
It’s like learning to ride a bike with the training wheels on…
Has anyone ever specifically MEASURED the effect on performance of running shoe weight? Shoes are pretty light compared to legs. I suspect their weight makes little difference. I like the slipper-like feel of racing flats, but I seriously doubt that they make me measurably faster.
I train on my light shoes so I don’t get injured come race day. They’re a lot harder on your feet and ankles. They allow me to train faster- a good thing in my book. Yes, you “feel” faster on race day by switching to light shoes, but I think you gain more benefits by training faster as well.
Yes. There have been many studies.
A barefoot runner requires something like 8% less oxygen than when running with a 11oz running shoe.
Oh! no! Here he goes…
I love my Vitruvians. I would try them. At $60 a pair it is hard to lose.
Dr. Dre’ said something to the effect that, ‘when you take them out of the box they will feel heavy, but after you run in them you will swear they are the lightest shoes you’ve ever used.’
Email Chuck at Vitruvianrunning.com. He can help you figure out which model is closest to the shoes you feel best in.
the newer models are not all that heavy. 10-11 oz in men’s. Much lighter than the Kayanos.
I don’t work for him. My family, including a neice and brother-in-law have owned over a dozen pairs in the last 12 months. My twins have purchased 5 pairs between them.
One benefit is that you spend less on running shoes. At 30 hours of running per month I was going through a pair a month. Since switching to flats (I use Brooks T3s and some Asics for which I don’t know the model number) I only bought those two pair of shoes for four months of running. I suspect had I continued along at 7-8 hours of running per week I would have been fine, but when I pushed up to 10-11 hours my feet started to protest. I backed off for a week, bought a pair of 833s from New Balance and split my time between the flats, which don’t provide any cushioning at this point, and the other shoes.
Ashburn from this forum first suggeted to me you could run forever in the same pair of shoes if your feet are accustomed to the lack of support and cushioning. At the time I thought he was crazy, but I have about 500 miles on the pair of T3s and about 250-300 on the Asics. He was only running about 35 miles a week, and at that level I would not need to buy more than one pair of shoes per year at the most.
When I first started, I was actually running barefoot on a golf course, but then I left home so I had to go back to shoes. It takes a while, but the only way to find out how it works for you is to try. I ran at about 20 hours a month for four months before I began increasing up to my personal record run month last year of 37 hours. All done in flats on paved roads or hard-packed dirt. Patience is very important. Your body can adapt, but it takes time.
I’m sure this is not a popular idea with the shoe companies, since people would not spend a lot of money on shoes then.
Chad
Barefoot on a golf course…are you crazy? do you realize what they spray on that grass?
Do your feet glow at night?
Hmmmm … no. Whatever normal golf courses use, I’m sure they can’t afford on a miltary golf course out in the middle of the desert that is losing a lot of money. Probably just water, I’m guessing.
Chad
No glowing feet yet. When I get back I can’t wait to do it again, once the weather is warmer.
That is why you should not ever eat any fish caught in a golf course lake…full of hebicides and pesticides
.
I am always surprised that weight is such an issue with bikes but not with running shoes. Since we lift our feet up and set them down over and over it seems to me that weight would be a much greater issue in running as opposed biking.
I normally train with Kayano X’s and race with DS Trainers. For me the DS Trainers are 20 seconds a mile faster with the same effort.
jaretj