The Moving to a Lighterweight Shoe Thread
So...
I use hard plastic inserts I got from a local PT to control my loose ankles, jacked up flat feet and other issues. I'm staying off technical trails to reduce my risk of rolling my left ankle and I've put together several months of consistent, injury free running (knocking on every wooden surface around me).
I'm in Asics Nimbus 11's, size 10, 2E to account for my wide, flat duck feet and this insert. As I said, things have worked perfectly for me so I see no reason to change this setup, for training purposes. The shoe is rated neutral and the insert is likely doing the bulk of the work of keeping my foot neutral in the shoe so I'm wondering if I need such a beefy shoe, for racing anyway, and could experiment with something lighter?
Notes:
- Stick to Asics. Been running in them for 10yrs and I'm not switching.
- Nimbus is 11.9oz. With my insert it's 13.75oz, the insert is 2 1/8 oz.
- Cumulus is 11.7oz...basically the same shoe.
- DS Trainer: 10oz, but only comes in medium width, as do the shoes below.
- DS Sky Speed: 9.9oz
- SpeedStar 5: 8.9oz
Let's say I picked up another set of the Nimbus and also a DS Trainer to use for shorter runs, to see how I do with them. My head spins when I do the math on the energy savings of 1.9oz x 92rpm x 3:40 IM goal marathon time = 4588.5 pounds NOT lifted!! And if I could work my way into the Speedstar...maybe not this year?
Anyway, I've seen discussions in the forums by the smart peeps about lighterweight shoes, your experiences, etc. I'd like to capture that here so we can have all of the learning points when considering making a move like this.
Thoughts? Your input?
Comments
Hate to point to a 6 year old ST post, but I had it bookmarked from the last time I invesigated this. It has some reasonably intelligent comments (including some good stuff from Dr. Skiba - also, dude was way ahead of the curve on the barefoot craze) and seems like an ok starting point for discussion.
Are there lightweight shoes you can put inserts into and still use?
http://members.endurancenation.us/Training/TrainingForums/tabid/101/aft/2950/Default.aspx#41814
The DS Racer is 7.6oz, so in my 2011 experiment, I'm going from a 12oz shoe AND custom plastic orthotic to next to nuthin'. The RPE is in the range of Out of this World.
Now, there's no doubt that there's a mondo placebo effect when I put on my fast kicks, so I wouldn't begin to say there were rigorous controls in my experiment, but they definitely felt very fast. Think of the way you describe the end of a taper in competitive swimming ... that kinda very fast.
Last year was some trial and error, and I started with the Saucony fasttwitch, went to DS trainer, and eventually settled on the DS racer based on its "rating" for distances up to marathon (and availability on the cheap through wiggle.co.uk). As I mention, I ran with orthotics-in in these shoes for two IMs, and the runs were problem-free. And with the orthotics, I could still notice a major difference after training in the 20xx all year.
This week is test'n'rest, and now I'm intrigued. I'll try a few intervals alternating between models and post further when run day comes.
This was me six years ago. Once, in 2001, I tried doing IM California marathon in racing flats, forget which ones, about 5+ oz. I had no problems with my feet, and the only time I ran well in an IM from 2000-2005. For some reason, I learned nothing from that, and kept plodding along until I did some calcs like Rich describes and decided there was something to having less weight on the foot. So in fall 2006, while acclimating in HI, I did a little test between the ASICS 21XX and another 5 oz flat, and found 30-40 second per mile difference. That convinced me to try the lightweights in the race - and I broke my marathon PR from Cali 2001 at Kona in the usual heat! I never looked back after that and switched to lightweight trainers without inserts for training, and flats for all races. Being 66-7 kilos (about 145 +/-) helps, of course.
But then I did that shoe test Tucker references, and found that 8.7 oz Newton racers were just as fast as 3.9 oz Mizuno racing flats. Hmmm, what's that all about? I concluded that weight may not be the be all and end all. Maybe the "rise" from toe to heel is significant. The lower the rise, the faster the shoe? That seems to be important, probably because it allows your foot and calf to me in the best angles needed for efficient running. The whole "barefoot craze and VFF fetixh is basically just about lowering the heels on your shoes, as far as I can tell, as well as allowing more freedom of movement within the foot itself, which again produces more efficient running.
Here are my points, to Rich in particular:
• Your weight is down, there may be less stress on your feets nowadays.
• You probably don't have flat feet or need orthotics; you probably need to get stronger feet - the little muscles that hold the little bones down there all together.
• Using inserts helps you avoid the work that needs to be done to strengthen your feet.
• Consider heel rise as well as shoe weight when deciding which model to get. I was stuck on ASICS for a decade, and then found that I went faster in Newton's, hands down. I understand being convinced that a certain brand has your anatomy down cold. The only thing that got me into the the Newton's was getting a free pair in Nov 2009, which went unused for months, and then I worked my way into them over 2 months. Then I did my shoe test and found what I felt was true was demonstrably so: those shoes are worth their $ if speed is what I'm after.
The little thin plastic inserts my Podiatrist made for me now go in my walking shoes.
Just to clarify about the test I did: Once or twice a week, after a hard or long bike, I would do a brick on the same course from my house. 5 miles, the first mile as a warm up, the next three @ MP, and then a cool down. In the Pac NW summer, environmental conditions are generally moderate and consistent. but I did note Temp and HR as well as pace for each show, The test was aborted abour 2/3rds of the way thru when I had a little accident and couldn't run for a while, but I learned all I needed.
I was lucky because at that time I happened to have a number of different pairs of shoes I could compare: ASCIS 21XX, Saucony Kinvara and Fastwitch, Newton Gravity's and Racers, and two flats, the Mizumo Wave Universe and the Pirhanas. I didn't get to the Sauconys. I may try this again this summer, as I still have all the shoes!
If you've got a stable of footwear, it's best to do your own testing; I make no representations that Newton's are the best for everybody, but they certainly are the fastest for me. Anecdotally, others in my tri club (who have access to an Army discount for this brand) say the same thing.
A year long project to experiment with all kinds of stuff? Yes. 15wks? Nope, I just want to see if I can work with a shoe that's 2oz lighter.
Any real issues switching to a lower heal shoe? My big concern that I've heard is the huge stress on the calves. Should you walk around in these for a few weeks first, start a stretching program, run a mile or two only? I guess I'm intrigued but really concerned I'll hurt myself.
I'll piggy back Al and say that strengthening our feet are an important part in preventing a lot of the foot problems people have today. I believe the smaller intrinsic muscles of the feet have become week/atrophy because of the type of shoes we have been wearing for years.
My foot strengthening that I do regularly consistantly of using a balance board, standing on a 10 lb medicine ball, standing on the large therapy balls ( for 3-5 minutes at a time, rolling back and forth and side to side and squating)), barefoot 1 legged squats and lunges. The added benefit of this foot work is that it is also very good core work.
At Al's recommendation I started wearing the Asics Piranahs, 3.9 ounces. I love them, wore them for IM Wisconsin, wear them for all my speed work. I had been running with a Chi style technique for a few years which allowed me transition into these very easily without the typical calf problems people initially get with the low heal style shoes.
It might be in my head but I feel faster and my leg turn over is much better in these lighter shoes. I just bought a pair of K Swiss Kruus, not as light but also a low healed shoe, have not tried them yet.
My question really becomes...how do efficient, veteran runners fare with Newtons? Just some thoughts.
After 30 plus years of always looking for the most cushioned shoes I could find, I have moved toward a more minimal, lighter shoe. I took the transition slowly and carefully and initially ran only the shorter bricks while wearing Nike Free shoes. I really liked the feel and the lightness of the shoe.
I moved from the Nike Free models to the Saucony Kinvara for all of my runs. I found it to be a very comfortable, extremely lightweight model, provided I am careful with my technique.
I am now wearing the New Balance Minimus for all my runs and really like this shoe. It may be my imagination but it seems to me that especially towards the end of my longer runs, my entire legs feel stronger. It is as if I am using more of my entire leg muscles for running as opposed to prior years where I just tossed my foot out at each step and landed on my heels.
P.S. Like Rich I also wear a 2E shoe, although my current models do not offer wider widths. When I started running in 1977 I wore an 11R shoe. Now I need a 12EE. I guess all those years of pounding the pavement, plus gravity's intervention, have flattened my feet substantially.
@ Rich: Got it, makes perfect sense, what I'd do myself in your situation, etc.
Re: Newton's etc @ Tom, Bob, George. I've been running "only" since 1999, and have approached it totally empirically - that is, I don't have theories or try to follow some guru, I just discovered what worked for me with speed and comfort being the sole outputs I am concerned with. In Nov 2006, I had bunion surgery, and foot pain became a thing of the past, maybe that's why I started experimenting more with shoes. And my podiatrist's lectures about foot strength problems leading to worsening bunion made me stop trying to "protect" my feet and just let them work on their own.
@ George: I have no idea how efficient a runner I am or was. B ut I bet my mechanics did improve with the Newton's, how else to account for the improved speed I've seen both in training and racing with them despite getting on in years?
@ Tom: No, I had no trouble with calf pain, I only took a couple of weeks to "get used" to the Newton's., and I went that slowly only because he experts said I should. Following that advice thus worked, I guess.
I have never had any foot pain (apart from that damned bunion) at any time in my running career, nor have I had leg pain issues like IT band or shin splints or joint problems. Despite being on the lean side, I think my tendons and ligaments are strong, and I've always lifted weights, giving me good quad and glute strength. With that as background, I had no troubles getting adjusted to the Newton's. I used them for brick runs only for the first couple of weeks, saw no problems, and just adopted them.
I think those three "plugs" under to front part of the foot really only do two things: (1) they raise the front foot, giving a lower rise back to the heel and (2) save weight by eliminating some of the forefoot sole material. Theoretically, I guess, those plugs do provide some cushioning to compensate for the increased mid foot strike which they encourage by the low rise. I bet that any neutral shoe with minimal material and a low rise front to back would also make one faster. I prefer the Newton's for a 2 or 3 other reasons: they have a wide toe box, which I need to prevent black toenails in my middle toes, the soles seem to last longer for me than other shoes (the damn things are expensive, but the cost permile is less than you might expec if they last longer)t, and they have a lot of ventilation - the upper material is just cross-hatched synthetic, so they breathe quite well.
Negatives: they don't do as well for me on a track or off of pavement, so I don't use them there (using Kinvaras for that now), and they allow feet to get quite wet when stepping in a puddle or running in a downpour.
I'm going to "experiment" further at my next IM, CDA in three + weeks. I'll use the Newton racers (which, oddly, are simply the Newton Gravity without a heel pad for protection). They have a softer, lower heel than the Gravity is the only difference. It's not a total shot in the dark, as I've done three races with them in the past year, 2 Olympic tris, and a recent half marathon. I had my fastest 10Ks ever in a tri last summer, and this recent HM was also faster, relative to others in my AG, then any in the past 5 years.
To reiterate: I get no discount from Newton, and represent their usefulness only for me. I advise others to experiment for themselves, as all our bodies and backgroounds are different.
I have a number of issues for which I was prescribed othotics. My feet pronate differently and I also had surgery on my big toe and have a screw in it. My orthotics are designed to take the pressure off my big toe joints. I like a lightweight shoe but need one that will fit my orthotics and provide enough cushioning for my forefoot. I've tried a lot from the DS Trainer to K-Swiss Blade Lights to Newtons. None of them worked. My issue is that I can find a shoe that will fit my orthotics but on long runs, my toe gets sore after 8-10 miles. I first found the perfect shoe with the Nike Lunar Trainer. 9oz trainer with execllent cushioning. They are not made any more so I switched to the Lunar Elite+ and they are great. They fit my orthotic and provide enough forefoot cushioning. They also weigh 9oz and are good for racing.
I had been running in Nimbus for years prior to making the switch.
rich and others, i am late to the light shoe party! my favorite topic.
...if you are too busy to read, then skip to the very last line for my ultimate suggestion to Rich!!!
here's my take from my experience:
speed: you will run faster and avoid long term injury with a lighter shoe; what is light? 9oz or below and you are OK. 7oz and below would be even better. meaning, i can run fast in 9oz shoes and in 4oz shoes, but once i get to >9.0oz i might as well go deep sea diving and take a stroll on the ocean floor. there is a distinction between the 9oz and 4oz however, see below...
wide and light: mizuno ronins are 7oz and run wide and are mostly neutral but do provide some pronation support. i currently run in asics piranha 4oz, but they run narrow. DS trainers are good too if they fit your foot. New Balance MT101 are my other favorite. a trail shoe, but weigh 7oz and have a slighlty raised heel, which make it a nice transition shoe when you are getting used to minimalist shoes (that have no heel raise).
benefit of lightness: the difference between a 9oz to 7oz shoe and sub 7oz shoes comes over longer distances. the sub 7 shoe allows you to feel the road better, like wearing fingerless gloves or really thin full gloves vs. snow mittens (i am from california, so i don't know what the thick gloves are actually called snow mittens!). at around mile 16, my technique starts to want to falter because of fatigue. feeling what parts of my foot are making contact with ground, helps me to be assured that i am maintaining my form. this is harder to do with a 8 to 9oz shoe because of all the cushioning. as a result, i am going kind of blind throughout the run. if at the beginning i start to land incorrectly, then by the later miles i can start to get weird tweaks in joints or get injured.
deformed feet: when your foot has been altered surgically or you've likely shredded your ligaments from past injury (Rich!), then certain rules do not apply to you in the classic sense, but you can still work around it.
example:
mt101's have a thin plate at the forefoot to protect from rocks in trail running. however, this is the perfect protection for people with sesamoid issues or great toe bunions, active or repaired, who run on the road. the plate prevents too much flexion at that joint, which could aggravate it. the plate also provides protection from impact force. in the case of bunions, strating the shoelaces at the third hole vs the first hole, helps widen the toe box.
Rich's case:
no ligaments at the ankle, means your ankle has lost stability. trying to make quick changes of direction will result in your ankle going one way and your body the other. in this case, a plate at the bottom of the shoe is kind of serving to distribute the weight evenly so that as long as you land properly, then the less chance the ankle turns. however, the problem is at the ankle, not the bottom of the foot. in the short term a lighter shoe (that fits your foot) + plate can help with the overall weight issue and still provide the support that has produced pain free running so far.
for the long term, i would make it a routine to go about your daily life in nike free or new balance minimus or minimalist shoes like that. this will strengthen your feet, since you spend more time walking around than running. get a shoe like the mt101, which has a plate in it (only where it is needed) and raised heel (like most normal shoes) to run in, get rid of the plate from the PT. run only straight lines, no trails, easy turns, etc. this will continue to protect foot, in a light shoe, and build foot strength. combined this will put you in the drivers seat in terms of protecting your ankle from getting tweaked, since it is more based on you sensing/feeling what foot position is best to avoid any injury vs. having all your senses obscured with your foot in a diving boot.
finally, wait for it....wait for it....COMPRESSION SOCKS, DUDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
seriously, though, for the biomechanical reasons described above, the compression at the ankle will help to keep all the structures in place. in time, you won't even need any plate because:
-your feet will be strong (and less flat);
-a lighter shoe will help you sense the road and thus less prone to landing wrong and turning your ankle;
-you will be faster;
-the C-socks will keep everything in place, like a functional ankle wrap.
hope this helps!
g
I bought in last year to improving my technique and running with minimal shoe (Born To Run). With wide feet, high arch, and 225 lbs and 49 years old and I went completely injury free through 1 IM and 3 halfs. And now I'm going for a run for no apparent reason, which is spooking me a little.
I also ditched the orthotics.
I just ordered my first pair of Brooks T7 racers.
I do some training in my Asics Gel Nimbus 12. I do most of my training and racing in Brooks Launch. I will now do my racing in the Brooks T7. I own a pair of Saucony Kinvaras as well but I'm having a hard time breaking into them.
The Brooks Launch are the best pair of running shoes I have ever used. Just looking for something a little lighter come race day. Previously wore Saucony Fastwitch shoes but I wanted to get away from any stability and just go neutral. While I don't have a perfectly neutral gait, neutral shoes work the best for me. I think there's something to be said for points made about naturally strengthening and conditioning your foot as opposed to letting the shoe do it for you (unless you're a serious pronator, etc.). I have much less discomfort in neutral and more minimalist shoes. I tried Newtons a couple of years ago and it just wasn't a good match for me.
Weight (according to runningwarehouse.com in size 9 -- I wear a size 12):
Asics Gel Nimbus 12 12.2 oz.
Brooks Launch 9.1 oz.
Brooks T7 6.0 oz.
Saucony Kinvara 7.7 oz.
All,
Thanks for the tips and advice. I think this thread will be a great resource for people looking to save weight on their shoes and move in a more minimalist direction.
I hear everyone's message to fix your feet, etc, but at 15wks out I don't want to "fix" anything. I can keep doing what I'm doing now, which is continue to rack up miles in a shoe + orthotic combination that works for me, but I want to see if I can save ~2oz per shoe. Looks like my limiter for the shoe is width to accomodate the orthotic and my flatass feet. I'll look through the thread again for options other than Asics.
I'm now looking for a lightweight, neutral trainer in 2E width. And I'll likely pick up a pair of Nike Free or other shoes for walking the dogs, walking around the house and "maybe" some Strides now and then in front of my house.
What other lightweight shoes are neutral or are they all neutral given their nature?
For what it's worth, I too have big chunky orthotics, and have to wear them to walk. For some applications, I use a version that's basically just an arch support underneath all my insoles. Can't always do that with other shoes, and have to wear the full insoles. Been running/walkding like this for 20 years.
As others have pointed out, with the bulky orthotics, the toe box is a huge issue. Over the years, I have bought shoes that didn't fit with the orthotic accidentally, and I have just put a slice in the upper at an appropriate spot to give myself a little more room. This is a crappy solution, but it can save a pair of shoes from being totally useless if you find yourself in a non-returnable situation.
Mancona would be pleased to know that I got into lighter shoes using the Zoot TTs and I still love them. They have plenty of room for me, and they have that funky lacing system that I like for race.
Over the last couple of years, though, I have switched to Newtons, which are at least almost as light as anything. I love them. I learned to alter my stride, and I am faster. A lot of that is training, but I think some is the new efficiency and lack of injury. Very interestingly, though, I've also been able to stop wearing my orthotics altogether when I run in them. THIS SAID, in my opinion, the ONLY time to try to switch into Newtons from other shoes unless you are already very confident that you are a fore/midfoot runner is at the end of your season, after your big race, i.e., during your down/transition time. You can take the time to learn to run the way they force you to, without interfering with your normal training. Jumping into them mid-season if you need to alter your stride is just asking for trouble. Again....all in my opinion/experience. For me, the switch was worth it, but it was an October thing.
William
Ditto. I got coupon for a free pair at my last race 09 (Nov), received them mid Dec, and started using them as I eased into last year's OS.
Also, like many others, I read Born to Run last fall and went out and bought some FiveFingers for training. I easily took 30-40 seconds/mile off my pace with them! Of course, buying them right before winter wasn't the best choice - too cold to wear in Oregon year-round - but I'm looking forward to working them back into my shoe rotation this summer. The calf muscles were sore at the beginning, though.
Other than my Newtons, those K-Swiss have been my favorites.