How many miles do you put on running shoes before you retire them? (Read 223 times)

Thanks for all the great feedback- it is interesting to see all the different factors that go into our decisions to retire shoes.  I'm thankful that RA makes it so easy to track running miles in a pair of shoes.  I've often wondered how much of my habit of retiring shoes between 250 and 300 miles was just mental (love running in new shoes) or physical (shoes physically wearing down).  I plan on pushing my current shoes a little farther than normal just to see.   

 

I go by a strict mile guideline rather than feel. Because I can't really notice any difference in how old vs. new shoes feel. I still don't understand what it means when people say they "get" a certain number of miles out of a pair of shoes. I just retire them when they hit about 500.

The only time I've ever had knee or hip pain in my running career, I was wearing old shoes. Switched to newer shoes and the pain went away. That's how I notice by feel. But it isn't a particularly nice feeling, so I generally toss them sooner.

Most road shoes I will toss at 500.

There have been a few (Mizuno Alchemy was like this) that I can't get more than 300 out of w/o feeling the telltale knee pain.

I tend to toss trail shoes between 300 and 400 because they just don't feel like they have cushioning anymore.

Exception to all that, both trail and road... the old school Hoka Stinson. Version 1 and 2... those bad boys were 900-1000 mile shoes. The newer ones, nah.

my random thoughts that might help:

gait mechanics vary between people.

If you're lucky enough to have a gait that is like a perfectly aligned machine in a lab, you can probably get 1000 miles out of a pair of quality shoes before they are noticeably shot. Greater than "normal" heel strike, toe-off, or supination/pronation issues will reduce the effective life of a shoe. I'm always sceptical of people claiming to get 1000 or more miles out of a pair of shoes, but I have seen a few people that actually land and take off exactly as the shoe engineers designed it for. Or they are running slow paced runs on less abrasive surfaces (tracks). Weight and force varies between runners, and heavier people or more aggressive gait will wear shoes out faster.

Materials used in manufacture will vary between brands. Some brands have midsoles that "pack out" and become dead after only a couple hundred miles. Others might last over 1000 miles. Outsoles also have a huge variation. There might be rapid wear on strike zones, but once the wear matches and accommodates your gait it will slow. Material science for running shoes has really boomed in the last 10 years, and there are many great midsole compounds available that will last a very long time before "packing". Outsole materials with interesting compounds that include graphene or carbon are more durable than ones from the past. Fabrics used in uppers, along with overlay technology, and weaving technology such as knit have resulted in more durable and comfortable shoes. It's always getting better.

There are people who wear the same pair of shoes for every run, and only get a new pair when they deem the current pair "worn out". This will result in creeping incrementalism, the shoe won't feel much different from run to run as the miles pile on, but it is actually wearing out way before the runner thinks they are. That's why they notice such a huge difference when they get a new pair!  The practice of rotating shoes reveals when a shoe has given up the ghost, or is headed that way. It also helps prevent some overuse injuries. Even if you like just one particular model, overlapping new and old shoes will help. eg; after 200 miles get a new pair and wear them every 3rd run, then every other run, then 2 of 3 runs, retire original pair and get a new pair, repeat.

Running is a simple sport with simple gear, so we get overly focussed on what little gear is used, like shoes. I know I do. But for perspective, even cheap knock-off shoes in Walmart today are often better than top of the line shoes from 30-40 years ago regarding fit and performance; mainly due to new available materials and copying proven designs*. And 30-40 years ago people were running almost as fast as they do now, and putting in as many miles. Going back even further, my Dad ran a 4:07 mile in the late 40's, and they trained in Chuck Taylor basketball shoes and uncushioned leather spikes.

anecdote: some guy ran 1:11:00 half marathon in Crocs. also does all his training in them.

*not that I'm going to ge get a pair of $20 shoes at Walmart to run in when there are so many better options available today!

I am 210 and have over 500 on my current shoe.

all my running is trail running

2778 on my old Merrell road glove until had hole in soul

currently on just over 1400 on my ‘new’ road gloves

can see why shoe companies might not like some of these longer lasting shoes

Depends on the shoe, really.  I'm a bit stompy so tend to run through them slightly quicker than average.

Saucony Kinvara I would typically get 500km / 300 miles before replacing.  For the Saucony Freedom, a bit more - 650km / 400 miles.  Mizuno shoes typically somewhere in between that.

Thanks everyone for your input to this thread.  It's interesting to see the differences in responses, as well as all the factors that go into running shoe "perceived lifetime". 

rlopex - Is that a hole in your sole or a hole in your soul?