How many miles did you run today?

[Fueco]

4 miles on the trails with the dogs. My usual loop was too crowded, so I did a couple of weird out-and-backs to dodge the masses, even running on the road parallel to the trail for a bit. Nice spring afternoon, with temps in the upper 50s.

 

[Michigan Planner]

6.3 miles this morning. My morning runs earlier this week were in temps in the upper 40s and low 50s. Today it was 34° and it felt like I was running into a steady wind the entire time, no matter which direction I was headed. At least it was sunny.

 

[jbarwick]

For a change I decided to run every single street in my neighborhood after a friend started in their neighborhood. Yesterday's run was 7.8 miles. I am thinking this could be done in 6 runs starting from home. The last run will likely be a weird cleanup route.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

Went out today after almost a week off letting my hamstring recover. Did a steady 14.3km (just under 9 miles), which was unsurprisingly a bit slower paced than I had been running previously, at 5:16min/km.

On another note, I wore my new Kinvara's and I can't say I was impressed. I've never worn Saucony before and these aren't going to convert me. This iteration in particular (10) got exceptional reviews but I'm struggling to see why at this point. The best I can say about these shoes is that they are there. Other than that, they give me absolutely nothing. They aren't soft or hard, they aren't cushioned or responsive, they don't seem fast or slow. I get no feeling from them. They are just there. Some runners might like this, but I prefer my shoes to have some character, to have something I can engage with.

 

[Man with Apple]

Went out today after almost a week off letting my hamstring recover. Did a steady 14.3km (just under 9 miles), which was unsurprisingly a bit slower paced than I had been running previously, at 5:16min/km.

On another note, I wore my new Kinvara's and I can't say I was impressed. I've never worn Saucony before and these aren't going to convert me. This iteration in particular (10) got exceptional reviews but I'm struggling to see why at this point. The best I can say about these shoes is that they are there. Other than that, they give me absolutely nothing. They aren't soft or hard, they aren't cushioned or responsive, they don't seem fast or slow. I get no feeling from them. They are just there. Some runners might like this, but I prefer my shoes to have some character, to have something I can engage with.

What have you historically run in?

 

[Fueco]

Went out today after almost a week off letting my hamstring recover. Did a steady 14.3km (just under 9 miles), which was unsurprisingly a bit slower paced than I had been running previously, at 5:16min/km.

On another note, I wore my new Kinvara's and I can't say I was impressed. I've never worn Saucony before and these aren't going to convert me. This iteration in particular (10) got exceptional reviews but I'm struggling to see why at this point. The best I can say about these shoes is that they are there. Other than that, they give me absolutely nothing. They aren't soft or hard, they aren't cushioned or responsive, they don't seem fast or slow. I get no feeling from them. They are just there. Some runners might like this, but I prefer my shoes to have some character, to have something I can engage with.

I can’t stand responsive shoes, so I suspect it’s just a personal preference thing. I ran in Kinvaras (versions 4,5, and 6) before I switched to Altra.

 

[Fueco]

3.65 mile trail run with the dogs. I have to say that a tripled over wool Buff not only potentially minimizes the risk of me infecting someone else, it’s a killer workout, making 5300’ feel like 7000’...

 

[jbarwick]

9 miles for day 2 of every single street. Never been to this area of the neighborhood on foot. Voting is at the school in this area but I just run in and run out for that. Nice little area to check out and felt like a killer workout as every cup de sac was up a hill.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

What have you historically run in?

I used to run in New Balance, a long time ago - can't remember the numbers, but my gait was assessed and I was fitted for the first pair I had and that's what they came up with. Whatever number it was I followed it through as they upgraded them for a few years.

Following a rethink, I went a lot flatter for a while, running in the first New Balance Minimus shoes, but while I liked what they did for my running form, I found I couldn't to distance in them.

Over the last few years I've been running mainly in Brooks shoes. I used to enjoy the Racer ST but I found that it had too much of a drop and I'm much more of a midfoot striker. I found my perfect shoe with the Pure Cadence, which had the perfect combination of moderate stability / motion control, reasonable support and cushioning and a low drop. In these shoes you could feel the road and your speed. So of course Brooks abolished them. I bought a couple of extra pairs and if I found any more in my size (Mens US 7.5, in case anyone sees any in a local shop sale sometime...), I would still pick them up now.

So... I moved to the Brooks Asteria, which Brooks claimed was a partial replacement for the Pure Cadence. But they really aren't. They are not as low drop (but they aren't high either), and they aren't as durable. I used them for practically all my running over the last year and they are definitely tempo / speed / race shoes, and they don't have the longevity to use as long distance trainers, and I'm not sure they are ideal for half or marathon races either.

So I decided to try something longer-lasting and more comfortable for my longer-distance training. I happened to see an older model pair of Brooks Ghost in my size in sale. I've got used to them now, but I really need that bit of stability too, and the drop is probably too much, so these won't be my long-term choice.

I bought the Kinvara because they seemed to be rather like the Pure Cadence, and I hoped they would be the perfect shoe for my mid-range, steady-pace runs (and maybe longer races). And in terms of specs they are like the Pure Cadence, but they just don't feel like them (yet). Hence the disappointment.

 

[Man with Apple]

I used to run in New Balance, a long time ago - can't remember the numbers, but my gait was assessed and I was fitted for the first pair I had and that's what they came up with. Whatever number it was I followed it through as they upgraded them for a few years.

Following a rethink, I went a lot flatter for a while, running in the first New Balance Minimus shoes, but while I liked what they did for my running form, I found I couldn't to distance in them.

Over the last few years I've been running mainly in Brooks shoes. I used to enjoy the Racer ST but I found that it had too much of a drop and I'm much more of a midfoot striker. I found my perfect shoe with the Pure Cadence, which had the perfect combination of moderate stability / motion control, reasonable support and cushioning and a low drop. In these shoes you could feel the road and your speed. So of course Brooks abolished them. I bought a couple of extra pairs and if I found any more in my size (Mens US 7.5, in case anyone sees any in a local shop sale sometime...), I would still pick them up now.

So... I moved to the Brooks Asteria, which Brooks claimed was a partial replacement for the Pure Cadence. But they really aren't. They are not as low drop (but they aren't high either), and they aren't as durable. I used them for practically all my running over the last year and they are definitely tempo / speed / race shoes, and they don't have the longevity to use as long distance trainers, and I'm not sure they are ideal for half or marathon races either.

So I decided to try something longer-lasting and more comfortable for my longer-distance training. I happened to see an older model pair of Brooks Ghost in my size in sale. I've got used to them now, but I really need that bit of stability too, and the drop is probably too much, so these won't be my long-term choice.

I bought the Kinvara because they seemed to be rather like the Pure Cadence, and I hoped they would be the perfect shoe for my mid-range, steady-pace runs (and maybe longer races). And in terms of specs they are like the Pure Cadence, but they just don't feel like them (yet). Hence the disappointment.

Thanks for sharing.

In ask because I have primarily run in Saucony over the last few years. Pretty much all training in the Saucony Freedom ISO. I have found them to be incredibly durable and a Swiss Army knife of shoes. Enough cushion for long runs, but also decent weight for speed and tempo days. I ran my first marathon in them and put in a 2:58.

But I hear you on the Kinvara 10. I personally was not a fan. However, I did like the Kinvara 9s. I felt they had more pep than the 10 and more cushion. I ran my second marathon in the Kinvara 9s and PR’d (2:51).

If you can find some 9s on sale might be worth a shot. Also, you might check out the Freedom ISOs.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

If you can find some 9s on sale might be worth a shot. Also, you might check out the Freedom ISOs.

Maybe I will. It's so annoying when you find the perfect shoe and they either 'innovate' it out of all recognition or just stop making it...

 

[imatlas]

6.75 on a cool and overcast morning. Stuck to a route that largely avoided people, and increasingly I just run in the street.

Unfortunately I still get some knee pain when climbing or descending, and after 6-7 miles of flat running. When I manually slide my patella up and down there’s a bit of grinding. When this thing ever lets up I think I’ll see an ortho for it. Not sure that anything can be done short of surgery; I’ve done a lot of PT and strength work already.

 

[jbarwick]

8.8 miles on mostly new roads to me. My neighborhood is a lot bigger than I realized so this is going to take a little longer than planned.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

Unfortunately I still get some knee pain when climbing or descending, and after 6-7 miles of flat running. When I manually slide my patella up and down there’s a bit of grinding. When this thing ever lets up I think I’ll see an ortho for it. Not sure that anything can be done short of surgery; I’ve done a lot of PT and strength work already.

That doesn't sound good, but as you say I'm not sure there's an easy remedy. I think we probably all have 'knee things' we live with. Mine are permanently overextended ligaments and sometimes I forget about them altogether until I'm on a steep downhill...

 

[Michigan Planner]

6.3 for me this morning. Temps in the 50s in the early hours today but it looks like the rest of the week will be temps in the high 20s or low 30s for my morning runs.

8.8 miles on mostly new roads to me. My neighborhood is a lot bigger than I realized so this is going to take a little longer than planned.

I try to run every mile of every road in my city at least once or twice a year. It isn't too difficult as the city is pretty small and there are less than 100 miles of road when you factor in all the side streets. Unfortunately, a lot of those side streets are relatively long dead end roads with other little cul de sacs coming off of them so you're doubling up a lot and that really adds to the tedium.

I like to run through the neighboring city to the south of mine. It's an older suburb laid out on a traditional grid. There are a bunch of distinct neighborhoods in that city and occasionally I'll run with the goal of getting every mile of every road in a particular neighborhood over the course of a week or something like that.

We have trails nearby but not really close enough to run to and get a bunch of miles on and I don't like driving to run so when I go out to run if I'm not doing one of my standard loops, I usually set out with a goal of exploring a particular neighborhood or running around one of the small local lakes. I've been doing that for about 11 years now and I could probably draw a pretty accurate map of my city and much of the local surrounding area off the top of my head thanks to all that exploration.