Platypus' Beginners Guide to Running

Maybe. They do look pretty cool though.

I got back from a run today and noticed a few holes developing on the upper which is annoying. I guess with trail shoes there’s a lot more opportunities to catch them on rocks/thorns etc. Hopefully they don’t get much worse as the trainers have loads of life left yet.
 
daz said:
From my very brief research I did a while back, you have to spend a fair bit to get a treadmill worth having. This is what I was looking at when planning on kitting out my home gym:-
https://www.jtxfitness.com/jtx-sprint7-motorised-home-treadmill

From what I understand the motor power and the deck size are the important aspects. Some are also 'commercial', in which case they're deemed to be tougher etc. But I realised I get super bored running on a treadmill so I'm still weighing it up.
Click to expand...

Martynt74 said:
I agree. Maybe look for refurbed ex gym units? Can’t suggest any specific models though.
Click to expand...
Sorry forgot to say thanks for these responses. I'll keep an eye out over the next few weeks on gumtree and see if anything pops up.
 
Reuben klang said:
Anyone seen these?

Got targeted on an ad for these and thought they looked interesting. I’ve only done around 200k in my current shoes but these may be an option to try in a few months.

Adidas 4DFWD
Click to expand...
The 4D midsole technology is currently very much on the gimmick side of things for now. This particular one is supposedly designed for heel strikers to allow the lattice to compress to push you forward. Many other technologies exist to do much the same thing. The most tried/tested one in my view being the rocker sole. This particular shoe is quite heavy and definitely on the expensive side at £170. Personally I would avoid with the only reason for buying it would be if you particularly like the look of the 4D midsole.

If you want recommendations for a a similar shoe (daily trainer for a heel striker) you cant go wrong with a New Balance 1080 or Nike Pegasus 38. If you particularly like this 4D technology in terms of it's forward propulsion technology, I'd take a look at a rocker style shoe like the Hoka Clifton 8 or Asics Glideride 2. All of these shoes are much cheaper too.
 
I forget how much knowledge and experience different people here have, so apologies if anything you already know but you get shoes which are designed for people who pronate (which I think is what you're describing).

I've not a lot of experience of that sort of thing but I'd be cautious about changing from "normal" shoes unless you already have injury problems. I'm sure someone here will be able to advise though.
 
dwarf said:
The 4D midsole technology is currently very much on the gimmick side of things for now. This particular one is supposedly designed for heel strikers to allow the lattice to compress to push you forward. Many other technologies exist to do much the same thing. The most tried/tested one in my view being the rocker sole. This particular shoe is quite heavy and definitely on the expensive side at £170. Personally I would avoid with the only reason for buying it would be if you particularly like the look of the 4D midsole.

If you want recommendations for a a similar shoe (daily trainer for a heel striker) you cant go wrong with a New Balance 1080 or Nike Pegasus 38. If you particularly like this 4D technology in terms of it's forward propulsion technology, I'd take a look at a rocker style shoe like the Hoka Clifton 8 or Asics Glideride 2. All of these shoes are much cheaper too.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I won’t bother then. FWIW I run in a pair of Pegasus 38.
 
It's easy to forget how incredible some people are.

I had a run this morning that ticked the 100km in a month badge on Strava. I clicked on it and saw the leaderboard with the top runner having done ~1500km this month. I thought "surely this guy is mixing up activities and includes some bike rides"....Nope, all running ticking around 40 miles a day for a "morning run". What's even more impressive is that he's not even very quick with yesterdays being done ~14 min/mile. So the run took ~10 hours. It makes you wonder what the rest of his day is like to be able to focus so much time consistently on running, his stats show ~60hrs a week of running, burning ~8000 calories on a regular basis.

Plus he's a firefighter, so a fairly physical job otherwise!

What was also amusing is just how flat his runs are. YTD he's done ~20x as many miles as me, yet only 5x my ascent.

https://www.strava.com/activities/5840879808
 
div0 said:
I forget how much knowledge and experience different people here have, so apologies if anything you already know but you get shoes which are designed for people who pronate (which I think is what you're describing).

I've not a lot of experience of that sort of thing but I'd be cautious about changing from "normal" shoes unless you already have injury problems. I'm sure someone here will be able to advise though.
Click to expand...
It's difficult to properly advise without actually seeing the footstrike. Pronation, landing on your outside edge and rolling inwards through the footstrike to push off the front of the foot, is entirely normal. Issues can arise with overpronation, where this roll inwards is excessive, or supination, where this roll inwards does not occur. @Blackvault you really need to get down to a specialist running store that can analyse your footstrike and recommend you suitable shoes. However, as div0 says, if you're not getting injured just stick with whatever works for you now. A shoe that forces you away from your natural footstrike can cause more injury than it prevents.
 
Have ordered a set of the Aftershokz Aeropex. What's pretty annoying is they seem to be online only for most stores so can't try them out. Have ordered from Amazon so that returns are easy enough.
Always feels a bit crappy doing that just to try them out. Hopefully they're good enough but it's a shame that i can't compare the different products in the range side by side. Have started cycling and so having open earphones would be pretty useful. My only concern is that most reviews suggest they're for podcasts/voice and music is less good. @AndyCr15 i think i saw you had some, how are they for music? I don't need to get every last bit of detail from every song when running but i also don't want them to be useless.

I'm not sure if it's just me, but my cheaper headphones seem to be losing battery strength and so they only last an hour or so these days. I seem to have about 6 pairs of bluetooth headphones in various drawers now because they still "work" just not well enough to be my main set!
 
Martynt74 said:
It's easy to forget how incredible some people are.

I had a run this morning that ticked the 100km in a month badge on Strava. I clicked on it and saw the leaderboard with the top runner having done ~1500km this month. I thought "surely this guy is mixing up activities and includes some bike rides"....Nope, all running ticking around 40 miles a day for a "morning run". What's even more impressive is that he's not even very quick with yesterdays being done ~14 min/mile. So the run took ~10 hours. It makes you wonder what the rest of his day is like to be able to focus so much time consistently on running, his stats show ~60hrs a week of running, burning ~8000 calories on a regular basis.

Plus he's a firefighter, so a fairly physical job otherwise!

What was also amusing is just how flat his runs are. YTD he's done ~20x as many miles as me, yet only 5x my ascent.

https://www.strava.com/activities/5840879808
Click to expand...

Can't understand how his body takes that.
 
Martynt74 said:
Have ordered a set of the Aftershokz Aeropex. What's pretty annoying is they seem to be online only for most stores so can't try them out. Have ordered from Amazon so that returns are easy enough.
Always feels a bit crappy doing that just to try them out. Hopefully they're good enough but it's a shame that i can't compare the different products in the range side by side. Have started cycling and so having open earphones would be pretty useful. My only concern is that most reviews suggest they're for podcasts/voice and music is less good. @AndyCr15 i think i saw you had some, how are they for music? I don't need to get every last bit of detail from every song when running but i also don't want them to be useless.

I'm not sure if it's just me, but my cheaper headphones seem to be losing battery strength and so they only last an hour or so these days. I seem to have about 6 pairs of bluetooth headphones in various drawers now because they still "work" just not well enough to be my main set!
Click to expand...
I've been using Aftershokz Aeropex for almost 2 years now. They are certainly not useless for music, they are very good for the rock music I listen to. They do lack a bit of bass and clarity which you don't really miss that much with podcasts but you might with music if you are used to good headphones. You're never going to get quite the same sound quality as traditional headphones as there's (obviously) no sound isolation at all. I would say the sound quality is something like as good as the cheap earphones you would get with an iPhone. I think they are fantastic for running, they are really comfortable and I completely forget I have them in. They allow me to remain aware of my surroundings even at high volume I would not hesitate to buy them again or recommend them.
 
Excellent. That’s all I’d be hoping for sound wise really. I have decent headphones for around the house etc but I don’t need that when out and about.

Especially with aiming for extra cycling volume, it’d be good to have music for long rides without risking my life!

Tempting for off road runs too. I don’t usually bother with headphones when I’m out on moors etc and like to hear the surrounding wildlife but some faint music in the background would help with some grind too.

They’d be ideal for when I’m pottering in the garden too and my wife gets annoyed with me having headphones in and being unable to hear her (although maybe in ears are better in that situation:p)
 
dwarf said:
I would say the sound quality is something like as good as the cheap earphones you would get with an iPhone.
Click to expand...

I personally would disagree with this. I have plenty of £30 Bluetooth headphones that I would happily listen to music on, but the Aeropex, I just wouldn't bother. I love them for podcasts and would suggest they are good as in ear headphones for the spoken word, but I personally think music sounds terrible on them (and I'm far from an audiophile btw)
 
Love my Aeropex, Sure they may not be top class for music but they are perfectly acceptable. Found them great on long haul flights with ear plugs as well.

Top bit of kit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom