3 months ago I ran a 5:22 mile. I’m almost 40. My fastest mile ever was 4:59 when I was 16 and my training was awful. I now train much better and recently got the rocket 2s from Hoka. I’ve always been a big Hoka fan, Nike’s don’t work for me, and I thought my fast times were over. But, I’ve been doing more speed work and today I ran a 4:46 mile. So, yes I have been running a little faster, but 35 seconds?? My only other theory is that they fix some issue with my form. I hurt my neck a while back and naturally run more upright these days so maybe they pitch me forward, but are these things legitimate? And don’t get me wrong, it’s awesome, but it makes me feel like I’m doing something wrong.
That's amazing coloradotomb! I'm about the same age and find speed a true challenge with endurance coming more easily.
I recently got the Asics Magic 2 super shoes. Today was my first run ever in super shoes. The shoes definitely make a difference. My run was half trail and half city road and sidewalk. The super shoes definitely didn't work as well in the trail. On road it was incredible and going downhill even more so. There is a pop off the ground. I used to run in Newtons 10+ years ago and it almost reminds me of them.
Umm yeah running downhill might've had something to do with it....
Lets do a rough estimate for how much downhill is needed to match supershoes.
Power output is something like 2000 watts running a mile for a 80kg person. If supershoes helps by 4% then how much downgrade is needed to get 80 watts?
A watt is a N-m/s.
Gravitational force in newtons for a 80kg man is 80 x 10 = 800 kg m/s2.
Vertical velocity is grade x 1600 m / time = grade x 1600/300 (5 min mile) ~ 5 m/s x grade.
So watts gained in going downhill is grade x 5 x 800 = grade x 4000 N-m/s
So rough down grade to get 80 watts for 80 kg man is 80/4000 = 2%.
Power output when running for a certain speed is probably about proportional to mass so likely cancels. So in general (assuming no errors) a 2% grade is likely equal to supershoes.
And this is probably an under estimate for how much the grade helps. When measuring running efficiency you are measuring energy your body is burning which is what, like 25% efficient to converting to motion? Conversion of gravitational potential energy to motion is going to be 100% (converting that downward motion to horizontal motion won't be 100% but is likely going to be way better than 25%).
So, as suggested, you really need to do your time trials on a track, or at least not point to point, to test supershoes.
Umm yeah running downhill might've had something to do with it....
Lets do a rough estimate for how much downhill is needed to match supershoes.
Power output is something like 2000 watts running a mile for a 80kg person. If supershoes helps by 4% then how much downgrade is needed to get 80 watts?
A watt is a N-m/s.
Gravitational force in newtons for a 80kg man is 80 x 10 = 800 kg m/s2.
Vertical velocity is grade x 1600 m / time = grade x 1600/300 (5 min mile) ~ 5 m/s x grade.
So watts gained in going downhill is grade x 5 x 800 = grade x 4000 N-m/s
So rough down grade to get 80 watts for 80 kg man is 80/4000 = 2%.
Power output when running for a certain speed is probably about proportional to mass so likely cancels. So in general (assuming no errors) a 2% grade is likely equal to supershoes.
And this is probably an under estimate for how much the grade helps. When measuring running efficiency you are measuring energy your body is burning which is what, like 25% efficient to converting to motion? Conversion of gravitational potential energy to motion is going to be 100% (converting that downward motion to horizontal motion won't be 100% but is likely going to be way better than 25%).
So, as suggested, you really need to do your time trials on a track, or at least not point to point, to test supershoes.
Mostly. I live around 5500 feet. The run today was hotter (80) but there was a slight downhill. I felt like I might be able to get in the 4:55 - 4:58 range but that 46 just blew my mind.
Just the other day I did a little run at over 500 mph, but I had to wait until we got over 10000 feet and the fasten seatbelt sign turned off. Nikes for the win.
Can't site administrators do something about this. We know Nike has low-level clowns scouring the Board. That is no mystery. But can't it be stopped? How hard would it be to block anyone from HQ in Beaverton? Not adding to a conversation but posting just to get a plug in is offensiveley common here. It just gets annoying....
Nike does have low-level clowns on this board, but the OP is bragging about his Hokas. If any low-level interns were doing this promotion job, it'd be Hoka's. But more likely the OP is legit writing about his experience.
Wait. You ran a GPS "mile" on a downhill course and think that the 35 second difference is due to Hokas. Until you run this on a track, I'd take that 4:46 with a truckload of salt.
I DID A GPS LONG-RUN OF 18 MILES… THE AVERAGE PACE WAS 6:45 BUT THE 12TH MILE WAS IN 3:12. (THE 13TH MILE WAS IN ABOUT 10 MINUTES). AM I THE NEW WORLD RECORD HOLDER IN THE MILE?
3 months ago I ran a 5:22 mile. I’m almost 40. My fastest mile ever was 4:59 when I was 16 and my training was awful. I now train much better and recently got the rocket 2s from Hoka. I’ve always been a big Hoka fan, Nike’s don’t work for me, and I thought my fast times were over. But, I’ve been doing more speed work and today I ran a 4:46 mile. So, yes I have been running a little faster, but 35 seconds?? My only other theory is that they fix some issue with my form. I hurt my neck a while back and naturally run more upright these days so maybe they pitch me forward, but are these things legitimate? And don’t get me wrong, it’s awesome, but it makes me feel like I’m doing something wrong.
After seeing your unbelievable performance, they are seriously questioning if the shoes should continue to be legal.