The current issue of Outside magazine claims that a lifelong runner will go through 156 pairs of running shoes by age 70. They didn't cite a source.
I don't keep track of this, but I'm guessing I've bought about 90 pair. I'm not on pace to hit 156 by age 70. What's your count?
investing in health is wise. money well spent
I'll take the over
fisky wrote:
The current issue of Outside magazine claims that a lifelong runner will go through 156 pairs of running shoes by age 70. They didn't cite a source.
I don't keep track of this, but I'm guessing I've bought about 90 pair. I'm not on pace to hit 156 by age 70. What's your count?
This is a pretty good estimate...for someone who runs regularly from about age 12 to age 70. That's 58 years. That's 2.69 pairs of shoes a year. SERIOUS runners would go through way more pairs than that even.
I've also noticed an inverse correlation between the size of my bank account and the number of miles I can put on a shoe.
Even only buying shoes when my current pair falls apart, I will still be over 156 by the time I'm done running.
Motram went trough like 180 in a season
I have 108 race t-shirts in my closet right now.
58 X 20 = 1,160
Not me. I buy shoes once every 1-2 years, depending on volume. I don't believe that shoes should be thrown away after 300 miles like they tell me at the running store. I get five to six times that out of a pair of shoes. And never have problems. A little wearing is not going to cause you an injury. Overtraining in one way or another is the culprit 99% of the time, not your shoes. Don't buy into the belief that the shoe companies are trying to brainwash you with.
I'd say thats a lowball estimate. I'm frugal and wear my shoes until they just about fall apart, but I still manage to go through about 6 pairs a year on average (including racers, spikes, etc). At 70, I will have been running for 56 years, so therefore I estimate my shoe usage to be about 336 by that time. I suspect that now that I'm post college (and have money) I will replace shoes more often, so it wouldn't surprise me if I hit 400 before 70.
Well, I get about twenty new pairs a year, but they are free.
I use a new pair for every run. During a marathon I also change shoes. I will have used over 9000 by the time I finish.
If you consider each pair to be worth an inflation-adjusted $100, that's $15,600 on shoes.
cheaper wrote:
I've also noticed an inverse correlation between the size of my bank account and the number of miles I can put on a shoe.
Even only buying shoes when my current pair falls apart, I will still be over 156 by the time I'm done running.
do you mean direct correlation? if it was an inverse correlation, you would have a lot of miles on your shoes, but a small bank account...
opposite.. wrote:
do you mean direct correlation? if it was an inverse correlation, you would have a lot of miles on your shoes, but a small bank account...
Yes, inverse...The less money I have, the more mileage I get out of a shoe, because I can't afford new shoes....I thought that was pretty obvious.
Cheaper wrote:
opposite.. wrote:do you mean direct correlation? if it was an inverse correlation, you would have a lot of miles on your shoes, but a small bank account...
Yes, inverse...The less money I have, the more mileage I get out of a shoe, because I can't afford new shoes....I thought that was pretty obvious.
The way I thought of it was the more mileage you get out of a shoe, the more money you have in your bank account, because you can now spend your money on other things.