Minimalist Running by the Numbers
Minimalist Running is all the rage these days whether you are talking to a seasoned marathoner or the new kid on the block getting into running. The big boom primarily started after the book Born to Run came out and people started wondering if barefoot running was right for them.
It turns out that barefoot running is a little more challenging to get into than originally thought as we have been running heel to toe for so many years. It takes time to reprogram your mind and body to switch to a mid-foot foot strike. The traditional drop from the height in the heel to the height in the toe has been roughly 12mm. While going from 12 millimeters to 0 millimeters sounds small, it can cause a lot of running related injuries. This has lead to the movement of minimalist running as most minimalist running shoes are coming in with a drop of 4mm with a little bit of cushioning. 4mm is a more palatable number for most runners.
Another thing you are seeing in the minimalist movement is the drop in weight of running shoes. On average, running shoes used to weigh in around 12.5 oz not long ago. The new minimalist shoes are weighing in around 9 oz. or lighter which sounds insignificant, but this is a noticeable difference when running. The weight drop can be seen in reductions in material used in the upper, less blown EVA in the midsole, and reducing the amount of rubber used in the outsole.
With reducing the amount of materials used in minimalist running shoes, you might ask whether the shoes will hold up as well as traditional style running shoes. The answer in simple terms is NO. On average, minimalist running shoes are getting between 250-300 miles while the average running shoe is getting around 400 miles. This number can differ greatly based on a number of factors such as the weight of the runner, the stride of the runner, the terrain run on, and the weather conditions the runner is running in.
Let’s talk numbers now. Say the average runner runs 5 miles a day 5 days a week, which totals 25 miles a week. Now multiply that by 52 weeks and you get 1300 miles. If you divide 1300 miles by the 400 miles you get in a normal pair of running shoes and that comes out to 3.25 shoes a year. Now divide 1300 miles by the average of 275 miles for minimalist running shoes and you get 4.73 shoes. The average pair of normal running shoes is running approximately $115 and minimalist running shoes are costing approximately $105. Multiply 3.25 x $115 and that totals $373.75 a year spent on traditional running shoes. Multiply 4.73 x $105 and that totals $496.65 a year spent on minimalist running shoes. The difference is $122.90 a year or roughly one extra pair of running shoes. Keep in mind that you can’t buy .25 or .73 of a pair of shoes, so most people will either buy another pair of shoes or get a few more miles out of a pair of shoes.
This is not to say that you need to stop buying minimalist running shoes and switch back to buying standard running shoes. If you go to Starbucks one less time per week, you will save $156/year if you spend $3 a visit which offsets your cost for using minimalist running shoes.
Food for thought…
Disclaimer: The numbers used in this article are rough as I have used mileage numbers and prices that I have seen over years of working in the running industry. These numbers are not exact, but they should be pretty close.
Do you have an opinion on minimalist running shoes? Feel free to leave a comment and let your opinions fly!
I’m not convinced my minimalist shoes last for less time than others. In lots of ways they are longer lasting – there are no medial posts or gel bits to wear out. You can just keep on wearing them. Where’s your evidence?
This information comes primarily from the manufactures and my own wear testing. The biggest wear area in a pair of shoes is generally the EVA. Since there is less EVA, that typically means the cushion will not last for as many miles.
Or get a nice pair of racing flats to train in and get 1000+ miles out of them
Chris, is there any chance that is what you do? I have thought about that, but I would think the upper would eventually break down.
EVA doesn’t break down (unless you’re worn through the outsole). It compresses (and loses it’s cushion-ability. But if you’re in minimal running shoes, that’s less of an issue, as there is less cushioning.
I can’t imagine retiring a shoe after 275 miles. I would be buying shoes every month. At least 500 miles or more, and I’m sure I’ve gone as high as 1000. And I train in the kinvara, free, and pureflow, and previously the green silence.
Back when I used traditional trainers, I would replace them more often, because the medial post would break down.
I think the manufacturers numbers are good for one thing — getting you to buy more shoes. Do you also get your oil changed every 3 months or 3000 miles, whichever comes first?
That is correct, EVA condenses, breaking down is just another way of saying that. When the cushioning condenses and runners continue to run in the shoes, they sometimes get shin splits or other minor injuries. That is because most people run the same as when the shoes were new as when they had 300,50,1000 miles on them. When the shoe is no longer able to take the impact, your body begins to take that impact.
If you can get 500 or 1000 miles out of a shoe, I say keep doing what you are doing! Most runners can’t do that without having some sort of pain.
Yes, shoe companies want to sell shoes and I don’t fault that for them. In the end, they have to balance what is best for the runner and sales to allow them to produce new shoes with new innovations in the future. It’s not always an exact science, that is why some shoe manufactures are successful and some are not. Some get it, some don’t.
New mim shoes are a hell off a lot cheaper than new knees.
I have found the best minimalist running shoe to be the Invisible Shoe. It comes the closest to duplicating running barefoot. I still prefer running totally barefoot, but when I need a shoe, rocky trail etc., nothing compares with the Invisible Shoe. And the price is great! $25 for the 4mm and $30 for the 6mm……where else can you find a great shoe for $25/$30. They are also fun to wear as a daily shoe and super durable.
Or you could actually learn how to run? In a way that protects the joints and not abuses them. Shoes with excess EVA just reduce the foots ability to feel where it is and therefore the brain tells it to come down harder to find a stable platform, causing injury in the long term. Want a good shoe? Water shoes at £5 a go, nearly no padding underfoot, my current pair are at 400 miles and going strong. The ITB problems I had are a thing of the past. People just need to learn to run well…
Justin, that is awesome you can get away using water shoes. I was hiking a 14’er 2 weeks ago and saw someone hiking barefoot. Most people were using hiking shoes, but it goes to show you there are all kinds of people with all kinds of preferences. There is not one solution for all people in running, hiking, or most other consumer products for that matter.