legs ache with Saucony PowerGrid 9

hi all

traded in my old asics nimbus 13 for the power grid 9 - after a few runs my left calf really started to ache after 2-3 miles - would get so bad i would literally hop back to the car!

put my old nimbus 13's on and i done 25 mile last week issue free!!

what does that tell me? my feet have a normal arch type - from my reading any how

from the start the Powergrids seemed to feel much less cushioned than the nimbus

anyone else have this issue with Saucony? 

mal

they where over 18 months old, so really on there last legs!

I'm guessing you mean the Saucony Triumph 9?  As "powergrid" is branding of the cushioning used in most of the Saucony shoes, e.g. equivalent to calling your nimbus "Asics Gel 13s"

Both shoes (Triumph and Nimbus) are heavily cushioned neutral shoes, so on paper the triumphs would be a suitable alternative.

I have a suspicion it might be the lower heel-to-toe drop in the Triumph that might be stretching your calves, as the Triumph 10 has a 8mm heel-to-toe drop whilst the Nimbus 14 is 11mm drop (only had info on the latest models, this may be wrong as I'm assuming Saucony adjusted the heel-to-toe prior to v10).

I went from Asics to Saucony and I do find them firmer than Asics, and I had no problems changing between the two. I'm happy with Saucony, but we are all different!

I've been running in Saucony Truimph 9's for the last year and as pointed out they have an 8mm heel drop, which is low compared to most cushioned shoes. It may be that change that is causing the issue.

dave - i went for 65quid over 100+ for the nimbus - sorry now, as now i still need a new pair

yes Triumph 9 - they are a good we trainer, and fit nicely, if i stuck at them would i harden up a bit?  or am i likely to just do damage?

Are you a heel striker?  If you are then the reduced padding under the heel will make them less comfortable, so you may have difficulty adapting.  If you are a mid- to fore-foot striker, then you will probably adapt over a few weeks if you gradually swap them over for the Nimbus.

I did have calf pains after my first run in my Sauconys, but they are only 4mm heel-to-toe (i.e. a much bigger change) and my first run in them was hill repeats, which wasn't a good idea in hindsight!

yea i would i say i am a heel striker, must give them a go 2 nite again, and if they fail well i can always use them to walk the dog! 

good info on the heel size - something i never even considered to be honest!

malachy rafferty wrote (see)

yea i would i say i am a heel striker, must give them a go 2 nite again, and if they fail well i can always use them to walk the dog! 

You really need to try to stop heel striking. Not a good way to run.

Ploddersoftheworldunite wrote (see)

malachy rafferty wrote (see)

yea i would i say i am a heel striker, must give them a go 2 nite again, and if they fail well i can always use them to walk the dog! 

 

You really need to try to stop heel striking. Not a good way to run.

Go on then, I am now intrigued - why ishould one try to stop heel striking?  In what way is not a good way to run?

DiscountRunner wrote (see)

Ploddersoftheworldunite wrote (see)

malachy rafferty wrote (see)

yea i would i say i am a heel striker, must give them a go 2 nite again, and if they fail well i can always use them to walk the dog! 

 

You really need to try to stop heel striking. Not a good way to run.

 

 

Go on then, I am now intrigued - why ishould one try to stop heel striking?  In what way is not a good way to run?

Well, for me, if you're using your heel as a shock absorber you're far more likely to end up jarring your knees, hip, and back and consequently make yourself far more susceptible to injury. Mid to forefoot landing spreads the load more evenly and, in my opinion, encourages an upright or slightly forward leaning posture helping you to run a bit quicker. Just my opinion. I use the Saucony PGT by the way and get on really well with them.

No one 'ought' to stop heel striking. It's a matter of choice and what is natural for each individual.

Mid or forefoot striking is not without it's problems and own injury risks.

The nature of running shoes design for heel striking is that they have more cushioning on the heel to take the impact forces. I don't think heel striking makes one more susceptable to injury. Certainly I have seen no evidence to support this and I have looked for it.

Ploddersoftheworldunite wrote (see)

DiscountRunner wrote (see)

Ploddersoftheworldunite wrote (see)

malachy rafferty wrote (see)

yea i would i say i am a heel striker, must give them a go 2 nite again, and if they fail well i can always use them to walk the dog! 

 

You really need to try to stop heel striking. Not a good way to run.

 

 

Go on then, I am now intrigued - why ishould one try to stop heel striking?  In what way is not a good way to run?

Well, for me, if you're using your heel as a shock absorber you're far more likely to end up jarring your knees, hip, and back and consequently make yourself far more susceptible to injury. Mid to forefoot landing spreads the load more evenly and, in my opinion, encourages an upright or slightly forward leaning posture helping you to run a bit quicker. Just my opinion. I use the Saucony PGT by the way and get on really well with them.

Oh, okay.  Because your first sentence said "You" and not "I" need to stop heel striking.

And your second sentence said "not a good way to run" but you didn't finish it with "for me".

You can see my confusion - the comments of so many barefoot runners seem to confuse opinion with fact and pseudo-science with science.

I will ask you the same question I've asked every b/f runner who tells me that I HAVE to change my running style: 

"If I have no problems, injuries or pain from heel-strike running and enjoy it, what benefits could I expect from b/f running?"

Not one has been able to answer it yet.  Food for thought.

DiscountRunner wrote (see)

Ploddersoftheworldunite wrote (see)

DiscountRunner wrote (see)

Ploddersoftheworldunite wrote (see)

malachy rafferty wrote (see)

yea i would i say i am a heel striker, must give them a go 2 nite again, and if they fail well i can always use them to walk the dog! 

 

You really need to try to stop heel striking. Not a good way to run.

 

 

Go on then, I am now intrigued - why ishould one try to stop heel striking?  In what way is not a good way to run?

Well, for me, if you're using your heel as a shock absorber you're far more likely to end up jarring your knees, hip, and back and consequently make yourself far more susceptible to injury. Mid to forefoot landing spreads the load more evenly and, in my opinion, encourages an upright or slightly forward leaning posture helping you to run a bit quicker. Just my opinion. I use the Saucony PGT by the way and get on really well with them.

Oh, okay.  Because your first sentence said "You" and not "I" need to stop heel striking.

And your second sentence said "not a good way to run" but you didn't finish it with "for me".

You can see my confusion - the comments of so many barefoot runners seem to confuse opinion with fact and pseudo-science with science.

I will ask you the same question I've asked every b/f runner who tells me that I HAVE to change my running style: 

"If I have no problems, injuries or pain from heel-strike running and enjoy it, what benefits could I expect from b/f running?"

Not one has been able to answer it yet.  Food for thought.

Well my original comment was aimed at the OP who said he was a heel striker and was experiencing pain in the Saucony pgt9. Therefore a logical attempt at a solution might be to try a different running style as, in my experience, heel striking can cause the problems listed above. If you have no problems with heel-strike running and enjoy it then carry on, that's fine, but it didn't work for me.

I'm not a barefoot runner by the way, amongst other shoes I use the Saucony as mentioned. What is surely true, however, is that mid to forefoot will speed you up, I am comfortably quicker since switching. Landing on the heels is like putting on the brakes with every stride. I've never come across a mid to forefoot striker who thinks it a good idea to switch to heel striking in order to improve their times.

Hmm, thanks for your answer.  I wasn't sure if it would be faster - we all sprint on our fore-feet, but tend to move further back for endurance/distance/comfort.  I am not against barefoot/minimal/forefoot running, it's just I haven't actually been given a reason amongst all the evangeling!  Faster, though, is a good reason.  Are you faster over all distances - I am thinking between 10k and half-marathon? Thanks

Ploddersoftheworldunite wrote (see)

What is surely true, however, is that mid to forefoot will speed you up,

Why is it surely true?  IMO you're getting cause and effect mixed up.  Maybe it's worked out for you, or maybe you've got quicker because you're running more comfortably and therefore getting fitter.  But I don't think you can surmise that it's a direct result of a different running action, as if it's more efficient or something.  For any one individual, I think the tendency is to run more on the mid- to forefoot for a quicker speed, rather than a deliberate attempt to do so resulting in a quicker speed at all distances.

Have a look at this article the crux of which is that most opinions about the rights and wrongs of what bit of the foot to land on are based on theory and conjecture rather than hard scientific studies, because not many scientific studies have been done.  (OK, the article's from 2008, but I still think it makes a lot of valid points, especially about the causality mentioned above).  See especially the bit about running styles of elites during a half marathon.  It found that the higher up the field you go, the higher proportion of runners are midfoot compared to heel strikers (although interestingly, even among elites, a higher overall number of heel strikers, and an almost negligible number of forefoot strikers).  But does this tell you that to run more like an elite runner you should be a midfoot striker, or does it tell you that they're simply running faster?  I'm guessing a lot of people who normally heel-strike during long distance races would be much more up on their toes trying to keep up with Mo Farah at 4:40/mile!

I wouldn't even go as far as saying that you'd move away from heel striking when racing against Mo Farah.  See following link showing the foot strike of the US Olympic 10k selection race.  Even at the elite level, on the track, you still have a large umber of heel strikers:

http://www.runblogger.com/2012/06/foot-strike-patterns-of-men-and-women.html

I've moved towards more minimal shoes with a lower heel-to-toe drop, but haven't seen any significant change in my speed.  I just prefer the way they feel and they haven't caused any injuries (not that I was injury prone in more traditional shoes).