Abebe Bikila (and Budd) proved many years ago that one can be quite fast while unshod in winning the 1960 Olympics- although he was a full 3 minutes faster while wearing shoes.

One could also lose a few lbs for the same effect.

I’m intrigued by this too – enough so that I’m going to go out and see what
I can do for a mile right now!
Pete

Steve – funny how things are so relative – I see 4:40-4:50 and view it as
blazing fast!

I think you’re right on the money about stride shortening. I’ve been running
a lot in my Bikilas lately, and I really get the sense that my stride is
shorter, and that was very noticeable when I ran the mile today. I really
had to pick up my cadence to go that fast. On the positive side though, it’s
very hard to over-stride in the Vibrams, which is why I think Matt might be
able to get away with heel striking in them. I even find it hard to force
myself to overstride in regular shoes these days.

If I had to guess, I’d probably be just a bit faster right now in my
spikeless Brooks Mach 12’s (my racing shoe of late), which weigh about the
same as the Bikilas. Given a bit more strengthening work in the Vibrams, and
it might be a close call. I’m tempted to run my next 5K in Bikilas just for
kicks.

Pete

Just from my experimentation, VFF’s are slower than spikes and flats but faster than regular trainers.

The weight is probably the primary cause, but that’s negated with spikes or racing flats as there are a couple spikes/flats that are just about as light as the VFF’s.

I think you lose some traction with the VFF’s, and you may lose some high force generating ability when full out sprinting.

I’ve experimented around with it a bit and I’m slightly slower in sprint work with VFF’s then spikes. For example, when doing some 100’s or 200m sprints in spikes I get down to 11.7-8’s and 23.5-24.0, while in VFF’s the fastest I seem to get down to is about 11.9 and 24.0-24.2 range.

Haven’t tried a fast mile in them, only stuff in the 4:40-50ish range and it felt relatively similar.

One problem I see for shorter races is that I think (at least it feels like it) the VFF’s shorten the stride a little.

If nothing else, they are a lot of fun to run in. Good luck on your search,
they are tough to come by on-line – City Sports seems to stock them most
frequently.
Pete

Shawn

If I ran tommorrow in VFFs, I would be slower in them because I am used to running in shoes. Would that “prove” VFF make you slower? My point stands, a new runner simply doesn’t have the history to judge. Sorry.

Besides, while he may be “fast” to some, he really isn’t all that fast in the spectrum of running. I don’t doubt that good times can be run in VFFs but shoes will always be faster.

And he did make the EXACT point that VFF made him faster (although he didn’t give them sole credit- get it “sole” credit.

Fitz – not sure about the Vibrams, but a lot of elites use the Nike
Free according to the Nike website. The Free is a lot more shoe than
the Vibram, and I too would be curious regarding the answer to your
question.

Pete

ok, a couple of things here. Steve-o, you are right, you may well be slower if you ran in VFF’s tomorrow because you are used to running in regular shoes. You are also right that in the grand scheme of runners out there, I am not fast…faster, yes! Outright fast, no. Also, I fully admit to being a novice. There is no doubt about that.

However, I would point out that I have done more running in my Brooks this past year than people may realize (Winters…love the temperature, hate the snow!), so I feel like I have some, if maybe shaky, legs to stand on when I compare my pace in my VFF’s vs my Brooks.

The bottom line for me in my post was that I believe that lighter weight on the feet can lead to faster times because you are carrying less dead weight. The weight that you gain or lose on your body will be a mix of muscle and fat and to me, and mind you I’m not a doctor or a scientist, but to me that weight is more important to keep than the dead weight that is your shoes. I’d compare it to carrying a water bottle in each hand while running. Over a short distance like 5K, those bottle may not have a great effect on your pace, however, over the course of 26.2 miles, I would imagine that you would race better carrying 2 6oz bottles vs 2 12 or even 20 oz bottles (AND you’re not allowed to drink from those bottle because you have to carry them the entire way).

I’ll finish by quoting a comment Ken Skier left on my post:
“…once you are running, your body is basically moving in a straight line, with very little acceleration. But your feet have extreme acceleration and deceleration with every stride. And of course they are at the end of a very long movement arm. Accelerating or decelerating an ounce at the end of a leg takes a lot of energy–much more energy than is required to keep an ounce around your middle going forward.

I’ve never run on spikes so can’t comment on that. But the shorter stride definitely makes me more efficient and so, faster.