nike lunarglide 4s

Yesterday I had a running analysis done (Asics treadmill) where your running gait is analysed   I had not done this for a couple of years, and the guys in the shop have recommended I go for a pair of Nike LunarGlide +4's.  Apparently because I slightly over pronante (have always had problems with shin splints the last 6 years), these are a good 'automatic slight re-correction/leveller' apparently   I was explained that basically they can level off any slight over pronation, but at the same time, if they are not needed, the way they work means that they don't 'over compensate' unless required as it were.


I just wondered if anyone has a pair and can recommend? I will try anything - bearing in mind I have swapped trainers a lot over the last few years, going from one extreme to the other (Brooks with extra heel cushioning) to Vibram five fingers, mimicking bare foot running.  The Nike LunarGlide +4's are supposed to be a good mid range/compromise between the two??...

Many thanks!


  • I switched to the lunar glide 4's from asics ds trainer 17 as like yourself I mildly overpronate( to moderate over distance) and I could not get on with the new incarnation of the asics shoe. I am thrilled with the fit and cushioning and have had no shin splint problems since even though I upped my distance and speed, I ran a pb on first use of the lunarglides mainly due to the fit and lack of weight of the shoe.

    However after the first couple of uses I found the sole seemed to wear at an extreme rate due to it being partly made of the lunarlon material and thought that I'd be lucky to get much over 200 miles out of them.This does seem to have evened out and there is plenty of life left and my first pair(already bought a 2nd) is approaching the 200 mile mark so my fears may be a little unfounded.

    I would recommend the shoe based on my similar experience to you,coupled with them being advised by someone who has actually seen your gait etc, and I hope you get a similar positive experience should you decide to go for it!


  • EllieJEllieJ ✭✭✭

    I am finding them really comfy to run in, but they are new so have only done 4 miles in them so far.


  • Sooo happy to hear this guys image)


    I shall now rob the Bank to buy a pair! May I quickly ask - what sort of price did you guys pay for yours and where from etc?? This shop wanted £90! I see them online for around £69-ish? 

  • XX1XX1 ✭✭✭

    I moved to the Nike Lunarglide+ 4 from Brooks Adrenaline GTS 12...  I've found them to be very comfy and have not had any issues with them...  I bought them online for about £56, but it was a while ago so I don't remember where from...  If you don an online search you should be able to find a pair much cheaper than £90 though.

  • have a lot of colour ways at £59.99 and have the newer lunerglide 5's at £71.99, plus you can get cash back through quidco. The updated 5's have exactly the same missile but updated flywire lacing and a couple of other minor changes to the upper. I think Nike got so much right on the 4 that it didn't want to change too much, after an apparent massive upgrade from the 3rd incarnation

  • *midsole, stupid predictive text(or tablet owner!)

  • Taxi Driver - funnily enough yes I too have the Brooks Adrenaline GTS12's but they are far too thick heeled in my opinion...

  • Lee Renard - would you recommend the 5's then? Otehr than lace improvements etc, it is exactly the same shoe?

  • Haven't tried the 5's but come the end of the month I shall be buying a pair to rotate them in,mainly as my first pair of 4's will be getting towards 300 miles(time I replace regardless of shoe). I'm hoping not much has changed but want to try before the 4's become obsolete so I can stock up if necessary.

    Present experience means I can only recommend the 4's and will do so completely,personally I have to force myself to run in anything else even though one pair of my asics ds have only around 100 mikes to them.

  • I also tried the brooks adrenaline gts 13's before the lunarglides and really didn't like them, caused heavy blistering to my instep although found some dodgy stitching which I believe may have been the cause. Returned them as faulty and supplier confirmed so again my experience may not be fully reflective.

  • Thanks for all of the advice mate!  I shall go for a slightly cheaper pair of the Nike's then (the +4) and see how I get on  I too have about 3 pairs of other trainers right now that I would say are on on more than 100 miles each right now!!

  • Just looking now - is the 'breathe' model just the same but offers more 'air' around the foot??

  • I believe so,although I've been using the "standard" shoe in the hot weather and haven't found my feet overheating or sweating too much,I do use dry fit socks though. The shield version is the "shower proof" equivalent model which probably suffers from the same problems as most waterproof shoes

  • If so I will get the cheaper of the two? Although the description looks the same, the shoes look fifferent would you not agree?!!

  • The link to sports shoes is the breathe model and sports direct is the "standard" model,same shoe but with the upper difference as above.Just watch the sports direct website as most prices are listed as from and when you change size the price changes too!

    As worth mentioning if you go direct to they have lots of colour ways of the shoe at £62.89 and if you create an account prior to ordering orders over £50 are free delivery.

  • I've been in Nike Triax for a few years and tried the LunarGlide 4's as an alternative.

    Very comfy, good support but after 200 miles the soles started wearing through. I'm not too heavy a heel striker but the outer rubber has gone. The softer middle section is not robust for road running. 

    I've gone back to Triax models for road running but use the Lunarglides on the treadmill or just loafing around.

    As comparison Triax soles last me 450+ miles

  • XX1XX1 ✭✭✭

    Malakite wrote (see)

    Taxi Driver - funnily enough yes I too have the Brooks Adrenaline GTS12's but they are far too thick heeled in my opinion...

    Agree...  And as I mid-foot strike anyway the thick heel is a bit redundant.

  • http://webkit-fake-url://C007AEB8-A35A-4ACD-8B80-3ACF2D60D7D6/image.tiff

    I have to agree with red stripe 

    the lunnar glides are a nice commfy light shoe and great to run in 

    but the soles wear very quickly  

    the left is a triax 16 with 350 miles

    lunnar glide 4 200

    i md foot strike mentioned this to nike they said it was due to my weight running style  and terrian 

    im 10.5 stone light on my feet and run on roads!!

  • I love the support and comfort of the Lunar Glide 4 Shields I got in January so much so I bought another pair in April and ran the London Marathon in them with no injury problems whatsoever.

    My only gripe with the Lunar Glides is that I get blisters on the side/underneath of my big toes on any run over 5 miles (obviously not ideal for a marathon!). I have tried a variety of different socks - Nike Dri Fits, Asics, Hilly etc and have the same problem with all of them. My first pair were a size 7 so I bought a size 7.5 hoping the extra room would help with my feet breathing but no luck. Ive even done the soaking my feet in surgical spirit for 2 months to try and toughen my skin up.

    After the marathon I decided to buy a pair of Asics Gel Excel 33's and so far so good on the blister front but I do not find them as comfortable (blisters excluded!) as the Lunar Glides.

    Has anyone else had similar blister problems with them and if so is there a remedy for it?

Sign In or Register to comment.