Running is one of the most accessible forms of aerobic exercise: You can do it almost anywhere without needing a gym membership or expensive equipment. But although you can run while wearing just about anything, that doesn’t mean you’ll have a good time doing it. We spent more than 90 hours researching and testing running gear and enlisted the help of a current collegiate track coach (and former podiatrist), a former Runner’s World editor, and several of the most passionate runners on our staff to help us find the best gear to get you up and running.
If I wanted a pair of wireless headphones for running, I’d put the Plantronics BackBeat Fit first on my list. While unsealed headphones tend to sound worse than their sealed counterparts due to a lack of bass, they allow you to hear your surroundings so that you can remain safe while running on busy streets.
I like the BackBeat Fit a lot—in fact, it’s the only set of unsealed headphones that I’d even consider buying. Why? First of all, among the unsealed in-ear Bluetooth headphones we tested, the BackBeat Fit sounded the absolute best. Yes, you lose some of the low-end frequencies and the richness that comes with a good deep bassline, but overall the BackBeat Fit doesn’t sound in any way objectionable. The headphones also fit well on a wide variety of ears, have a sturdy feel, and come with a neoprene pouch that doubles as a smartphone armband. No other unsealed Bluetooth headphones even come close.
If I were seeking a pair of headphones for treadmill use or trail running, and therefore more concerned about sound quality than the ability to hear environmental hazards around me, I’d get the JLab Epic2 Bluetooth. We considered a total of 147 sport-specific headphones and tested the 85 best-reviewed and newest options—and our panel of experts agreed that the JLab Epic2 pair sounded and fit better than anything else. Slim earhooks comfortably keep the headphones in place. A three-button remote allows you to change tracks, adjust volume, and take calls without having to reach for your mobile device, and Bluetooth means you don’t need to worry about a cord getting in the way of getting your sweat on. These headphones sound great, too, with (like most sport headphones) only a little bass boost—just enough to drive a workout to the next level. And their IPX5 waterproof rating means they’ll hold up over time: We listened to them, ran with them, got them wet, kicked them, tugged them, stomped them, and then listened to them again. Finally, the 12-hour battery life means this set will last twice as long as similar models made by Beats.
If you aren’t worried about getting tangled up in your cord while running, our latest pick for the best wired exercise headphones is Sennheiser’s OCX 686G Sports. The OCX 686G Sports survived all the tests to which we subjected our original pick and fared just as well. Plus, this pair comes with an impressive two-year warranty when you purchase it from an authorized Sennheiser dealer. For other situations and budgets, take a look at our full guide to wired exercise headphones to see a few more choices. —Lauren Dragan
As phones grow bigger, running with one strapped to your arm becomes less pleasant. But after researching for 30 hours and actively testing 26 armbands and waist packs, we think that the TuneBand for iPhone 7 and TuneBand for iPhone 7 Plus are the best and most comfortable accessories for running with your phone on your arm. Our previous picks for the iPhone 6 and 6s, iPhone 6 Plus and 6s Plus, and iPhone 5 and 5s were all TuneBand models as well. You can check out our full guide to armbands if you want to learn more about these older models.
While most bands take a one-strap-fits-most approach, the TuneBand comes with both large and small bands, providing a secure and comfortable fit on a wide variety of arm sizes. What’s more, the TuneBand’s design keeps the bulk of the phone’s body from directly contacting your skin, and its open-front, silicone skin provides a secure fit for your phone while allowing for direct access to the handset’s screen and buttons (although this design means that you can’t use another case with it). —Jim McDannald
If you want to free up your arms and not feel like one side of your body is heavier or bulkier because you have a big phone strapped to your arm, we recommend the Aqua Quest Kona Pouch. This spacious, water-resistant pouch felt comfortable during our runs and has room for a phone, keys, and ID, with some to spare. Next to top contenders like the popular Spibelt, the Kona Pouch offers a more water-resistant zipper design, and unlike the otherwise excellent Nathan Phantom Pak, it’s big enough to accommodate the widest phablets, such as the iPhone 6 Plus.
If you want to carry more than just a phone and keys, check out the Ultimate Direction Jurek Essential. In addition to a water-resistant phone pouch, it has a front pocket that’s perfect for keys and an ID, as well as additional rear pockets that you can fill with energy gels for longer runs. You can read more about why we like both of these picks in our review of the best iPhone running bands. —JM
We’ve run with more than 20 GPS running watches over the past three years, and we’ve found that the Garmin Forerunner 230 is the best for both beginners and experienced runners. It carries on the accuracy, long battery life, and light profile of our previous Garmin pick (the Forerunner 220) but has a larger screen with more readable information, allowing you to get quick-glance updates while running. The Forerunner 230 (FR 230) feels good enough to wear as a day-to-day, non-running timepiece, and it can track steps and other metrics if that’s what you choose to do. While it’s easy enough to use as a first GPS watch, it contains deep features and optional apps that expand its powers. It tracks runs better than most watches at its price and can work with cycling sensors, too, and it’s waterproof down to 50 meters. —JM
We conducted research, surveyed readers, interviewed industry and exercise-physiology experts, walked, ran (and ran some more), slept, grocery-shopped, jumping-jacked, swung kettlebells, analyzed user experience, and got many a curious look from passersby. And after 60 hours of all that activity, we determined that the Garmin Vívosmart HR+ is the best fitness tracker for most people. It effectively collects the same data as top competitors from Fitbit and Samsung but offers integrated GPS and a larger, more legible touchscreen and more useful smartphone-notification options, as well as full waterproofing to 50 meters—other models are merely splash resistant.
The Vívosmart HR+ checks off nearly all of the boxes: It tracks steps, floors climbed, distance traveled, calories burned, and active minutes. It monitors heart rate continuously, keeping a record of both resting pulse and workout intensity; many rivals do one or the other, but not both. Its display is easy to read, and you can customize it more than its peers to show whatever metrics you desire. The display also manages to show smartphone notifications and the current weather along with music-player and camera remote controls. Its distance-measuring accuracy is particularly impressive, even when compared with that of trackers sporting built-in GPS receivers. And it offers all of this functionality in a slim, waterproof package. Check out our full review of fitness trackers for more information on the Vívosmart HR+, as well as some alternative picks for other uses. —Amy Roberts
Having worked at a few major marathons, I’ve seen my fair share of foot problems in the medical tent. Blisters and dangling toenails are common reasons for runners to see a podiatrist after running 26.2. Along with a well-fitting pair of shoes, training and racing in running-specific socks will help prevent problems and keep your feet healthy.
After having eight university distance runners help test four of the top running socks, we recommend the Darn Tough Tab No Show Light Cushion (for men and women). These socks were comfortable right out of the bag, with no seams to irritate testers’ feet. They have an unparalleled reputation for durability that makes them a favorite among Pacific Crest Trail backpackers. Made from a blend of merino wool and nylon, which is an ideal running-clothing material, these sweat-wicking socks keep feet warm in the winter and cool in the summer. They also keep feet dry, which is crucial for blister prevention. Merino blends cost a bit more than other fabrics but wick better than cotton and resist odor better than synthetic—both of which are highly desirable traits in a running sock.
Testers preferred the comfort and fit of the Darn Tough socks over that of the competition because of the softer feel and less prominent seams. In comparison, they found the seam on the top portion of the Icebreaker Multisport Cushion Micro socks to be more coarse and irritating. A few runners testing the Patagonia Lightweight Merino Run Anklet socks reported issues with seams rubbing on the outside of the big and little toes.
Runner’s World chose the Darn Tough as the “Most Durable” sock, and Aaron Zanto of OutdoorGearLab writes that Darn Tough “looked as good on mile 50 as it did in the packaging, especially underfoot where it really mattered.” The Vermont-based company also offers an unconditional lifetime guarantee that works as advertised. Though we haven’t performed controlled durability testing on these socks, Wirecutter/Sweethome editor Michael Zhao has had three pairs of No Show Light Cushion socks for one and a half years, and they still look and feel brand-new. He notes that Smartwool socks he’s used in the past tend to reach threadbare condition at the heel or toe (or both) after about a year. A number of websites and message boards also tout Darn Tough over Smartwool for its durability (we tested the Smartwool PhD Run Light Elite Micro Sock).
Overall, the comfortable fit, moisture management, durability, and odor resistance of the Darn Tough Tab No Show Light Cushion socks make them well worth the premium over synthetic and cotton counterparts, which you can find for half the price. But we know of some truly excellent synthetic socks, and we’ll test them as spring approaches. —JM
Because feet come in a variety of sizes and shapes, having a single pick for the best running shoe is impossible. As a podiatrist, a distance-running coach at McGill University in Montreal, and a former employee at a running specialty store, I’m familiar with how difficult it is to get the right shoes. Not only are everyone’s feet and running routines different, but the sheer abundance of options also make it a uniquely challenging category to cover. If you follow a few guidelines, however, you’ll find something that you’ll like.
While it’s tempting to go shopping for the best deal online, a brick-and-mortar running store is your greatest ally in your quest for the best running shoes. Use your favorite online review service (such as Yelp or Google Places) to find a highly rated store near you. Some general sporting-goods or department stores will have decent selections, but a running speciality store will stock a broader offering. More important, since running-store employees are runners themselves, the staff will be more helpful since they can speak from experience—and they don’t have to worry about selling fishing poles or baseball gloves too. Their expertise will save you a lot of time and potential discomfort from getting the wrong shoes. They may also have a treadmill, or they might give you the option of running a bit outside so that you can take a few strides before committing.
If paying the lowest price is paramount, or if you already know exactly what you want, buying online is a valid option. Take advantage of sites that offer no-hassle returns, such as Zappos. This way, you can try multiple pairs and return the ones that don’t fit right. Just be aware of any restrictions on the return policies (most sellers won’t accept returns if you’ve used the shoes outside). It’s also bad form to have someone spend time with you at a running speciality store and then bail to go buy the same shoe online for a few bucks less.
While a great running store will be able to help you find the right shoes, even if you have no idea what you need, answering the following questions before you begin shopping will increase your odds of getting the perfect fit:
The answers will allow you, or someone assisting you, to narrow down a large list of possibilities to a manageable number of shoes that meet your particular running needs.
When you’re shopping for running shoes, be sure to have a general idea of what you’re looking for, but also to keep an open mind. Remaining fixated on a specific brand or model can lead you to select a shoe that doesn’t suit your needs or, in a worse-case scenario, increase your chances of getting injured. For example, a Nike pair may look great, but many Nike running shoes are built on a narrow last (the plastic mold around which shoes are manufactured). This means that they can hurt if you have wider feet. But the design varies from model to model—and even from year to year for the same model—so you really need to try before you buy.
Another common mistake is shopping on price alone. A $150 pair of trainers marked down to $40 may be the best bargain, but it may not be the best pair of shoes for you. Trust how your feet feel in the shoes, as well as the guidance of the running-store employee who is working with you. Expensive does not necessarily equal better.
If you already have a favorite running shoe, bringing it with you may help the staff find a new pair with similar characteristics. They may even be able to help you select a new model that’s better based on the wear pattern of your shoe. If you are having any issues with your current shoes, the employees can troubleshoot and help you find a solution. When I was helping customers during my days at Universal Sole, it wasn’t uncommon to find a great shoe that was just a little too narrow or prone to rubbing in a particular spot. Thankfully, the store had tools available to remedy the issue, and gently spot-stretching the offending area of the shoe fixed the problem and helped achieve a near-perfect fit.
Unfortunately, the bliss of finding the perfect running shoe may be short-lived. Every few years, as fashions change, shoe companies discontinue models or make major redesigns to existing ones. So if you find something you love, you might want to invest in an extra pair for later while you’re at it.
Here are a few general tips:
A correctly fitting sports bra can significantly reduce breast discomfort during high-impact exercise. After more than 33 hours of research and testing, talking to six experts over two years, comparing hundreds of bras, and evaluating feedback from a total of 16 testers, we know that there is no one-size-fits-all sports bra. We recommend the Brooks SureShot for A/B cup, the Champion Spot Comfort for C/D cup and the Brooks Juno for DD+ cup.
For DD+ wearers, we like the Brooks Juno. The Juno’s straps are the bra’s highlight: They use Velcro, and you can adjust them from the front while still wearing the bra, making this bra the easiest to customize out of any we tested. The supersmooth, breathable material and seamless inner lining make this bra one of the most comfortable we looked at; with firm straps and band, it offers ample support without underwire or excess hardware that digs into skin.
For C/D cup sizes, we recommend the Champion Spot Comfort. The Spot Comfort has cup definition to prevent the uniboob look, and ample side and front coverage still keep larger breasts secure while running. With padded, adjustable, vertical straps and a back clasp, the Spot Comfort is easy to put on and take off compared with a traditional pull-on racerback.
The best bra for people with an A/B cup size is the Brooks SureShot. This racerback bra has stronger fabric than the rest of the compression bras we looked at, which means the bra won’t stretch out so much that it stops controlling bounce. The SureShot stood out from the other compression bras we looked at because it had all the desirable features we wanted: lined seams to prevent rubbing, a high neckline and high side panels for added coverage, and an inner lining to transport moisture away from the body. It’s a step up in price from cheaper brands, but comes with Brooks’s 90-day return policy (even for a bra you’ve sweated in), so you can take it for a run to make sure it fits correctly.
As the temperatures begin to fall, you can best keep your hands warm and dry with liner gloves. They make great stand-alone running gloves because they’re cozy enough to take the bite off a chilly morning while you warm up but not so thick that they get hot as your heart gets pumping. If temps get really cold, you can always add a shell or a mitten. We like merino liners because all of the natural sweat-wicking, odor-resisting characteristics that make the material great for socks apply to gloves as well.
After having 10 collegiate track runners, both men and women, test five pairs of merino liner gloves, we recommend Smartwool Liner Gloves, which offer the best combination of durability, touchscreen sensitivity on the thumb and index finger, and warmth. In our tests, Outdoor Research Biosensor Liners also worked great with touchscreens but lacked the durability of the Smartwool gloves. And the more expensive, softer gloves from Icebreaker and Arc’teryx provided just as much warmth but limited touchscreen compatibility.
While the Smartwool gloves are more durable than cheaper knit gloves, they are still knit gloves, so they’re prone to snags. Activities other than running will cause them to wear out more quickly. They also tend to stick and snag on Velcro. In our tests, while the Smartwool pair was softer and less itchy than the Outdoor Research pair, a couple of testers found the Smartwool design to be a little itchy compared with the finer, $40-range gloves. So if your skin is sensitive to wool, these gloves may not be for you.
If interacting with a phone on the run isn’t important to you, or if you prefer a softer wool glove, a pair of Arc’teryx Gothic Gloves is a good option. These gloves, made with a less coarse merino wool fabric (as opposed to a knit material), have a softer, less itchy feel than our main pick; in fact, a couple of our testers were surprised to find out that a glove this soft could really be wool. The material is nice, but unfortunately its touchscreen ability can’t compete with that of gloves costing $30 less. Instead of surrounding the entire tip of the thumb and forefinger with conductive material, Arc’teryx sews just two little spots onto the pad of each of those digits. Both tapping and pinching to zoom are extremely frustrating. As one tester put it, “They feel great but are pretty much useless if I want to use my phone.” We also tested Ibex Outdoor Clothing liners, but they were even worse in this regard.
Although in our tests the Icebreaker Quantum Gloves were slightly better for touchscreen use, we found that the capacitive material on the thumb and index fingers was stiffer than the glove material—we almost had to fight against the glove to maintain a clenched fist. This design isn’t that annoying if you’re just walking around, but a bit of irritation each time your hand moves adds up to a lot of irritation over the course of a run. If you need to interact with a touchscreen, stick with the Smartwool gloves. —JM
The right winter running gear can help you stay warm, comfortable, and motivated to get outside. A running beanie will help to protect your head and ears from the elements. After 13 hours of researching hats and testing four finalists with a group of university distance runners, we can say that our favorite is the Ibex Woolies 2 Earflap Beanie. As the name implies, the Woolies 2’s contoured bottom edge acts as a pair of minimally intrusive earflaps. This design allows you to protect your ears from the elements without needing to pull the beanie down over your eyes, so it stands apart from flat-edged designs like the otherwise excellent The North Face Redpoint Wool Beanie. Furthermore, a double layer of material along the ear line keeps your ears warmer while allowing the top of your head to breathe. Our testing group of 10 university distance runners determined that the beanie fit well on a variety of head shapes and sizes.
If you want a lightweight running beanie or one to wear in moderate to cool weather (no colder than mid-40s Fahrenheit), the Icebreaker Chase Beanie is a good option. Constructed with a lighter-grade 97 percent merino fabric, the Chase Beanie features the traditional beanie design. In our testing, the Chase Beanie provided better ear coverage than the Smartwool PhD Training Beanie. As long as you keep in mind the conditions the Chase Beanie is built for, it will provide sufficient protection.
If you overheat under a beanie, or if you have longer hair that you can’t tuck into a beanie, a headband is another option for winter runs. Our pick, the Smartwool PhD Hyfi Training Headband, features a windproof polyester exterior combined with a merino interior. This design gives it all the comfort of merino and makes it more protective against the elements compared with the wool-only Icebreaker Quantum Headband. And like the Ibex beanie, the Smartwool headband has a contoured edge that provided ample ear coverage to all the runners who tried it in our tests. —JM
For women’s running tights, the clear winner was the Sugoi Women’s MidZero Tight. Our tests gave this pair the edge in warmth (the most important factor). Ultimately, we preferred the Sugoi pair for its slightly lower price tag (it’s often about $10 cheaper than the Women’s Winter Warm Tights); our testers also preferred the style and shape of the Sugoi tights on their legs.
When you’re heading out for a run, a medical emergency or a trip to the hospital is the last thing that comes to mind. But accidents and medical events can happen without warning. Without access to your ID and health information, first responders and emergency medical staff won’t be able to adjust treatment to your specific needs. Running with a driver’s license or some other government-issued ID is not enough, as such cards provide no information about your past medical or surgical history, medical conditions, medications, allergies, or emergency contacts. A dedicated identification band can take care of that.
After 10 hours of research, including interviews with first responders and ER doctors, we recommend the Road ID Wrist ID Sport safety ID band. This adjustable identification band displays personal and health information on a replaceable stainless-steel tag that you wear right where first responders are most likely to notice it. Unlike the MyID Sport Bracelet, which requires the use of a QR code, or Vital ID, which tucks handwritten information away behind Velcro, the Road ID Wrist ID Sport makes your information immediately available, engraved on the band in legible text, no fuss required. In our tests, runners also liked the comfort, fit, and low-profile design. When our testers wore the Wrist ID Sport in conjunction with some other running gear for this guide, a couple of them completely forgot that they had it on.
The Wrist ID Sport’s location on the wrist is of utmost importance. While the prospect of a shoelace-mounted ID sounds convenient, a bracelet will be more visible, according to Dr. John Sillery, assistant medical director of the emergency department at Highlands Medical Center. “We quickly remove shoes in emergency situations and may miss an ID band in that location,” explained Sillery. “We’re always going to check pulses, so an ID band placed on the wrist is hard to miss.”
If you run with a GPS watch or a fitness tracker, consider the 1BandID, which is an adjustable neoprene and Velcro sleeve that attaches to the band of a watch or tracker. Like the Road ID Wrist ID Sport, the 1BandID features a replaceable stainless-steel ID tag. While the 1BandID does add bit of bulk, runners with a watch or a tracker may prefer using this accessory instead of wearing a wristband-style ID band. —JM
As a former editor at Runner’s World and an experienced outdoor-gear and fitness-gear tester with more than a decade of experience, I take running gear and safety seriously. So does James Gallagher, who works at the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center. In an interview, Gallagher offered a number of recommendations for runners looking for nighttime safety gear. Your priorities should be to accentuate moving body parts (namely your feet, ankles, and wrists), light up your lower legs (since most car headlights are angled downward), and maximize the amount of reflective material you wear to create more opportunities to catch a driver’s attention. Our product testing, conducted on roads that were both pitch black and dimly lit, backed up that general advice and offered more nuance. In particular, we found that nothing attracted more attention than reflective materials around the feet and ankles; we also discovered that products with large amounts of reflective area outperformed the competition, and that items designed for use in variable weather conditions or without daily washing are more versatile.
After extensive testing by a crew of three runners and an automobile driver on two dark stretches of pavement, we found that the single most useful piece of reflective running gear is Road ID’s High Visibility Reflective Ankle Band. In our tests, this band was extremely reflective from all angles, well constructed, and comfortable to wear. It proved to be more useful and versatile in a variety of conditions compared with many of the other reflective-gear options we tested, and the pricing is great, too.
You can wear ankle bands every day, regardless of the weather conditions, and they don’t require frequent washing. Most important, in field testing nothing caught our test driver’s attention faster than a reflective ankle band—even vests with larger amounts of reflective material weren’t as eye-catching, because they didn’t move around as much. Made with 3M Scotchlite material, which radiated a bright white when hit with light, this band outperformed other anklets such as the Nathan Tri-Color Reflective Ankle Band. The Nathan model glowed in three colors as promised, but the overall effect was not as visible as what the solid-white reflective material on the Road ID band produced. We also like that the Road ID model is usually a few bucks cheaper per band than the Nathan model.
Although you can get away with just a set of ankle bands and be quite visible, our experts agreed that adding more reflective material on your torso or hands is a smart choice. “The more reflectivity you have, the better,” said James Gallagher. “The point is to be more visible to motorists.” Specifically, we like reflective vests because they’re visible from all angles and light enough that you can wear them over any nonreflective clothing you already own. And unlike any other single layer (like a reflective shirt or jacket), it doesn’t require frequent washing since it doesn’t come in direct contact with your skin. After testing three top contenders, we like the Amphipod Xinglet the most because it’s more visible and adjustable than the rest.
Amphipod claims that the Xinglet has up to 40 percent more reflective area than most standard running vests, and although precisely confirming that claim was impossible, we could clearly see that the Xinglet had more reflective area than the Nathan Streak and Zivalo 3M Scotchlite vests. Its minimalist construction provided excellent ease of movement and didn’t get too sweaty on a hard run. Our testers, which included a 6-foot-2 man and a 5-foot-4 woman, found the vest simple to adjust for different height and waist sizes. The front latch is intuitive and quick to use, and unlike the Velcro used in the Nathan Streak, it won’t risk damaging clothes or accessories it comes in contact with.
With a reflective anklet or vest, you’re probably sufficiently protected, but you can’t really overdo it if you’re concerned about being visible to motorists. So if you need specialized running apparel, choosing items with reflectivity features offers some obvious added benefits. With that in mind, we also tested reflective running gear in numerous categories, including hats, jackets, shirts, tights, socks, and laces. Generally speaking, shirts and jackets constructed with reflective materials—usually on the seams or in the form of reflective accents—did not catch our test driver’s eye as much as products that had reflective zones that were larger, positioned low on the body, or worn on moving extremities. In addition, many of the products were less versatile pieces useful only in certain weather conditions, or items like shirts and socks, which require a wash after every use. But a few did stick out, and we think they’re worthy of consideration if you want even more reflectivity.
You can easily and inexpensively swap out the laces that come with your running shoes for Road ID Reflective Laces, which are extremely reflective from the front—useful given that you’re generally supposed to run against the flow of traffic. They are moderately eye-catching from the side but not visible to a car coming behind you.
Clipping a 4id PowerSpurz to your shoe’s heel can make you visible from farther away. Because this device does not depend on light from a car headlight to be noticeable, our test driver was able to see this product in pulse mode from a greater distance than any reflective product we tested. (Once the car got closer, though, the reflective anklets were more visible.) We were concerned that the PowerSpurz might fall off mid-run, but our testers didn’t shake it off despite their best efforts. The manufacturer says the battery will last at least 70 hours; replacement requires nimble work with tiny screws. —Peter Flax
If you want to be especially visible at night, or if you run in areas where the streetlight coverage is less than ideal, we suggest running with a headlamp to see and be seen. The Black Diamond Sprinter is not too heavy and has a 200-lumen beam—enough to illuminate a sidewalk or city street. It’s easily adjustable, too, a benefit since the ability to quickly adjust the beam angle lets you adapt to rain or other changing weather conditions. It also features a rear blinker so you can be seen more easily. Unlike the Black Diamond Spot, the Sprinter has a built-in battery that charges over USB. You’ll need to remember to charge it since you can’t replace the batteries, but during our runs the battery life was plenty for 20 miles of testing. You can find lighter-weight headlamps, but they don’t provide enough light to really be usable. Overall the Sprinter was the best of all the running headlamps we tested. If you plan on using your headlamp only every once in a while, you can save money and get the same performance by choosing the Black Diamond Spot.
Running with a supply of water can help you prevent dehydration and make longer runs a bit easier. The ideal water bottle for running should hold at least 16 ounces of liquid, which in our experience is enough for up to two hours of running in moderate temperatures. A place to store keys is ideal too, as well as quick access to gels or other energy foods. Being able to pack your smartphone instead of needing a separate armband is also useful. If you’re looking for water bottles for non-running activities and other uses in general, take a look at our full guide to water bottles.
Choosing between waist- and hand-mounted options is a matter of personal preference. Many people prefer a handheld bottle because waist packs can ride up or shift position during running. However, usually a waist pack can carry more water than a handheld bottle can, and some people don’t like carrying things in their hands for an hour or more. After over 100 miles of testing with 14 different bottles (seven of each type), we have recommendations for both kinds of products.
The best handheld water bottle is the Nathan SpeedDraw Plus Insulated Flask because in our tests it was easier to hold and drink from while running than the other bottles we tried. It holds 18 ounces of water and is fully insulated to keep liquids cool on hot days. The Amphipod Hydraform Handheld Thermal-Lite holds only 12 ounces, and the FuelBelt Wedge Bottle holds just 8 ounces. The Nathan’s pouch can hold keys and multiple energy gels or an iPhone 6; in contrast, the Ultimate Direction Jurek Grip is basically a fancy strap that can hold nothing beyond water. The Nathan is easy to carry, unlike the CamelBak Quick Grip Chill, which has a wrist strap that begins to rub against your hand and quickly becomes unpleasant. The Nathan model’s spout requires you to merely squeeze the bottle instead of opening it. And in our tests, it adjusted easily to fit the hands of people between 5 feet 1 inch and 6 feet 3 inches, while the Amphipod Hydraform Jett-Lite was harder to adjust in size.
If you don’t mind a sweaty wrist, the Salomon Park Hydro Handset offers more stability and storage for a bit more money. Instead of a strap that goes around your hand, it’s designed for wearing more like a glove. And it has a compressible 17-ounce flask that shrinks as you drink from it, which means it won’t slosh as it empties. Its zippered pocket can hold an iPhone 6 in a battery case plus an energy gel, with room to spare. Unfortunately, because it covers a large section of your arm, it will make your wrist uncomfortably warm and sweaty during runs, which is why the Nathan is our overall top pick.
If you want a waist-mounted bottle, get the Nathan Peak Waist Pack. All the other waist bottles in our test group felt as if they were pulling me back due to their unbalanced weight distribution, but the Nathan Peak Waist Pack didn’t do that. It shifted the least during our 8-to-10-mile runs, and it provides easy access to 18 ounces of fluids while you’re running. A side pouch holds keys and keeps them from jingling; it can also fit an iPhone 6 or similarly sized phone, while a side tie-down provides fast, easy access to gels or other fuel sources. The size-adjustment straps stay put if you arrange them correctly before you start your run—but when you adjust them on the fly, they have a habit of coming loose due to the thinner waistband design.
If you prefer a multibottle option, for carrying water and Gatorade for example, the Nathan Trail Mix is your best bet. It has two 10-ounce bottles that you can easily grab and replace while running; in contrast, the bottles in the Amphipod RunLite Airstretch 4 are hard to remove. The FuelBelt R3O Revenge Hydration Belt holds more liquid, 21 ounces, but the nozzles are small and annoyingly soft next to the larger, firmer Nathan nozzles. The Nathan belt also has two quick-access points for gels, something lacking on the Fitletic 16-ounce Hydration Belt, and a zippered pouch for keys. Unfortunately, it won’t hold a larger phone like an iPhone 6—and it barely even holds an iPhone 5—but its superior bottle design and easier access to water and energy gels make it the best choice overall. —Chris Heinonen
If you’re running for less than an hour, just drinking water is totally fine. But in order to sustain peak performance and boost endurance during long runs (from 60 to 90-plus minutes), nutritionists recommend that runners consume additional hydration, carbohydrates, and electrolytes. Fuel for runs falls into two categories: sports drinks, or water paired with energy bars, chews, blocks, or gels. After speaking to experts, doctors, nutritionists, and trainers, and after consulting notes from two staff members running their first marathon (including myself), we think that gels offer the most portability, consistency, and convenience when it comes to daily training or competition running.
Gels, when taken with water, offer an easy-to-digest combination of electrolytes (such as sodium and potassium) and carbohydrates (in the form of sugars like maltodextrin, fructose, and glucose). “Oftentimes, runners will talk about hitting the wall,” explained Dr. Lonnie Lowery, an exercise physiologist (PhD), nutritionist, professor, and co-host of the long-running podcast Iron Radio. “And what they’re talking about is that they’re so deep into a long run that they’ve run out of muscle and liver glycogen.” In the body, glycogen is the main storage form of glucose, a simple sugar, and according to Lowery, two hours of fairly intense exercise “will almost completely deplete all of your muscle and liver carbohydrate, glycogen stores,” leading to fatigue and even a difficulty to concentrate.
After considering all the brands and flavors of gels available, we can’t name a best one for you without knowing your specific preferences, but we’re confident in recommending GU Original Sports Nutrition Energy Gels as a good starting point. GU offers the best overall nutrition, variety of flavors, availability, and affordability (around $1 per packet). That means you’re likely to find a flavor you don’t abhor (none are particularly delicious), and it’s likely to remain easy to find so you can train with it—an important factor for preventing gastrointestinal surprises on race day.
GU gels come in 17 flavors, and you can start with a variety pack if you’re curious enough to try a bunch. Andrea Mathias, The Sweethome’s growth editor, preferred to use GU’s espresso flavor during the most recent New York City Marathon, while I stuck with the berry flavor in the Brooklyn Marathon. The company even sells a Tastefully Nude variety that has no flavor.
The gels contain a blend of maltodextrin and fructose, which is key to sustaining nutrition while you’re exercising. Certified sports nutritionist, author of the recently published book How Bad Do You Want It?: Mastering the Psychology of Mind over Muscle, and coach Matt Fitzgerald explained to us why this is important: “Different types of sugars are processed or they’re absorbed through different channels,” he said. “You can actually absorb more total carbohydrates if you have different types of carbs going into your body through different channels, because your body can multitask or parallel-process to get more sugar in.”
GU also has a line of gels, called Roctane Energy, that have additional sodium and amino acids beyond the standard Sports Nutrition Energy Gels, but they’re nearly twice as expensive as the regular ones. If the normal GU is “the Honda Civic of energy gels,” you can consider Roctane to be the Acura. Roctane gels come in eight flavors.
Some people have digestive issues with specific brands of gels, but usually they can keep trying other brands until they find one that agrees with them. If GU isn’t working for you, and if you want to explore the huge variety of gels out there, Jonathan Savage’s website fellrnr.com has an incredible chart detailing all the nutritional aspects of gels. Some are made with honey, some come with caffeine, some have a bacon flavor. You’ll even find a margherita pizza flavor! Ultimately the nutritional differences from gel to gel are pretty slight, and GU gels are solidly in the middle of the pack.
Sports drinks offer nutrition similar to gels, albeit in a less portable package. “A gel is essentially a sports drink without the water,” Fitzgerald said, “so a gel plus water equals a sports drink, more or less. Functionally, they’re not that much different, but obviously a sports drink, it’s high volume and it’s heavy, and so it’s harder to carry.” A 12-ounce bottle of Gatorade has 21 grams of carbohydrates, about the same as a single gel packet. But if you’re following the recommendation to consume 30 to 60 grams of carbohydrate per hour, you’d have to drink nearly three bottles of Gatorade an hour, which is a lot to drink, likely guaranteeing a visit to a Porta-Potty.
You can find other alternatives as well, specifically energy bars, blocks, and chews. Energy bars are bulky, however, and block and chews can get stuck in your teeth or become a choking hazard when you’re moving quickly. —Raphael Brion
After 40 hours of research, we now have a full guide to the best foam rollers for various uses and budgets. Our top pick is the AmazonBasics High Density 36″ Round Foam Roller, which we think offers nice quality for the price and is probably the best pick for most people, but feel free to read through our full guide if you’re looking for something a bit more specific (or a softer roller).
For self-myofascial release (SMR, aka massaging your own muscles) as well as for use in certain exercises, the AmazonBasics High-Density 36″ Round Foam Roller does the job for less than $20. The cylinder has a slightly rough surface texture that keeps it from slipping against clothes or the floor, and the 36-inch size allows for techniques that smaller rollers don’t, such as stretches that involve lying along its length. The only caveat is that sensitive people might find the very firm density—as with any black roller—to be too intense.
If you’re a beginner, you might prefer a soft version (rather than the firmer “standard” version), especially if you’re new to rolling. The foam in this version is more yielding, giving the feeling of a moderate-to-medium massage. This is especially important for beginners, said Jonathan E. Gallas, a physical therapist at Rockford Orthopedic Associates in Rockford, Illinois, as “the firmer ones are tough to adjust to.”
When it comes to running, the physical therapists we spoke to agreed that foam rollers work well for both pre- and post-workout stretching. “Anyone who runs seriously would be wise to incorporate foam rolling into their daily running routine,” said Tiffany Moey, a certified athletic therapist at the McGill Sports Medicine Clinic in Montreal. “Rolling helps prevent muscle adhesion, improves flexibility, and aids in recovery,” she added. To what extent this is beneficial to your health is more of a gray area,1 but the bottom line is that many runners find that it feels great, and you probably will too.
So, once you have a foam roller, what should you do with it? Here’s a good total-body guide to using a foam roller, from a Southern California–based physical therapist. And for runners, the Guardian recently published an excellent tutorial listing six specific foam-roller stretches. —Dan Koeppel
When you’re running, your clothes can become waterlogged and drag against your skin, causing chafing. Running in technical fibers that wick moisture away from the skin and dry faster, instead of cotton, helps but sometimes isn’t enough. Anti-chafe products create a thin barrier on the skin that guards against irritation.
We tested four anti-chafe products by running in wet clothes using different products on each side. We also had testers running Oregon’s 198-mile Hood to Coast Relay, which took place during severe thunderstorms this year. In the end, all the products provided equal protection against chafing, so we decided that the best choice is Gold Bond Friction Defense because it provided the same amount of protection for half the price of the next-cheapest option. Note, though, that it does contain isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl myristate, which are totally safe but can clog pores on sensitive skin (though we didn’t have any issues in testing). Bodyglide, the next-cheapest option, works just as well and doesn’t have either of those ingredients. However, all anti-chafe balms will have some kind of potentially pore-clogging ingredient (even if they haven’t specifically been tested for that) since they work by creating a slick layer atop your skin. As for the others we tested, 2Toms Sport Shield has a nicer applicator but doesn’t perform any better, and the same goes for RunGuard Anti-Chafe Sensitive. —CH
According to Runner’s World, icing your injuries is good for aiding recovery as well as for therapeutic purposes, but only if you do it right. After conducting 35 hours of research, including interviewing experts and testing temperature reduction on the body parts of two people, we think the Accurate Manufacturing Ice Pack is the best and most affordable cold pack for most people. The gel was still fairly pliable after freezing, with a small, microbead-like filling that we could mold more easily than a liquid that freezes into a solid brick. Plus, the 6-by-10-inch pack held its temperature very well—its surface temperature remained nearly constant when we exposed it to air for 15 minutes, even when we placed it in a microfiber pouch.
The Accurate Manufacturing pack scored between three and four on a pain scale (moderate to high coldness), but it was one of the only packs we tested that helped the treated site reach a temperature needed to treat pain directly. The cover is much thinner than that of other cold packs, so the cold material is closer to the skin, which may be the reason this pack gets and stays so much colder than comparable products. Because of this, though, in our tests the area we iced was somewhat numb and irritated from the coldness after 15 minutes. We suggest keeping icing times to 10 minutes or less. —Michael Zhao