How far could you walk without having to give up?
How far could you walk without having to give up?
Author
Discussion

Wacky Racer

Original Poster:

40,472 posts

269 months

Yesterday (09:05)
quotequote all
Just for a bit of fun this, sensible answers only. smile

There's no time limit, you can take as long as you want, although you can't stop, other than to take a quick toilet break, or to nip into a corner shop for a minute to buy a can or a Mars bar, but not to sit on a wall for twenty minutes taking a breather.

I reckon I could do 40 miles and I'm 72, don't go to the gym or do any cycling etc.





Edited by Wacky Racer on Wednesday 4th February 00:33

tamore

9,331 posts

306 months

Yesterday (09:07)
quotequote all
was listening to some scottish band who reckoned they could do 1000 in total.

oh….. sensible. sorry.

boyse7en

7,908 posts

187 months

Yesterday (09:09)
quotequote all
40 miles will take somewhere around 14 hours to walk, and I reckon that at some point on a 14hr journey you would need to stop for food/drink/piss/tighten shoelaces/stretch/whatever.
I know loads of people that do ultramarathons and even in a race they will have short stops for the above reasons.

1690cc

202 posts

38 months

Yesterday (09:10)
quotequote all
It's definitely 1000, has been confirmed by Vanessa who was clearly a keen walker

1690cc

202 posts

38 months

Yesterday (09:16)
quotequote all
Ignoring my failing bladder I think beyond 6 / 7 hours some niggly joint pains would start to creep in unless your body was used to this type of sustained repeated movement and these would need you to stop for a rest.

So for me (59, regular Parkrunner) I would think I would struggle to hit 30 without stopping.


Cotty

41,760 posts

306 months

Yesterday (09:19)
quotequote all
I have walked 17 miles in a day with a 4.5kg pack on, think I could do more. Basically section 1 and 2 of the London LOOP back to back. That's without poles.



Edited by Cotty on Tuesday 3rd February 09:21

FlyVintage

319 posts

13 months

silentbrown

10,326 posts

138 months

Yesterday (09:34)
quotequote all
If you can't stop for a pee that's going to get messy by the end of a day...

kambites

70,449 posts

243 months

Yesterday (09:35)
quotequote all
I think I'd struggle to walk more than 30 miles in a day even with stops, let alone 40 without stopping at all! And I'm a pretty fit 45 year-old. Even if I could do 30, it would be a hell of an effort and I probably wouldn't be able to stand up the next day. I think a reasonable upper limit without making myself completely unable to function the next day would be about 20.

ETA: I'm sure with some targeted training I could raise that quite quickly but last week (which was pretty average) according to my phone I only did 50k steps (which with my stride length is about 24 miles) in the entire week. And I bet that, as pathetic as that is, is a fair bit more than most people do!

Edited by kambites on Tuesday 3rd February 09:52

Bill

56,969 posts

277 months

Yesterday (09:38)
quotequote all
Wacky Racer said:
I reckon I could do 40 miles and I'm 72, don't go to the gym or do any cycling etc.
I think you're delusional! biggrin I suspect you'd struggle to do 10.

king arthur

7,566 posts

283 months

Yesterday (09:46)
quotequote all
Wacky Racer said:
Just for a bit of fun this, sensible answers only. smile

There's no time limit, you can take as long as you want, although you can't stop for any reason.

I reckon I could do 40 miles and I'm 72, don't go to the gym or do any cycling etc.
I don't think you could because for one thing, if you're sensible you'll be drinking water as you go, so you'll need to stop for a pee at some point.

Last year I did a fair bit of walking cross country and was doing around 8 or 9 miles (20,000 steps) at a reasonably brisk pace with hardly any stopping. If I wasn't allowed to stop I could probably still do it but would be a bit slower.

Randy Winkman

20,379 posts

211 months

Yesterday (09:47)
quotequote all
I have walked 36 miles on the south downs in one day and I've walked 25 miles for 4 days in a row. I did those in my 50s.

I think it's a genuine mistake to think you know how far you could walk. For me, it wasn't about how tired I got or how much I ached but it was my feet that dictated how far I could walk. A pair of shoes that feels really comfortable for 20 miles might be totally unsuitable 5 miles later. Once your feet start to swell or you get really bad blisters it really is hard to carry on.

Crumpet

4,957 posts

202 months

Yesterday (09:57)
quotequote all
I accidentally walked 28km around London one day after setting out to just go for a coffee. I’m early 40s and was in a pair of Converse but think I’d be limited by footwear and blisters long before the legs gave up. I’d go with 50km as my max range.

CSR Performance

200 posts

10 months

Yesterday (10:05)
quotequote all
Crumpet said:
I accidentally walked 28km around London one day after setting out to just go for a coffee. I m early 40s and was in a pair of Converse but think I d be limited by footwear and blisters long before the legs gave up. I d go with 50km as my max range.
I was just thinking along the same lines. A few times when I've had a meeting in London I've ended up walking 13-15 miles in my smart shoes and utterly destroyed my feet.

I've got very wide flat feet so I really struggle to footwear that works for me. Got a few pairs coming this week to try as I've got some long walks planned for this year and I really want to get an answer to the OP question.

My goal is a walk I've got planned across London which is 22 miles.


gotoPzero

19,736 posts

211 months

Yesterday (10:07)
quotequote all
How far away is the nearest maccies?

GadgeS3C

4,682 posts

186 months

Yesterday (10:11)
quotequote all
I walked 100km (~63miles) in 2013, in 24 hours for the Oxfam Trailtrekker.

The walking was OK, but the blisters were epic!

That's strictly cheating for this thread, as we did have a few food stops.

I'm probably fitter now, but even though I enjoyed it, I don't think I'd want to do it again.





Edited by GadgeS3C on Tuesday 3rd February 10:56

WH16

7,844 posts

240 months

Yesterday (10:22)
quotequote all
Hills or flat? Carrying weight or not? What are the consequences of stopping?

Bear in mind the Royal Marines endurance march is 30 miles in boots and kit in 8 hours (7 for officers). These are very fit, very conditioned guys in their late teens or early 20s. Anyone claiming they could smash out 40 miles+ in their flip-flops is frankly talking out of their arses, or have never done any walking.

I'm not saying it is impossible to do more, especially on nice flat easy ground without carrying any weight, but unless it is something you do regularly it will not be easy.

Personally, my knees are knackered so anything more than 20 will be a struggle. The longest I've actually done in recent years is only about 12 in the hills.

bigpriest

2,262 posts

152 months

Yesterday (10:26)
quotequote all
Wacky Racer said:
Just for a bit of fun this, sensible answers only. smile

There's no time limit, you can take as long as you want, although you can't stop for any reason.

I reckon I could do 40 miles and I'm 72, don't go to the gym or do any cycling etc.
Manchester to Chester? That's quite a hike. Personally, 10 miles, maybe 15.

Lefty

19,366 posts

224 months

Yesterday (10:27)
quotequote all
Depends totally on terrain and surface and weather hehe

I’ve done 25 miles a day for 4 days with backpacks, on good paths/tracks and some hills. On good tracks with good weather and no backpack I could do more quite easily. On crappy paths with lots of hills and stty weather all bets are off

Nezquick

1,725 posts

148 months

Yesterday (10:32)
quotequote all
You should watch The Long Walk (a Stephen King adaptation) - set in a dystopian future where the winner takes home untold riches. Only one rule, if you stop, you're out (you actually get shot in the head, but whatever).