Your 26.2 PR-Weekly Mileage

Oof! Back when I did my PR (at age 19), I was probably averaging 85-90 mpw. That being said, for my second-fastest marathon (18 months before), I was only doing about 65-70. The two races are less than a minute apart. The fastesr (2:43) was on a much tougher course, though. Probably would have been close to/just under 2:40 on a flat course and cooler day. Depends on your goals. Within reason, long runs (building to 20-23 miles) are more important than total mileage. If you have time goals, then quality runs as well--tempo, fartlek, hill runs, long reps.  Mileage for the sake of mileage, in my experience, isn't particularly useful--there was very little in either case.

My marathon PR was last year and I peaked at just over 50 mpw. As HotRunner pointed out, it's about getting in quality runs, not just number of miles. This year I'll peak at around 45mpw but doing more cross-training.

In college I ran 60-70 mpw, but that's a loooong time ago I've never been injured, but I do have chronic sciatica/piriformis issues that get worse when I start running over ~40 mpw. I run 4x/wk: long run, easy run, tempo, speedwork.

I guess my question was biased... thinking that overall, consistent volume was king. I guess the "volume vs 'quality' " debate is a whole other thread.

My son was born in April so training's been really hard. I have averaged some 30 MPW & completed 40 last week & have done speed work. Got until October 30. Think I can make a 3:30? I have run SEVERAL marathons... all in around 4 hours. Never really tried to PR.

PRed by 20 minutes with peak week being 35 miles about.

I don't know!  Because very regrettably the year I ran my PR I didn't log my training.

Moral of the story?  LOG YOUR TRAINING!  then if something works you can repeat it!

Similar to you, my marathon PR had been about 4 hours. Training for those marathons topped out in the 45-50 miles/week range. I bumped it up to 70+ for several months and ran a 3:26.

Based on the training you've done so far 3:30 doesn't seem likely.

Thanks all for your in-depth responses. Now my response: dang! 

I actually have been consistently logging 30 MPW w/one weekly "speed" work-out. Last & this week, I'll be at 40. I'm gonna feel my body out & see if I can creep into the 50s for the following two weeks & maybe 60 which will be three weeks out until the marathon & would allow me two week taper. Again, depending on how I feel, I will shoot for one day of speed work per week.

I know this is ambitious (please do feel free to knock some sense into me). I've had a couple runs w/Vibrams &, literally after a couple runs, I am now "remembering" how to run lightly (COG & all that jazz). I haven't been feeling any unusual pains since.

A couple weeks ago I pulled off a 45min 10K & I have a half marathon planned for next week. I reckon this will give me some insight as to whether I can hang w/the 3:40/3:45 pace group. 

Hi Dave. I disagree with some of what you say (partly because I enjoy doing so). The point isn't that less mileage is needed, the point is that the mileage needed AND types of workouts will depend on a lot of factors. What are his goals? To finish, run sub-4:00, or sub-3:00. What is his base and experience? I would say for most people it IS the long run that is most important. No matter how you cut it, 26.2 miles is tough! You need to get used to being on your feet and moving for 3+ hours and the only way to do that is to run long. I would agree that the faster you want to go, the more important speedwork and tempo runs become. I'd also argue that while speedwork makes you faster, it's the tempo run that teaches you to hold that pace. If you want to build mileage, build it on the tempo runs, but not at the expense of being able to do 20-22 miles on a long run.

I think it's important to point out that people are different and respond differently to training regimens. Saying you need to run 80 miles a week or 40 miles a week doesn't take any of that into account. As you point out.

Interesting & I see your point. 

Not to mention reducing the time you're going nuts, thinking you're getting sick, worrying about every little ache and pain, losing conditioning, etc. I stick to 2 weeks between my last 20-22 mile run and my marathon.

I agree with Scout. Bumping up to 60 won't be all that useful at this point and could even be detrimental. Based on your volume 2 weeks taper seems a bit long as well, but you should do what you think will work best for yourself.

If you're able to run that HM in the 1:40ish range, you may be able to run sub 3:30. If you find yourself really falling off the pace toward the end of the HM, 3:30 may be unlikely.

Really!? 1:40HM may = sub 3:30? I can easily huff/puff a sub 1:30HM (done it several times this year). But I'm far from confident that I can do a sub 3:30 in a full, let alone a 3:30 (hence my original post). Alright then, game on! 

^^ This.

I've had two marathons where I set a PR that I considered to be a big step forward in each case.

For one of them, I was also training for a half iron tri and so both my frequency and volume were limited...generally could only fit in three runs a week and did probably a max week of just under 40 miles with a 20 mile long run.  Pretty certain I wouldn't have PR'ed without incorporating a serious build in my weekly long runs that included a 20 miler.

My all-time PR, though, involved at least one 50+ week and 4-5 runs per week (was still doing 3-4 rides and 2 swims).  I still built to a couple 20+ mile runs along the way, but I felt like having more sustained volume gave me a bit more flexibility in my schedule.