Jul 5, 2012 at 6:38 am #1291679
I've been wanting to try a lower drop shoe, w/o going all the way to a 0 drop. The MT110 looked like a viable choice, but has been plagued by quite a few failures in the plastic mesh- where I run it looked like a very high probability of getting torn.
The 1010 offers a little more protection vs the 110 at basically the same weight. The mesh is "traditional" mesh, not plastic and shouldn't see the tear failures the 110 did.
Good news for me- evidently the toe box is on the large side according to this recent review, they are also offered in EE (as is the 110)
rumor is they will start shipping sometime this monthJul 5, 2012 at 10:39 pm #1892553
@sgiachettiLocale: Boulder, CO
these look good. i like the 110's but not quite enough rock protection for my already bruised foot & on my first trip tore the plastic on a blowdown. too bad because otherwise the plastic provides a really nice glovelike fit. good lateral support with no pressure points. NB must be bummed-its obvious a lot of R&D went into the shoe design, just didnt forsee that issue.Jul 5, 2012 at 10:56 pm #1892557
@eugeneiusLocale: Nuevo Mexico
I'm leery jumping into a pair of NB kicks these days, in part to their lack of consistency in construction and design. The transition/progression from the MT100 to the MT101 was a natural one, but they dropped a different beast with the MT110, one that didn't jive well with me.
The Amp (MT1010) looks good except for that stylized outsole with cutouts and exposed areas of blown foam- I'm still unsure what kind of trail NB is designing this MT stuff for. I was excited when they announced this shoe several months back, but now I'm not so sure. Had they chosen a once piece Vibram outsole and done away with the "Rock Plate" in the forefoot of the Amp I might bite.
My Brooks Pure Grits are my trail pillows and I'm still quite smitten, they lack a really aggressive sticky outsole, but more than make up for that in comfort for all distances as a general training/racing shoe. The upcoming Pure Grit 2 is going to be killer, as will the new Inov8 Trailroc 235- the latter I am quite excited about as I've been looking into an aggressive/lightweight flat for vertical runs.Jul 6, 2012 at 4:08 am #1892565
I have mt20's that are too small to wear without socks, so I go sockless. Anyone know what that is like hiking 15 miles a day?Jul 6, 2012 at 6:28 am #1892580
Eugene- how is the toe box on the Grits? I need lots of room, I had to ship back a pair of Mtn Masochists as they didn't have enough room- I'll keep an eye out on the Grit 2, I take it will also be a 4mm drop?
Inov-8 has a reputation for non-roomy toe boxes, so I'm really leery of their shoes
greg- if they fit well you should be good to go, lots of guys running ultras w/ no socks :)Jul 6, 2012 at 6:51 am #1892584
yeah i go running in them sockless, but hiking 15 miles for 5 days might not be the same. also after a while, your feet start feeling nasty. either way i should test it out when i can.Jul 6, 2012 at 7:00 am #1892585
greg have you tried one of the really thin socks like the drymax hyper thin? they get pretty good reviews, don't last forever obviously as thin as they areJul 6, 2012 at 7:57 am #1892595
Greg – I have done some long days in the MT10s sockless and it's okay. I need to train more in them and be more careful about where I am stepping to reduce some foot pains. I am usually crossing some snow in these too and I like how they cool off really quickly.
Mike – I Have a pair of the Inov-8 Roclite 295s and I have to say the toe box is surprisingly roomy! 4mm drop, I actually much prefer these to the MT10s for long days as the lugs are beefier, toe box wider, and have a half rockplate for the rocky trails in the ONP. Also, the achilles cut out in the back of these feels like butter compared to the nasty heelcup on the minimus.
I like them both for different things though. I feel really free and nimble in the minimus.Jul 6, 2012 at 8:25 am #1892598
I have the MT10s. They fit great but the durability and longevity have not been great. What are the functional differences between the MT10 and the 1010?Jul 6, 2012 at 8:44 am #1892600
@eugeneiusLocale: Nuevo Mexico
NB is calling the MT1010 a "transitional" shoe for consumers, so it has a 4mm drop, more midsole (Revlite) and a more substantial Vibram outsole. Functionally? I would guess increased support and more substantial outsole grip on trail. The presence of a true midsole is going to make the MT1010 a better option for longer distances and rough trail conditions.
This shoe from Inov8 looks promising and shares quite a bit with the MT110, but might be better executed:Jul 6, 2012 at 9:28 am #1892607
I guess it depends what your running/hiking plans and goals are.
my buddy John (from the recent RRR), after running in minimal shoes for the past year, got tired of soreness on the bottoms of his feet, and the mental strain of having to constantly focus to avoid rocks, and stepped up to the Cascadia 7 for his first 100 miler last month.
the Cascadias are not sports cars, more like a 3/4 ton pickup, but they get the job done. like I said, depends on your running plans and goals.Jul 6, 2012 at 10:12 am #1892620
@gregfLocale: Canadian Rockies
I am looking forward to the MT1010 coming out but won't buy one right away as I still have a pair of 110's that are going strong. I haven't have any of the mesh issues that others have had and I am at about the 300 mile point on the shoes. My only complaint with the shoes is that they are slanted inwards and seem to exagerate pronation. This does help prevent ankle rolling but I have to be careful how many miles I run in them a week becasus on one foot in causes some mild achillies issues on them. As I wore them in the is went away as the outer edge of the sole has worn down.
I am hoping the 1010 are more flat, then I might have found the perfect shoe.Jul 6, 2012 at 12:03 pm #1892643
hmmm the Inov-8 linked above says wide toe box, I'll add that to the list to look at :)Jul 6, 2012 at 12:23 pm #1892648
These Innov-8s look like the ticket!Jul 6, 2012 at 2:39 pm #1892679
@tomhowardLocale: SF Bay Area
Hi I just talked to New Balance customer service the mt1010 series
will be available September 2.
Hope it holds up
TomJul 7, 2012 at 11:41 am #1892861
@eric_kLocale: The northwest is the BEST
I currently switch between the MT10 and the PureGrit, both of which I run sockless in. I love the MT10s but they are mostly a specialized shoe for specific trails, soft and not very rocky. I do not like hiking in them though unless it is for approach/decent of muilti-pitch climbs rock climbs where you need to carry your shoes in your pack while climbing. I use the Grits for rough trails and runs longer than 15 miles. They are incredibly soft. I am still amazed at how much cushion is in these shoes. They are a please to hike in and I find that even though these have so much cushion they still offer great ground feel and they drain water well. Unfortunately they are a little too narrow in the toe box, and they don't seem to offer my foot enough lateral stability. As much as I like them I probably wont get them again unless the Grit2 have a wider toe box and the uppers are a little stiffer.
I tend to keep my shoes in service a little too long, but when I replace them I will likely be checking the MT110 and MT1010 first. They seem to fit the bill for what I want. They both have 4mm drop, I don't like zero drop shoes for long distances. They have a very low profile. They both come in wide versions, this is something you don't usually find in trail shoes. After working at at a high end running shoe I have to say that both New Balance and Brooks were my favorite companies to work with. Their sales reps are super knowledgeable and helpful to the stores, and both the companies genuinely seems to try and listen to customer feedback. I really don't think you can go wrong with either of these.
The Innov8 shoes look cool too, but I have never found any of their products to fit wide feet well. My wife loves them but she has very narrow feet. Maybe their newest models are different though.
EricJul 7, 2012 at 12:47 pm #1892871
Eric- thanks. I started reading reviews on the Grits, that definitely came up on the less than roomy toe box. New Balance is one of the few outfits that actually offer wide sizes, too bad others wouldn't follow suit :( The Montrail Sabino Trail and AT Plus both have roomy toe boxes, but it appears that many of their shoes don't- the Mountain Masochists for one.
I'll be curious what Inov-8's idea of a wide toe box is, be nice if the Grit 2 would be roomy as well. I'm on my third pair of Sabino Trails (almost ordered a fourth!), would be fun to actually try another shoe :)
MikeJul 7, 2012 at 11:43 pm #1892979
@hankinsohlLocale: Pacific Northwest
I was excited about the MT1010 until I read that it probably won't be made in 4E width. I have very wide feet and prefer 6E although I make do with 4E.
I'm leaving for an 8-day trip in the Sierra (Emigrant Wilderness) where I'll finally get a chance to try out my pair of NB MT1110s. I'm hoping that the MT1110s perform well and I won't be looking for another shoe.Jul 8, 2012 at 9:36 pm #1893248
@brendansLocale: Fruita CO
Seems like there are more and more great looking shoes that have horrible looking outsoles/treads. I for one am definitely looking forward to the Trailrocs (probably 255); Inov8s have worked mostly wonderfully for my long, low volume feet and the outsoles on those look excellent.Aug 11, 2012 at 8:31 pm #1901933
I tried a pair of these in 2E width on today at the New Balance Store at South Coast Plaza, CA. Looks pretty good, felt pretty comfortable. I've never tried this style of shoes before, but it didn't feel that weird. Didn't end up buying it because I wanted to do some research first online.Aug 11, 2012 at 10:14 pm #1901942
yall are lucky you have a choice… I wear NB mt00 in 4E(minimus zero) because they are they only shoes that fit, I would basically rip through innov 8's and pure grit's… though I do love my MT00's.Aug 13, 2012 at 6:49 am #1902238
going to have to find a pair to give a go :)Aug 18, 2012 at 1:19 am #1903683
@sgiachettiLocale: Boulder, CO
The fit is great, with a wide toe box, and form fitting everything else. The midsole seemed substantial enough, but what really bothered me was the pods on the bottom of the shoe. There is a set of lateral pods that is so far outside of the actual foot print that I could see it being a real risk for ankle sprains. When the sole is curved and aligned with your foot, its easy to avoid severe ankle rolls because your proprioception responds to counteract your ankle from rolling. When there is extra sole, that just means that your ankle will torque with that much more force and speed. I tested this in the store by slowly rolling the lateral side of the sole and nearly twisted my ankle just standing still. Anyway, thats my layperson's take on it. Just a little disappointed, because otherwise it seemed like a great shoe. It should be really hard to twist your ankle in a minimal shoe.Aug 18, 2012 at 2:11 am #1903688
Big New Balance fan here- I've run in multiple pairs of everything in the MT and Minimus line but I have to agree with Eugene…New Balance is quickly losing me with all the blown foam and lack of continuous rubber on the soles of their new models. A single prolonged talus encounter and there goes 1/4 of your shoe life.
Though I'm not a fan of big heel/toe drop, the durability issues have me looking at my Cascadias and Roclite 295s in a new light.Aug 18, 2012 at 7:39 am #1903699
NM, Eugene already listed them.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.