Feb 28, 2012 at 1:09 pm #1286347
Just got my new pair of NB Minimus Trail Zeros in the mail this past weekend. (NB doesn't even have them up on their website yet.?)
These things are great. I've only been able to put in a little over 4 hours of running in them and plan to put a couple more hours in them today. The first thing I noticed taking them out of the box was how light they are. In size 10 they weigh 4.8oz per shoe (on my scale)!! Ridiculous light. The sole of the shoe looks similar to the NB MT10 but with less of it. NB has strategically removed areas the vibram outsole to reduce weight, increase flexibility and increase awesomeness. I did try to run in these without socks and did fine until I hit 1 hour 15 min. After that I got blisters on the top of both feet which soon became bloody wounds. This was due to the construction of the shoe's tongue. All of the seams in the shoe are flat except the tongue. On my second run I decided to wear socks and the problem disappeared. I usually run in socks, so this will work fine for me. Overall I love these shoes. Can't wait to be done with work and go running.
I'll update this short review in a few weeks after I've had time to put at least a couple hundred miles in them.
Cheers.Feb 28, 2012 at 1:11 pm #1846260
Chris WBPL Member
I have a pair coming in 4E for review here on BPL. The regular width are too narrow in the toe and midfoot IMO.Feb 28, 2012 at 1:23 pm #1846266
Sounds great (except for the blister part, of course!) I used the MT10's for trail running last spring thru fall with MT101's for longer runs and hikes. I found the MT10's to be just what I was looking for – i.e. something close to a five finger shoe, but with more protection for my feet as I run on a lot of rocky trails and some dirt roads with scattered gravel chunks. I find with the MT10 I don't have to pay full attention to where I land my feet. Don't get me wrong, my feet will let me know when I've stepped some where or in some way that wasn't ideal, but it's a tolerable pain. With the five fingers I felt that I was actually punished for landing wrong and occasionally ended up with some nasty bruises from wearing them (five fingers, not MT10s).
So I'm in awe of the weight of those MT00s, but I'm hesitant becasue I know there just isn't enough coverage on the sole for the type of running I do. I'm not careful enough with my foot placement to always make sure I land on the padding. What has been your experience in this regard. And what type of similar shoes have you used in the past to compare? What types of terrain are you using them on and do you plan to use them on in the future.
Man, 4.8oz. I'm jealous. Love light shoes. It's like a whole different sport when you get that light on your feet, especially for hill climbing.Feb 28, 2012 at 1:58 pm #1846298
I've been wearing a new pair of MT110s since the first week of Jan. Simply the best shoe I have ever worn. I seriously think I can do longer days due to the these shoes.Feb 28, 2012 at 2:14 pm #1846305
Not that I want to thread drift, but would you say the rubber on the MT110 is sticky? I know it's touted to be stickier with better treads than the MT101s, but lets be honest the bar was pretty low there. I love my 101's but i find myself not wearing them in certain situations because the rubber is pretty sub-par. I'm eyeing a pair of innov8's or the upcoming S-Lab Senses as potential replacements…or perhaps the MT110s as a good upgrade if the rubber is good.Feb 28, 2012 at 7:07 pm #1846452
Eugene SmithBPL Member
@eugeneiusLocale: Nuevo Mexico
Salomon S-Lab Sense will have a eye and pocket gouging price of ~$200.
Kilian and Salomon are laughing all the way to the bank.Feb 28, 2012 at 7:39 pm #1846478
Mike MBPL Member
those Sir are indeed light! I'd love to try a little lighter shoe, but am afraid those would be simply too light for meFeb 28, 2012 at 7:41 pm #1846479
Very true Eugene. Won't let that stop me from buying a good shoe though (assuming of course that it is a good shoe). I've got plenty of gear that cost me >$200 that won't see near the use a good pair of shoes will. Sadly I've got more than $200 worth of shoes that I don't even use anymore as I've found others that I like much better.
My current shoes of choice are starting to look like a bargain at under $70/pair.
I make up for all my gear purchases by eating ramen noodles regularlyFeb 28, 2012 at 9:14 pm #1846541
@djstwoLocale: Southern California
Looks like the other new shoe is the MO10 "New Balance Minimus Multi-Sport MO10".
I have the MT10 shoes, and they might be a little "too" light for hiking. These MO10 add "Water-Resistant Synthetic/Mesh Upper", might work well for those looking to hike rather than run.Feb 29, 2012 at 8:13 am #1846662
Great conversation going here.
I was able to get in another couple hours in the Zeros last night and they continue to preform great. I'm more than happy to answer questions about the New Balance Zeros, MT10s and/or 110s as I use all three pairs of shoes in my running and hiking.
For reference I've also tried the Brooks Pure Grit and Inov8s F-Lite 195s. After running in the MT10s the Brooks felt like I was wearing platform shoes. I did like the F-lites. Great tread for mixed trail and road but I found them to be too narrow in the foot box. I've never run in the Five Fingers. I tried them on and didn't like how they forced my toes to splay. For my preferences and needs I find that I like the moccasin approach to minimalist footwear as opposed to the glove approach
@ Chris. Yes, one of the many reasons you gotta love NB is the availability of multiple widths. Also, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on these kicks after you've had some time to abuse them. Let us know.
@ Nathan. Great questions.
A little about me and how I run.
I started running track and cross country at age 13 and this spring will mark 20 years of running. I live in Southern California, so it's rare that I have to deal with cold or rain. I try to do as much of my running on chunky mountain single track trails as possible but most of my runs also involve fire road and street. I view streets as the crap I deal with on the way to and from trails. I love running up hill. In fact it's a family tradition. During the week I keep my runs under 3 hours and take a day off between runs. On the weekend I try to do two runs with one of them going well over 3 hours
I've have been running in the NB MT10s for the past 11 months and have loved them. But as I've progressed with my running I've wanted something more minimal and closer to a barefoot feel for my general training. With the Zero, NB has achieved just that. Lots of ground feel with protection. The Zero is very similar to the MT10 and if the MT10 has worked for you the Zero could be a winner. I find that the Zeros have more foam padding and less vibram sole than the MT10. Be aware that the MT10 has a 4mm drop and the zero has a 0mm drop (obviously) and I (my calves) have noticed this change on runs. I should probably ease my way into these shoes but that's no fun. I'm just amazed how much difference 4mm can make. Also, with the removal of a majority of the vibram outsole the arch support has been greatly reduced. I like this. Others my not.
I plan to use the Zeros as my main training shoe for runs under 3 hours (or less than 20 miles). For runs longer than that I will use the NB 110 (also an amazing shoe) which I use for hiking too. As of now I don't know that I would use the Zeros for long hiking days but maybe for a weekend SUL trip.
@ Eugene. That's crazy dude! I can't believe that the s-labs senses are going to retail for $200. Those shoes better come with a second pair of shoes for that price. Ha.Feb 29, 2012 at 9:40 am #1846715
ah nuts, running warehouse doesn't have wide sizes available… can't wait to try them out.Feb 29, 2012 at 12:36 pm #1846842
This is very unlike Running Warehouse to not carry extra widths. Must be because the shoes are so new. You might contact them about when they expect to get the wider sizes in.Apr 17, 2012 at 1:44 pm #1868215
Just wanted to give everyone a heads up on the lack of durability on the NB Minimus Trail Zeros. After less than 100 miles they started to develop holes in the pinkie toe area on both shoes (first the left, then right). It is not uncommon for me to make holes like these in shoe uppers but this is the first time it's happen in less than 400 miles; let alone less than 100 miles. Anyone else have durability issues with these? I love pretty much everything else about these shoes.
As a quick remedy I tried using K tape. The tape pealed off before I completed one mile. So today I used some silicone glue and patching fabric from my sleeping pad to make some patches. I'll let you know how it works.Apr 17, 2012 at 1:47 pm #1868216
Here's a pic of the repair job I did to patch the holes.Apr 17, 2012 at 3:11 pm #1868246
Eugene SmithBPL Member
@eugeneiusLocale: Nuevo Mexico
I checked these out last Friday in Flagstaff and the Trail Zero is not a legit trail running shoe, no doubt about that.
It didn't take more than a second to realize how incredibly lacking in durability they are. These would be great for strides out on a grassy field or on groomed recreation areas at best.
The retail price is laughable.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.