New Balance MT110 Failure and Resolution

I have about 150 miles on mine right now and one of my concerns has been if the upper woukd hold up. It seems to hold up very well to abrasion but it appears that they will tear under the right stresses.

Really happy to see NB replace the shoes without even being asked. I love these shoes and hopefully these total failures are relatively rare.

But if this shoe does continue to fail there is always their next shoe coming out in August.

http://www.irunfar.com/2011/12/new-balance-minimus-amp-mt1010-preview.html

Although i have concerns about the sole on thoses ones

In my experience their customer service has always been top notch.

that sucks, I read about Joe's failure as well- major bummer :( might be back to the drawing board for a material change?

Good to hear. I work for a retailer that sells New Balance, and their policy is always “replace it, no questions asked, and keep people happy”. Costs them a bit of money, but pretty smart IMHO.

I'd love to give these a try- I'd like a shoe that had a little less drop than my current shoe (10mm) w/o going to a 0 drop, also would like try a lighter shoe that still had a rock plate, need it in a wide size- the MT110 meets all the criteria; but I know where I run that likelihood of tearing the upper mesh is VERY high :(

Just bought these today, I like them so far and I think there going to work for my quick 1-2 overnighters.

But I have to say the 1010 looks more rugged, maybe ill get those after these wear out. But I did only pay $70 for these on sale and so far I like them.

These do not feel like stilettos!

I used the MT110 for the entirety of my PCT thru hike. The outer layer always rips, but it doesn't really matter much. Eventually the light mesh will get ripped, which is more of a concern and is the reason for the outer layer. But I found it took quite a long time for that to happen (around 800 miles) and I already had another pair on the way.

These types of failures (which I now have seen many times) is the reason why I am skipping the 110's. I went from the 101's to the 1010's. I haven't used the 1010's yet, but they are in transit.

The replacement pair they sent me currently has 260+ miles on them, not including miles I haven't recorded. No rips this time. I think it's just a luck thing.

Given the 1010 appears to have even less real rubber on the sole than the 110s, I'll pass on those.

I wore my 110's all day today + a 1 mile run and am loving them.

It feels like im not dragging a heavy shoe around all day, and I never had the urge to rip them off my feet due to uncomfort.

I like how light they are, i like how low to the ground they are, they give me good ground feel and low balance point.

I think they are going to be trail ready with my semi light setup ~ 8 pound base.

To the guy who did a through hike in them how did that go? Detials?

Thru-hike went well. Finished just over two weeks ago and I miss living on trail. My first pair of MT110's already had a lot of miles on them and I replaced them at mile 450. Next pair made it to 1350 w/ an extra 60 in yosemite and the additional abuse that everyones shoes took in the high Sierra. Next pair made it to 2300. Once again these were pretty destroyed, mostly from kicking in steps in icy snow throughout the high snow levels in Oregon. I'm still wearing the pair I ended with and I don't particularly enjoy them on pavement. Too much shoe for road running. And I will be using a more minimalist trail shoe in the future, perhaps the Vivobarefoot Breatho Trail. I was hesitant to make the switch mid-trail since the MT110's were working out well and going more minimal might have meant backing off on miles a bit again while adjusting. I had nearly no cushion/sole left at the end of each pair but I didn't know how a new pair with equally little protection would have effected my hike. I started the trail with low miles and much of that was to build up foot strength and develop good form so it was a good way to be entirely injury free throughout the trail. If you'd like to know anything specific let me know.

Yes I just have a few questions:

What was your base pack weight?
What was the weight of your pack all loaded up with food and water?
What are your stats, how tall and how much do you weigh?

base pack weight less than 10lbs. sub 8? quite possibly. never weighed it.
my pack weight got pretty huge at times. i stopped hitching and didn't send boxes so i went up to 300 miles without resupply*, but was doing 100miles every 3days by that point. biggest haul was when i packed 55000 calories into the high sierra + bear canister. my pack had to have been over 35lbs going into the high sierra. my pack was definitely 30lbs on a number of occasions.
i am 6'3" 170lbs 23yearsold shoesize14EE.
[* from chester (1335) to seiad valley (1660) minus a meal at drakesbad and a half gallon of milk at both old station and burney falls.]

That black mesh outer layer is also ripped all over on mine. But, like John Z said above, it doesn't really matter much. My only complaint with the 110s is the amount (and size) of debri that can enter through both layers. Mostly when off trail. Kinda renders gaiters useless.

The winterized version, which should be out in a month, looks to have a solid outer material and should correct this, plus have an integrated gaiter.

Debri definitely gets in, but since I go sockless (and gaiterless) almost always the debri that got in from there was more of a concern than the finer sandy stuff from the mesh holes. And at the end of my shoes' life, debri just came and went as it pleased…

It's probably worth noting that this damage is the result of some pretty extreme use (1000 miles w/ lots of repetitive kicking at icy snow).

Good to know, I have a pair of MT00s that have started to rip on the top for no apparent reason.

Ya, John! Now that really makes gaiters useless. Any chance you could post a pic of the tread on the bottom of those, cause thats the one thing that been holding up on mine decently. Except for the middle blue section. That was gone my first chossy .5mi scramble to to the crag.

Yeah the rockplate tread held up really well. Lugs basically the same but lost some height. Blue tread was nothing by day three. By the end I could usually see a bit of the blue cushion layer coming through in select smoothed out spots, but this one was still doing pretty well. If I was using this as a running shoe I would expect the tread to wear evenly and last longer.

Wow, I'd say that tread is in pretty good shape. All things considered.

I must say I keep coming back to my 110s, the tread is simple and effective.

I recently picked up a pair of 110's to try out and have to say I'm quite pleased with the update over the 101's. I've put about 100 miles on them thus far doing a mixture of 7, 12, and 15 mile runs in them – no hiking as of yet.

I had switched to inov-8 f-light 195's as I felt the grip and tread life of the 101's was poor. Now I'm a bit torn between the 110's and the 195's. The 110 feels like a more substantial shoe than the inov8 which is both good and bad depending on the circumstances.

In summary, I think NB did a great job with the 110.

I'm turning into Imelda Marcus with MT110s. The last is the BEST for the shape of my foot (ymmv). Yes, the center section wears (for me in about 4 miles), so it's pretty silly. And yes, the upper rips easily (solution, duck tape), and yes, fine dirt, sand, etc. enters way easy, but I tell you, I'm in heaven since Ive found a NB outlet store that's selling em now on sale (they're seconds…blemish only) for under $30. I feel like a kid at Christmas, that these shoes are 1) so cheap, and 2) even cheaper on sale. Bingo!

BTW, I plan to do a solo hike——May, 2013——of 24 peaks in the San Bernardino mountains (SoCal) in a pair these shoes only!!! (okay, I'll wear some other clothes as well)

(epic4epic.org)

I have the winter version too, they are amazing, the gaiter is perfect for keeping dust out, perfect for all but the hottest summers.

[IMG]http://postimg.org/image/9kbffsoxb/[/IMG]