Minimalist shoes are designed to allow the foot to function as naturally (and as close to barefoot) as possible, while offering the protection dictated by environmental conditions. In warm weather there are few environmental conditions from which we need protection and hence thin-soled, flexible shoes work fine. In colder weather however, there are a few additional requirements. The criteria used to select the shoes for this review are as follows:
- The heel lift (the difference in height between the heel and the forefoot), also referred to as differential, must be be very low. Differential is typically measured in mm. A differential of 0mm means the shoe is essentially flat - the heel and forefoot are at the same level. A number greater than 0mm indicates the number of mm that the heel is higher than the forefoot. 0mm is preferred, but small differentials can be tolerable as well.
- There should be no arch support. A minimalist shoe is designed so that the strength and structure of the foot provides all of the support required. Some shoes have arch support built-in to the insoles but this can be overlooked if the insoles are easily removed. Shoes with arch support built-in to the structure of the shoe are not considered minimalist. Some shoes may have a raised area under the arch that naturally flexes with the foot and this is ok as long as it isn't designed to provide support for the arch.
- In warm conditions it is desirable for footwear to have very little cushioning to achieve the best ground feel. In colder weather, having foam under-foot is desirable - not for cushioning, but for insulation.
- For warm conditions, a minimalist sole should be thin and flexible so as to provide good sensory feedback. For conditions where snow and ice is involved (especially when used as the base for a winter footwear system), having a stiffer sole is desirable. In winter conditions, stiffness helps to gain better traction and also enables the use of crampons and snowshoes.
- The last (shape) of the shoe should allow the foot to be as unrestricted as possible. This means that the shoe (especially the toebox) should be wide enough and flexible enough to allow the foot and toes to expand under impact. This is essential for the body's natural stability and cushioning mechanisms to work properly. It is also very important for keeping feet warm. On the flipside, it is also important that the fit not be too lose or sloppy such that it hinders stability.
Since the above selection criteria could easily apply to a wide range of footwear not appropriate for backpacking, a few more were added to ensure that what we test would be more "in the ballpark" of what we are looking for: The shoes should be designed for the purpose of athletic/active use. The uppers should absorb little water, be breathable, and dry quickly. The soles should be substantial and grippy enough to handle a variety of rugged terrain, both wet and dry.
ARTICLE OUTLINE
- Selection Criteria
- The Shoes
- New Balance MT101
- Inov-8 X-Talon 190
- Inov-8 Oroc 280
- GoLite Amp Lite
- GoLite Timber Lite
- Brooks Mach 12 Spikeless
- La Sportiva Crosslite
- Walsh PB Elite Trainer, PB Elite Racer, PB Ultra
- Summary
- Conclusion
# WORDS: 5030
# PHOTOS: 10
Member Exclusive
A Premium or Unlimited Membership* is required to view the rest of this article.
* A Basic Membership is required to view Member Q&A events
Discussion
Become a member to post in the forums.
@Luke
I am with you with fat/wide toes. I have found that with the narrow toeboxes, by then end of the day my toes are actually quite sore. This probably also has a lot to do with the fact that I spend a lot of time on my forefeet as I get much better stability that way.
Although they weren't available at the time when I wrote this article, you may want to try the New Balance Minimus Trail shoes, they have a nice wide toebox a pretty aggressive sole (although nothing like an X-Talon), and just a little bit of cushioning.
@Henk,
Since you already are a sandal user, maybe you could continue in the vein, but with trail sandals instead? You could experiment with Huaraches (Luna makes some out of varying thicknesses and cushioning), and you may also want to try out the Teva Zilch as well.
I would just start out with day hikes and maybe an overnight to get a sense for how quickly you body can make the transition. Everyone is different, the important thing is to figure out how fast/slow your body will respond and work within those boundaries.
The La Sportiva identification error has been corrected and noted in the text.
its hard to pinpoint what is considered "fall/spring" weather and appropriate footwear in a world with such varying weather. while minnesota is just defrosting in march, arizona can be 90 degrees in some areas.
that being said, i do think sandals should have been included in your study – and i can tell you something i learned about sandals like LUNA brand.. the toe strap is miserably placed and you'll quickly notice why on downhill hikes.. there is an answer to this, either make home-made sandals without the toe strap, (which the luna brand does not offer) or try these: http://www.unshoesminimalfootwear.com/pahtempe.html
i'd like to hear what others think on the Unshoes/strapless model. they look 'doable'.
Sandals were included in the study, they were in the Summer article.
"@Paul,
I would love to try a pair of Lunas some day, but they weren't appropriate in my mind for this article (i.e. Fall/Spring)".
sorry, i should have specified "luna" (or similar) sandals. my bad.
Hi Damien,
Sorry for not coming back to you earlier.
>> Since you already are a sandal user, maybe you could continue in the vein, but with trail sandals instead? You could experiment with Huaraches (Luna makes some out of varying thicknesses and cushioning) and you may also want to try out the Teva Zilch as well. <<
Since I really like my Columbia sandals (except for the debris coming in), I had decided to either have a more open sandal (where the debris could escape from as fast as it comes in), in which case something like the Teva Zilch could be appropriate or, as I said before, have something like the Tech Amphibians (which would completely avoid any debris coming in), but these wouldn't be minimalst.
As a matter of fact, I’ve been working on some home-made (open) sandals. I call these my TFD-sandals (TheFlyingDutchman). When I first started (a few month’ ago) I wanted these to be really sturdy (bullet-proof) and I also wanted to the sole to be thick (and rigid) enough so that me feet wouldn’t feel anything protruding from the ground. That’s why I decided to make the sandals out of heavy genuine leather (upper sole and straps) and I wanted to use a car tire to make a rubber outer sole (the one in contact with the ground). I would be using acetal side release buckles to secure the straps. This is what I had made so far (stopped when I read your first article about minimalist shoes):
My TFD sandals (not finished yet):
For “qualifying” my TFD sandals (MYOG) as a minimalist shoe, I would think it has many things in favor: 0mm heel lift, no arch support at all, no toe-box (therefore unrestricted spread/splay), no cushioning but…… even though there is no cushioning, as you can see, the outer sole (last picture) is quite thick (and it’s VERY rigid too), so…… no ground feel AT ALL. This, I think, would make my sandals NOT appropriate as a minimalist sandal. Because of this sole these sandalas are also quite heavy.
OK. To the point: To make my “creature” into a minimalist sandal, I’ve been thinking of forgetting about my “car tire”-sole and buy a ready-made (maybe Vibram) sole. This one should, of course, be very thin and very flexible, so this is my question: Which sole would you recommend?
Just one more clarification: As you’ve seen in my previous interventions, my goal is long-distance, multi-day (non supported & no-resupply) hikes (25-30 miles/day for 1-2 weeks) with an initial load of 25-30lbs (including ALL the consumables for the whole trip). Do I go for the thin, flexible sole or might I be better off with the (better?) protection of my “car-tire”-sole?
Sorry for being a nuisance, but I don’t know how to proceed. Many thanks in advance.
Henk, that is a very cool project you are working on. I think that a sole you would be very interested in trying is the new one made by Invisible Shoes. They just released a special purpose-built rubber sandal sole for their huarache kits, they are available in 4mm (Connect kit) and 6mm (Contact kit) thicknesses. I think these would be an idea candidate. You can buy them here: http://www.invisibleshoe.com/store/
You might also be interested in this thread on my Toe Salad site where one of the forum members is considering using that sole for her custom sandal project. That thread can be found here: http://www.toesalad.com/node/1079
Keep me in the loop on your project, I would love to see where this goes.
One of the misconceptions I see in the minimalist footwear world at the moment is when people think the technology (or lack thereof) is, inherently, the answer. It's not.
It's a combination of YOU, and your style of walking/hiking/running AND the technology.
For example, some people LOVE wearing our 4mm Connects when they hike, because the sensation is just like being barefoot… if they covered your trail in 4mm of flexible, comfortable rubber (4mm is not a lot, mind you, but it takes the edge off).
Others like the 6mm Contact because they have slightly less ground-feel.
And other people want a big, thick, inflexible sole, because feeling the ground is the LAST thing they want when they're on a trail (a sentiment echoed by a few ultra-trail runners I know).
The opportunity that minimalist/barefoot products provide is to use the feelings/sensations you have (that is, pain), to help you learn to change your gait to one that doesn't cause pain… and in doing so, move in a more what might be a more efficient, healthier manner.
Plus, feeling the world is a lot of fun for some of us. ;-)
So, sadly, there's no way to say "Oh, you want to walk the across the country in a week with a 200-lb pack balanced on your head? Here's the shoe for that!" The answer depends on your STYLE and preferences rather than your goal.
I hope that's helpful in some way.
Hi Damien,
After a few e-mails between Steven (Invisible Shoes) and me, I decided to go for the Contact Soles DIY Kit. This gives me the opportunity to start making the Huaraches and use these as they are. I'll take my time to, little by little, transition into the minimalist style.
If it won't work out because I don't like to "feel the world" or the total load on my feet gets too much (220 -myself- + 30 -initial packweight-), especially for the type of hikes I do, I can always take the Huaraches apart and use the sole to glue this to my leather inner soles.
I'll tackle the matter with a positive attitude and I'm convinced it'll work out.
Shoe reviews at Natural Running Center
http://naturalrunningcenter.com/naturalrunningcenter-shoereviews/
Yes, and on my website as well: http://www.toesalad.com
Study your naked feet for a few minutes when you need a good laugh. I don't think anyone ever texts pictures of their feet to their sweethearts.
Okay, George… I couldn't resist
@Ken, about the Chuck Taylors.
Those kind of shoes work fine. My absolute favorite shoes to hike in are the regular canvas van classics. I have been wearing them for years and have probably worn out close to a dozen of them. They are everything I need in a shoe, just stupid simple. Chucks work very well too, the low rise ones are very similar in cocept. Not the most durable but they break in very easily. I can't say I have done any long expedition trips with them, but I have put in some long days, a few days a trip at most, and I had no complaints. I wear them sockless.
I know there are probably "better" light shoes out there, but I just can't deviate from classic vans or converse.
I have been desperately looking for a shoe just like classic vans, but possibly in leather for more durabilty and water resistance. I end up with actual holes in the canvas, only ditching them when the insoles wear out.
Anyways, if we are talking about minimal shoes, less tech is not a bad thing. I wouldn't think twice about attempting some extended treks with them. I am actually going to try out the converse "coast" sneaker, an even more minimal version of converse. Hopefully these don't fall apart on me though… Another option are the old school pro keds. Similar to converse, probably much better quality.
Become a member to post in the forums.