New Balance 889 Multisport Review

So, looking at the NB web site, it looks like the brown ones are the men's model and the blue ones are the women's model. The blue ones in the NB pictures and in your article look like the ventilation holes in the front portion of the upper are larger. Are there other differences you noticed?

> How well do they dry after getting wet? Does it take forever?
Not the fastest for drying, but they do dry after a while.
And that never worried us anyhow.

I had better add that there is a long way between 'a bit damp' and 'dry'. They don't hold buckets of water. It'sd thge tail of the drying cycle that takes time.

Cheers

> bruising potential on my favorite dried creek/sharp rock bed.
I would be pretty sure that the Vibram soles on these would NOT suffer that problem. The Vibram technology does not use the New Balance RockStop technology, but it does not need to imho.

Cheers

I still dunno about these NB hiking shoes. They seem a bit lighter in the sole than I prefer for protection from rocks. But then, I haven't seen them yet so maybe I'm wrong.

My Merrill Moab Ventilators (also W/ Vibram soles) seem just about right for sole protection. The weight is also pretty low and the durability is good.

BUT, I do like the NB leather toe. My Moabs have fabric mesh in that vulnerable area and I've had to coat a 3/4" wide area with Shoe Goo to reinforce it. I'd bet the NB is a very durable shoe.

From wikipedia:

Vibram S.p.A. is an Italian company based in Albizzate that both manufactures and licenses the production of Vibram-branded rubber outsoles for footwear. The company is named after its founder, Vitale Bramani.[1]

Bramani is credited with inventing the first rubber lug soles for shoes. These soles were first used on mountaineering boots, replacing leather soles fitted with hobnails or steel cleats, commonly used up until then.

> those shoes are foisting extra 12mm effort (angle) onto the heels (etc).
We did not notice the 'drop'; I would not call them 'high heel shoes' at all.

Anyhow, the web site says they have a 10 mm drop, not a 12 mm one.

Me, I think that the flat heel business may have been slightly exaggerated recently: it certainly is no where near as bad as the gimmicks. Making the change from flipflops/thongs I wear most of the time (which are pretty flat) to these shoes does not cause any sensation of 'high heels', so we didn't worry about that.

YMMV

Cheers

> I ordered these in 4E width and returned them because I noticed they were not as wide
> as other "all mesh" NB trail runners. I haven't measured them but they just didn't
> feel wide enough.
Hum … odd. I did not notice anything like that myself.

It may be that you had been used to a different last with a bigger volume at the front. They exist, and this certainly can happen. Sigh – everyone's feet are different. Hey – my left foot is different from my right foot!

Cheers

Thanks, Roger. You know, the human race has no doubt prospered over the course of shoes having heels, high, or otherwise (i.e., heels have not stood in the way of progress). But, fashion/beauty debate aside, I can't think of a single reason that elevated heels on shoes are of any use, athletic or otherwise. If the history were reversed, and elevated heels were the newly introduced craze, the same sense of curiosity would certainly arise.

I don't run barefoot, except from time to time in grass or on the beach, but I do run some in flat huaraches that I make (talk about cheap footwear!). I prefer shoes for my mountain running and would love to find some more serious trail shoes sans heel, since it's taken me a couple of years to strengthen my feet/ankles to not be so heavy on my heels (an obvious byproduct of elevated heels). BTW, I used the phrase "high heels" with some humor, since the phrase is so relegated to women's fashion footwear.

Anyway, thanks again for the review.

The further one's heel is from the ground, the easier it is to turn the ankle, which hurts a lot. Hiking boots try to compensate with ankle support, but that introduces other problems, as we know.

Roger points out the usefulness of heel height for dominance. Cowboy boots are especially good in this regard with their high heels and their pointed toes, which are suited to kicking social inferiors. However, the backcountry is supposed to be egalitarian, and so the cowboy boots are best left behind.

Thanks for an interesting review. I think it would be interesting for you to review this shoe:

http://adventure.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/gear/gear-of-the-year-spring-summer-2013/#/hoka-one-one-shoe_65642_600x450.jpg

I know, they look a little different from the flat shoes that are in style now, but National Geographic seems to like them!

Do these shoes have gusseted tongues to reduce dirt/sand entry?

"Well, I was rather pleased to see at the end of the day that neither my feet nor Sue's feet were pruny. Despite the reinforcing all around the shoes, not to mention the very hot weather in the Australian summer, they must have breathed fairly well."

I just wore a pair of these yesterday. Got up to 80 degrees.

There is no mesh and these shoes do not breath. Not like a Innov-8 Terroc 330 for example. Even the nylon outer fabric is lined inside. Hot.

That Vibram sole has zero traction (when new at least) on tile floors, be careful.

These will take too long to dry out after getting wet for me to consider them for trail use. These will be for work, in town.

Got mine for less than $70 shipped. Not the worst money I've spent on shoes. That nod goes to Brooks.

Just ordered something else for trail use.