 |
| MT1010V2 and MT10V2 |
After a long period of training since last fall, I am happy to finally provide a full review/recap of two trail running shoes from the
New Balance Minimus line!
I was excited to finally get to try out a few choices from the New Balance Minimus collection, as I felt I had tried out many other "big brand" minimalist offerings. I received both the latest
MT1010V2 and
MT10V2 trail shoes last fall and since then have logged more than 300 miles between the two models. By far, the most mileage I've logged in shoes before doing a review.
So, if you've ever wondered about either or both of these as a minimalist trail shoe, continue on for a full review of each! And, as a reward for slogging through my shoe nerd blah blah blah... I'm giving away a pair of MT10V2 Trails thanks to the cool folks at New Balance... so read on!
 |
| MT1010V2 |
First up is the MT1010V2. These are my first foray into New Balance shoes, so I don't have any kind of perspective on a comparison against the original version of the shoe.
First off, just a few of the specs. The 1010V2 is a 4mm drop shoe, with a stack height of roughly 15mm at the heel, down to 11mm at the toe. The overall height is slightly more as there is a 1-2mm non-removable insole as well. Now before I get into more details you might be thinking.. "4mm drop? That's not 0mm drop!" Yes, that is true, and I did have some slight concerns as all my other shoes/sandals are a 0mm drop. However, I learned that (at least for me), I didn't notice anything significant with the slight drop, and have had no issues running in them. However, I 'm not willing to crank it up any more than that!
The 1010V2 weighs in at 8.5 ounces, and carries a pretty aggressive tread. Also, there is a rock plate built into the forefoot area. As far as minimalist shoes go, these would be considered much less minimal, and probably approaching a more traditional trail shoe build. However, they fee light for the construction, and my toes were very happy with the toe box roominess and overall comfort. The stack height precludes any really good proprioception, but I still felt the response on the trail was decent. The interior of the shoe is well constructed, and pretty comfortable with or without socks.
What I really loved best about the 1010V2 was the tremendous traction from the aggressive tread pattern. These became my shoe of choice for all of the snow/cold weather running I did over the winter. I logged close to 250 miles, and almost all of them on snow/ice etc.
The tread pattern on the 1010V2 was amazing for traction, and most especially on downhills. In other shoes I've ended up putting on YakTrax for slippery conditions, but shy of pure ice, the 1010V2 provided excellent traction this winter. Also, they were surprisingly warm and relatively hydrophobic. Part of that warmth (as compared to very minimal shoes) is attributed to the stack height insulating my foot from the frozen ground, but I'll take it! Especially in single digit temps :-)
So... the overall verdict? Frankly, I love these shoes, especially when I'm more concerned about traction, warmth, and a little more protection. They proved out to be an excellent winter shoe for me. Very comfortable, with plenty of room for my feet/toes (I have the standard width). If you are transitioning to minimalist shoes, and are taking the path of easing down (versus jumping straight to barefoot and moving up), then these could be a great choice. The trade off from other minimalist options are lesser flexibility, a slight drop, and less ground feel. Again, as I've said before, it becomes a matter of finding that sweet spot for yourself and your running style and trail conditions etc.
.JPG) |
| MT10V2 |
And now, for something completely different.... the New Balance MT10V2 trail shoe. Yes, I know... it's only different by two digits from the 1010, but these shoes are worlds apart! The 10V2 is much more of what I would call a minimalist shoe, both in construction and in feel. Granted, these also have a 4mm versus 0mm drop, but I've discovered I am ok with that... perhaps some of you can really notice a 4mm difference, but fortunately I don't seem to. That being said, I don't know why they didn't just make both shoes 0 drops... unless they are catering to those who are a bit scared to make the leap? Anyway... sorry... digressing.
Ok... a few specs on the 10V2. These weight in at 6.2 oz, so very light for a trail shoe, and pretty flexible, even with a stack height of 12.5 down to 8.5mm at the toe. Compared to the 1010V2, these shoe really have the barefoot/minimalist feel when you put them on. The ground feel on the trail is really good, and perhaps too good at times as the lack of a rock plate will keep you mindful of the trail conditions.
The tread pattern, while much less aggressive than the 1010V2, provides some fairly decent traction in most standard trail conditions. Part of this comes from the extra flexibility, allowing your foot (and the sole) to wrap a little bit better around contours on the trail. Also, very little of the trail gets stuck or hangs around very long on this tread.
The plus side to this relatively flat tread, is that these perform well when running on the road as well. I didn't like road running in the 1010V2 as the rugged tread didn't make for a smooth ride, but I had no issues with these on the smooth asphalt. For some reason, these became my shoe of choice for hill repeat days on pavement. Part of it was how light they felt, and also they were very comfortable going downhill.
Now, this brings me to the only real issue I had with these shoes, if you could call it an issue. As you can see, the design of the upper includes a band that cuts across the top of the forefoot. I initially got a pair in my size, and in the standard "D" width, but wow, I could really feel that band cutting across my foot and constricting it. It was not comfortable at all, so I returned them and swapped out for the wider ("E") width, and was much much happier. I needed that additional width to take that weird tightness away. Now, I believe my foot is fairly average as far as width goes, so if you have wide feet, these may not be the best choice. Highly recommend trying them on in person first. So, with the wider version, the band was less of an issue, although I could still feel it, it didn't bother me. I can see the idea behind it, as it helped stabilize my foot better on downhills, so I had less cramming of my toes etc.
Aside from having to sort out that issue, the 10V2's have also been a great shoe. I have about 60 miles on them, with about 40 on the trail. If you are looking for a good minimalist trail shoe with a minimal drop, and one that could get you by on the road as well, these may be a good choice. As I noted, these are certainly more in line with a true "minimalist" feeling and performing shoe.
Well, there you have it. If you stuck around this long, you are as much a minimalist shoe nerd as I am!! As always, if I've missed anything, or you have any questions at all about my review experience, let me know! Email me, or leave a comment here or on
Facebook.
Ok... want to win a pair of the MT10V2 Trails? Enter below in the Rafflecopter dowidgie thing.. Contest open to residents of the US only and will run until 10PM MST, Sunday April 20th!
a Rafflecopter giveaway
Now, bear with me as I shift into taper mode for my upcoming 50K... yep, as you can see on the ticker, less than 3 weeks to go! I'm not panicking... not yet at least :-)
Have a great week, and happy trails!
Jeff
barefootinclined@gmail.com
http://barefootinclined.com
.JPG)
