I am a semi-minimalist runner who frequents roads and trails and averages 40-50 miles a week. By "semi-minimalist," I mean I still wear cushioned shoes on runs over 20 miles, and I wear zero-drop or barefoot shoes on anything less than 8 miles. Most of my favorite shoes have a 0-4mm heel-toe drop. This shoe--with the combined last of the Minimus, the super-grippy lugs, the light weight, and the easy price-tag--easily satisfies all of my needs in one package. Right out of the box, I took them on 11 miles of hilly road running, and I have since taken them on about a dozen miles of technical single-track, both wet and dry. The shoes are fast and secure. After a couple of days, I can say comfortably that they are probably my favorite all-purpose running shoe. I look forward to racing with them this upcoming weekend in a trail half-marathon, and I may even use them on some upcoming trail ultras I have in the spring. I definately will be purchasing more pairs of these. Anyone who likes fast, semi-minimalist (or "reduced," or whatever you wish to call it), lightweight shoes for all surfaces, this is your shoe.
Click Here For Most Helpful Customer Reviews >>
I started running last October, but after a month, I injured myself by overuse with bad form in some old running shoes. I took a month off, thinking that all I needed were new shoes. All the signs of expired shoes were there.
I picked up some Ghost 4's and started running again. Everything felt great except that I felt weighed down by all the rubber cushion. By this point I started focusing on forefoot running, so I figured most of my pain was my form change. It was true, but running in the shoes felt a lot more cumbersome. Plus, all the cushion was in the wrong areas for my newly-acquired form (all in the heel). It was strange, considering this was the shoe that was recommended to me.
After a week or two of running low mileage, I felt pain that I can only describe as my foot and leg being pulled apart from each other. I wasn't aware of what it could be at the time, but after some research, the location of pain looked like it could be shin splints. I tried running some trails, and I felt a little better, but still felt weighed down by the shoes. The shoes were exacerbating my situation of form change, even though the shoes felt OK for the most part. In the end, they gave me too much confidence.
I ditched the Ghost 4's (great shoes, but not for my style and foot type) and tried barefoot running and felt immensely better. I then started looking for some trail shoes shortly after.
Skipping over debates of shoes, I finally went with the MT110s. I knew I wanted something minimal, but also a jack of all trades (just in case I want to mix it up).
I got them, laced them up and hit the trails. I went 2.25 miles feeling free and light with plenty room for my feet to feel natural (no socks needed). What an experience! I've never ever felt this good in running shoes! After discovering trails a couple of weeks ago, I knew this was the way to run for me, and the MT110s confirm this. I even ran on the road, and it felt just fine.
I haven't been able to stop smiling since I got these shoes; they've rekindled my spirit and reminded me why running is so much fun.
------------------------------
UPDATE: It's now been several weeks since I've received these shoes, and they're still going strong. I've been doing daily trail runs that feature all different types of terrain, and I have had no problems whatsoever. My legs and feet have never felt better! Best part? No injuries!
Best Deals on New Balance Men's MT110 Running Shoe
I have been a 10-25 mile a week runner for the better of 10 years. I managed a sporting goods store for a hot minute. I got tech'd by all of the brands I carried. I was fed plenty of propaganda by shoe manufacturers about all the "necessary' corrective elements that went into the design and technology of each of their respective shoes. I "pronate". I understand that diagnosis. As well as the others (supernate, neutral gate, etc). I bought the propaganda (mostly because a free pair of shoes came along). Years removed from that, I decided to give the "minimalist" designs a try. I've been through a number of shoes. In my opinion, the New Balance 110 is the gold standard. The fit is better than a slipper. Emidiate motion control and response. Drains quickly. The synthetic upper looks great after long muddy runs. The only thing more true to my natural mechanics would be to run barefoot. I run trails; so that't not an option. I'm sure the next model will be tits. But I'm buying 2 more pairs of these. Just to make sure I've got something I love to run in for the immediate future. Cheers amigos.
Honest reviews on New Balance Men's MT110 Running Shoe
I know, I know: if its supposed to be so "minimalist" then why do you need a rock plate? I like to feel the ground, but I like my feet too. Call me a quasi minimalist or call me a pansy, I'll be happy just as long as I can have my cake and eat it. On with the review....
I bought the New Balance MT110 about three months ago after finally blowing out my beloved Trail Gloves on a 25K. I switched to another shoe from the Trail Gloves because the Trial Gloves offered very little protection on the rocky trails I run.
The ideal shoes to me would be lightweight, minimalist in design, have zero heel to toe drop, have a solid lacing system, they would dry easy, they would allow for ground feel and they have a rock plate to protect my feet. I know, particular, right? The New Balance MT110's are the only shoes I found that fit my needs with one exception: the 4mm heel toe drop. I know 4mm is no amount to fret over, but I can feel the difference when I compare them with the Trail Gloves, which has been the only aspect I dislike about these shoes.
Here are the pros and cons for ya:
Pros:
-light weight
-dry fast
-keep more debris out than Trail Gloves
-solid lacing system
-wide sizes are available for flat-footed people like me
-good traction
-durable materials
-minimalist
-rock plate: I love it--it really works and has saved me miles of aching
-I can still feel the ground quite well
Cons:
-the 4mm heel toe drop
-the tread in the center of the sole wore down after the first 20 mile trail run and is soft enough to get rocks lodged in it on rare occasions. The rest of the tread has held up quite well.
The pros outweigh the cons so I rate the shoes a 4/5. Happy running.
Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for New Balance Men's MT110 Running Shoe
This shoe seems well made, and I love the tread. The tread is why I purchased it in the first place. But I am going back to my beloved MT10's. Here's why:
I live in Michigan and mostly run soft, well-groomed trails, but recently I spent a week in the Sierra Nevadas and Sangre de Christo mtns. The footing was terrible (but the views were great). Soon I realized that the vibram nubs on the sole of the MT10's were inadequate for such harsh terrain, as sharp granite jabbed my feet through the soft foam between the nubs. In fact, two of the little nubs began to tear off. I also almost took a wicked tumble of a nasty cliff (but that was probably my own fault). But my real concern, shoe-wise, were the rocks jabbing the soles of my feet between the nubs. Ouch!
But, this review is actually about the MT110's. . .
So I assumed that minimus shoes had advanced since I started using MT10's back in 2011, I started hunting for something more rugged from NB (note that I grew up near a NB factory in maine; it is my brand, I will leave it at that). The MT 1010 was way more shoe than I wanted, almost like a light hiker. It seemed to defeat the whole concept of a minimal shoe. The MT 110, on the other hand, seemed like a perfect hybrid. It still has a sole that is thin and light, but it has a shank and a continuous hard rubber outer sole (at least on the forefoot). It SEEMED like it would be perfect. I bought a heavily discounted pair and took them for a 5k jog on some easy trails.
But the pain that quickly developed in the ligaments and tendons of my right leg was unbearable! I am no pediatrist, but I think it was the shoes. Back in 2011 when I got the MT10's, I adjusted my form to a fore-foot strike and began using shoes that allowed my feet to pronate naturally. This change cleared up a persistent case of knee pain that had sidelined me for nearly a decade. I had great results with the MT10's, and I started ENJOYING running again. But for me the MT110's just don't work the same way. Here is my theory: I think the shank forces my feet to pronate in a way that tweaks my knee. Using these shoes I found myself back in that dark place where running hurts, and not in an invigorating way. It was the same pain I had experienced years earlier.
Like I said, everything about the MT110 seemed perfect, but I think the principles that make a so-called "barefoot" running shoe effective are just not compatible with supportive shanks inside the soles. Please comment if you have any advise on a shoe that would work (surely somebody does). I want to run more rugged trails with a proper barefoot runner (my fiancee is from the rocky mountains), but I don't want rocks to poke my feet. I am even willing to entertain the idea of a non-NB shoe. . . maybe.
