I've tried this on in the New Balance store, but haven't worn it outside.
The fit of the last (foot shape) is identical to the MT20, which I find a tad tighter in the toes than the MT10 due to a slightly more pointed last. The upper has a similar amount of volume in the toes as the MT20 but uses an even stiffer mesh that has less give than the mesh of the MT20. This no doubt helps to keep out dust/sand and protect from puddles, but I found it tends to fold and bunch up a little around the flex point for me but it will probably soften with use. The tongue is not gusseted and I found it easily twisted and folded when putting the foot in. I didn't like this part very much, and don't understand why a trail shoe wouldn't have a gusseted tongue.
Length is true to size barefoot or with a thin sock. However, I found the toe-room a bit lacking compared to the mesh covered MT10 due to the stiffer upper and the slightly more pointed toe, and even a wide (2EE) in my measured size (10.5) allowed my 4th and 5th toes to rub the end of the shoe. In the end I needed to go up a half size to the 11D in the MO80 to accomodate my wide toe splay and might need and 11 EE even though the shoe was a tad long for me in that length. Not ideal, and I'm a bit disappointed that New Balance used a narrower toe on this model.
The MO80 has good forefoot flex but is definitely much stiffer then the MT10/20 (particularly in the mid-foot and heel), though not as stiff as the MT110. The midsole is a beefed up MT10/20 with amazing toothy tread. It is a bit less cushioned than the MT110, especially in the forefoot. The vibram outsole is soft and will probably wear fast on rock and asphalt but is great for trails. The lugs will probably make it uncomfortable on paved roads anyway.
Lastly there is a pronounced arch support in these compared to the MT10/20. That might be a good or bad thing depending on your needs. True minimalists will probably find it far too much, while bad over-pronators like myself transitioning to minimalist running will appreciate the support. I couldn't keep the MT110s due to lack of any arch support and the raised lateral edge increasing my over-pronation.
Overall a good shoe, but I wish it had a little more midsole in the forefoot and a more rounded toe like the MT10. The level of midsole support is a bit light for people transitioning or logging a lot of hard miles on technical terrain, and the stiffer heel/midfoot and arch support might encourage a heel strike in those still learning proper barefoot form. I'd give it 3.5 out of 5 stars.
Click Here For Most Helpful Customer Reviews >>
I like this shoe and the fit. It's adequately tight through the arch, but very roomy in the toe box, and the heel cup has a good cradling effect. I actually have to remind myself not to tighten the first couple of eyelets worth of laces too tightly because it will bunch up the material at the toe box. Those I keep loosely in place, then I snug the upper laces a little more for a good fit. The deep double eyelets at the very top give you alternatives for lacing styles, which I like, allowing you to tighten in the rear foot and ankles, without over-tightening the top of the foot.
The length is shorter than expected. I attribute this to two possibilities: a) my feet are getting bigger, or b) it's a characteristic of New Balance's minimalist shoes. I say that because I have run almost exclusively in New Balance shoes my whole adult life. I have long narrow feet, and for a long time it was the only one that fit, due to widths. I'm 40 now and I run with a more mid-sole, fore-foot strike than heel-toe. I've heard that both with age and/or with a natural stride that your feet will stretch out. I still have a high arch, but my feet fit better in normal widths and in some shoes I need a larger size. The conundrum of course is few people make 1/2 sizes above 13, so I have to bump to 14. That was the case with this and previous minimalist series New Balance shoes. So, either they tend to run a little short, or minimalist runners' feet get longer with age.
As minimal shoes go, this one is the lower end, all-around performer. Good for hiking, walking, running and multi-sport or functional fitness type conditioning. I'll probably pick up a separate running shoe for workouts that are more purely running-centric, and for track workouts, etc. This shoe will seem a little stiff if you've run in other minimalist series New Balance shoes, but I really like the stiffness and more robust sole for other activities, especially hiking. I do a fair amount of backpacking and I've been searching for a lightweight, yet sturdy hiker. This could be the one, especially for summer with the breathable mesh and light upper.
Construction seems very solid. I complaint of past minimus series trail shoes for New Balance was that the rubber toe guard would become unglued quickly. This one seems more solid, but only time will tell. One gripe I do have is country of origin for manufacturing: New Balance has long been one of the last bastions of American shoe making, especially in traditional locations like New England. Not so for this model, made in Indonesia.
Best Deals on New Balance Men's MO80 Minimus Multi-Sport Shoe
These seem to be designed with a curve in them for arch support and that curve is what would have definitely caused blisters had I kept these shoes.
Honest reviews on New Balance Men's MO80 Minimus Multi-Sport Shoe
I've worn these 3 times and the sole on the toe is already coming un-glued. And I'm talking I wore them to the office, NOT to RUN in... Un-acceptable for a high priced supposedly top of the line shoe. And the left and rights don't even match. The way the sole comes up on the front off center, it's a different angle on the left than on the right. Don't know what NB was thinking, but these are WAY cheap-o shoes. The look good in the box, just don't wear them.
Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for New Balance Men's MO80 Minimus Multi-Sport Shoe
the uppers are put together wonky. The front has diagonal wrinkles across it and the lace fittings are crooked. They feel wrong.
