Comments: I own a lot of running shoes, but these are favorite shoes from door to trail. I bought my original pair (black/orange) last year and have about 250 miles on them so far. I did notice the raised lateral side, so I used an orbital sander to shave down some lugs. Other than that, the lugs are holding up well. Same with the upper. I did notice the other day that some of the outsole is starting to separate from the midsole. I'm sure I can glue it if it gets worse. The fit of these are perfect for me. Snug in the heel and midfoot but a wide forefoot. I bought my 2nd pair about a month ago in white/green.
From: Glen, NJ
Comments: I own a lot of trail shoes, most of which cost way more than these. But, I keep ending up back in these bad boys on race day. Did the two races I'm most proud of in these (My first 50k and my second 50 miler). Highly recommended.
From: Ken, Somerset, NJ
Comments: I started running in this shoe late December 2011, right before the official release date in 2012. My local shop secured a few pairs early and as soon as I started my first run in them I fell in love. After buying a few more pairs and running in them for the better part of 2012, I felt the need to seek out more cushion, since this shoe is pretty stiff. I've gone through the Salmon Sense/Montrail Rogue Fly's/NB MT1010/and recently the Pearl Izumi N1 Trails. I really thought I found my perfect shoe in the N1 trails, but after a recent run in the 110's I've realized that there really is no other shoe that I've tried on the market that can hold my foot as well as these. I don't get any movement when they're laced down. It doesn't feel like I'm wearing a pair of heavy trail shoes, or where my foot can move side to side in the shoe on steep downhills or switchbacks. The 110 feels more like an extension of my body if that makes sense. I do recommend taking it very slow if your new to minimal shoes (4-6mm offset) cause these shoes really fire up the calves and achilles if you're coming from a 10-12mm shoe. I like to train long distance and tend to enjoy the longer races. Here in Tennessee I've put these through thick mud, rock, and occasional creek beds. I've found the harder that I run in them though the quicker I see wear in the exposed eva... but this doesn't effect the performance of the shoe. The old colorways are on clearance now and I will be buying a few more pair. Many reviewers have stated that the shoe feels built up in the lateral forefoot. If it is, I sure can't feel it and it hasn't effected my running at all. It feels very flat to me. Hell I even wear my old used up pairs to work. I've rediscovered the 110 again.
From: Joe, Franklin, TN, USA
Comments: Bought and sent back without running in them. The outside curve from the little toe to the big toe is too great or steep or sharp. it crammed my little toes into the shoe. I did not want to size up further as this would have made it too sloppy in the toe box. Also, walking around the house in them, the lugs in the bottom caused pronation. Replaced them with the Asics Fuji Racers. Those feel great.
From: Steve, Texas
Comments: The first 200 miles on these shoes were great. I used to have IT band issues in my heavier Brooks Adrenaline. These shoes changed that. BUT, in miles 200-400 on these MT110 I have started getting IT band issues again. I wish I could post a
picture here but the insides of the heels are completely worn away and it was interesting to read about others here having the same issues. I'm not one to cut lugs since I don't really know what I'm doing, but given all that I just bought a second pair because NB is having a ridiculous sale right now and I have the North Face 50 Mile race in 9 days. No time to research new shoes, and for $50 I'll go with a second pair.
Overall, great shoes, definitely room for improvement but they're priced that way and I'll take it. Very light, I've worn with and without socks and the only blister I got was because I was too stubborn to take out a little pebble and ran 20 more miles with it under my heel. I'd like to see NB make a similar shoe but make it more rugged underneath.
From: Emile, San Francisco, CA, USA
Comments: Great throw-away shoes. Two runs and they are already in bad shape. Okay the two runs were the Georgia Jewel 35 miler and Cumberland Trail 50K but they ought to hold up better. Cut in the upper, midsole lugs are worn smooth and hard rubber on heel is starting to separate from the midsole. I really do love running in them, just can't afford throw-away shoes.
From: Ben, Tennessee
Comments: I put a lot of miles in these on super rocky, dry terrain. I initially thought that the lugs would wear out on the harsh limestone but they have worn very well. I was also skeptical of the outer material and it does have (only?) a small hole in the side after 500 miles.
These are a great shoes with plenty of room for improvement: 1. Why aren't they level? That was a really dumb mistake by NB. I had sore tibial tendons. 2. Toe box has great width but too low a height. I went up a 1/2 size and still suffered regular blisters on my second and fifth toes. 3. The forefoot sole should be more flexible. 4. I didn't really mind the lack of continuous sole -- the rock plate seems to be thick enough to avoid any issues at the midfoot. However, the narrow width at the midfoot left me with many bruises on the inner arch. This was a strength of the MT10, which had arch protection, so I'm a little surprised they didn't include that feature. 5. If you run on sandy terrain be prepared to stop and shake the sand out of your shoes.
From: Kevin, Carlsbad, NM, USA
Comments: Loved these shoes from the moment I got them. Very light, low, flexible and grippy. The only issue I had, like many others, was with the outside of the sole being seemingly too think relative to teh inside. I noticed that my ITBS started to flare up once I started running more than 10 miles in these. Visually it was imperseptible, but after reading several blogs and reviews about this issues I simply cut off 6 outside lugs right under the arch that says "support" on the top and this issue went away.
Hopefully, NB fixes this in the next iteration - otherwise this shoe is perfect!
From: Sergei, Boston, MA, USA
Comments: I love this shoe. For me to say this is exceptional. I wear a 14AA. Yeah, you read right. I don't even wear socks and have yet to receive a blister. This has been a delightful and much needed change, from the New Balance 990 Series, which I have been running in for years, since they are the only running shoes I have found in my width.
From: Bryan, Palestine, TX (USA)
Comments: I've had these for a while and like them. I had to size up because the outside toe of the shoe angles in too much. The Merrell Trail glove fits my foot perfectly. The foam part of the outsole wore smooth in just a couple of runs, and I tore a 2" gash in the upper without even realizing it. I really like the 4mm drop and cushioned sole, but I'm going to look for something with a more durable upper.
From: Richard, Socorro, NM, USA
Comments: I like these more and more each time i wear them. I have the same issues everyone else has with the outside being thicker than the inside. It feels lik eless over time though. Also I wish it had a full length outsole. the section under your arch has look-like lugs but they wear down super fast and offer no traction. I think with a little more work, maily leveling the shoe and extending the outsole some this will be near perfect
From: Ben, State College, PA, US
Comments: On paper these were exactly what I was looking for: lightweight, low profile, grippy outsole, rock plate. I loved the MT101s and the general consensus seemed to be that the 110s are a superior shoe. Unfortunately the fit is off for me. The toebox is amply wide but unnecessarily pointy at the front, which caused a few trips in the first few runs. Worst of all, however, is the slight inward tilt that seems to force pronation. On roads and smooth surfaces it feels pronounced, and I've been experiencing pain in my ankles. I can't imagine why they would design the forefoot this way. I also miss the foam heal cup from the 101s. Traction is improved with the 110s though, and they perform passably on rugged trails after some break in time.
From: Jake, Golden, CO
Comments: It's a good shoe however it is almost too minimal for it's own good. I had delamanation issues with this shoes predecessor the MT101 and couldn't use them anymore because it was so excessive. With the MT110 I'm yet to have delam problems however the rubbery/plastic cover has come apart in a few places and even the sole is starting to come apart as well. Unfortunately these shoes aren't made to last. In terms of the sole thickness and slight heel to toe drop (4mm) they are good and the traction was great for the kind of terrain I find here in the Wasatch Mountains. However I can't help but ignore the shoe coming apart and not being rugged enough. I won't buy a New Balance Minimus trail shoe until I see one that is not only mimimal but also rugged.
From: Francesco, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Comments: I have run the 110s for short mixed surface trail runs under 1hr at moderate paces, up to 3hrs on non/minimal mud single track dirt mixed with little rock/root/gravel and the spectacularly muddy tough North Face DC trail Marathon. They performed very well in all occasions. The only thing that got to me was I should have worn gators on the north face run. An honestly, I didn't train for that magnitude of mud. They grip just fine and lose the water well but leave the dirt and silt behind. I didn't bother me too much b/c I wore thin socks. I think this shoe is a real winner for the way they perform and at this price point.
From: Michael, Woodbine, MD, USA
Comments: Fantastic shoe for anyone with "normal" toes (not Morton's toe). This shoe's last fits my foot like a glove, no need to size up whatsoever. Definitely no socks needed in these guys. Some people have commented about getting blisters from them but my guess is that they're getting blisters from trail dirt and mud collecting in the shoe because they're feet are not conditioned. If your feet are as smooth as a baby's bottom you might need to take your time getting used to sockless running. These shoes endure about 300 to 400 hard miles on them and then the toes blow out. The toes can sometimes blow out sooner if you snag a root the wrong way. Since these shoes can be had for $63 they are a tremendous value even if they don't last 500 miles. I agree about cutting off the outer lugs of the shoe (in the area where Anton had them add extra rubber) the shoe is misshaped and it causes excessive pronation with those lugs there. I also cut the rubber and cushioning back to be even with the shoe, this makes the shoe feel really nice!
From: Ken, SLC, Utah, USA
Comments: Absolutely love these, I will buy many pairs, only flaw so far is I wish they had a gusseted tongue. I thought I would hate the synthetic upper but I love it can‚t say enough good things about this shoe. Be careful though, the lower profile and smaller amount of drop will cook your calves at first. Also for sizing I usually don‚t mind my toes to be near the end of my shoes but when I bought these I was urged to go up a whole size I'm so glad I did it‚s like I‚m bare foot.
From: Trent, Golden, CO, USA
Comments: I just wore these for my first 50K two days ago. I had to cut off the outsole lugs on the outer half of the forefoot due to the lateral build up and major blister issues along the inner edge of my forefoot and big toe during training runs. After the modification, they felt level and comfortable. They're very pointy, so the size that fits your foot best might have you tripping on rocks and roots if you're not careful. The not-really foot shaped footbed has weird seams that can rub the foot wrong just forward of the lateral heel, as well as a hidden chunk from the upper's heel cup that poked under this area in the left shoe. Some overnight compression with a c-clamp seemed to fix that, but I still can't go sockless in these. Besides, they let so much dirt and tiny debris in that socks and gaiters are mandatory. They're a work in progress but they did get the job done.
From: Gil, Derry, NH, USA
Comments: This is an all around great shoe. I put in a little over 100 miles a week and these shoes have just enough to them to get me through all types of runs. If you are new to a lightweight trainer i would recommend easing into them. Start off by using them on slow easy doubles and slowly bring them into your regular training. I can get about 300-400 miles out of these shoes (regular trainers I can get about 500 miles). Feel wise here have to be the best shoe i have had on my feet. No need for socks anymore either. I was never big into sock but other trainers would make me blister; I have not had this problem with these shoes. I recommend this shoes if you are seeking something lightweight trainer with a low heel-to-toe drop allowing for an effortless forefoot strike. Good for roads but great for trails.
From: Anonymous, USA
Comments: Absolutely the best shoes I have ever worn in my life! they fit like a glove and they are so comfortable for trail running. minimalist shoes forces you to become a better runner; you don't want to strike on your heel with this shoes. It will hurt your calf at the beginning if you haven't run on minimalist shoes before. But after you get used to it, you will love to run on trails and enjoy the awesome feel of the ground and nature.
From: Ivan, Blacksburg, VA, USA
Comments: I love the room for my toes with this shoe. I haven't gotten any toe blisters yet. The one thing I do have trouble with is debris. I run on dirt roads and trails and I get so much grit in these shoes. With thin socks, it's really hard to ignore. Any ideas?
From: Susan, Thetford, VT, USA
Comments: absolutely perfect shoe for trails! excellent traction, sheds mud like crazy, and super light! This is the first trail shoe review i have ever written. new balance has definitely figured it out. thanks!
From: Anonymous, the great PNW!
Comments: Best shoes I have found for road and trail. Also no problem with Morton's toe issues. Just ran the Land Between the Lakes 50 miler. Had other shoes in drop bag (just in case) never needed to consider a change. The rock plate is nice to have even when running along roads.
From: David, Georgtown, KY, USA
Comments: I was pumped for this shoe, but it still managed to exceed my expectations. I have the first gen. Minimus Trail, which I like, but it isn't enough shoe for the technical, even jagged trails I run. The 110 doesn't have too much more bulk, but the step up in protection is vast. I have bombed ridiculously rocky trails in these, and I have yet to feel any pain on the bottoms of my feet. Part of that is the rock plate, but I think it also encourages you to be more conscious of your footing, which in itself decreases impact. I love the last on this shoe too. The back half of the foot is quite narrow, while the front is wide...it's shaped just like--my foot! To me, this is the only design a shoe should have. It hugs most of the foot while providing plenty of room for toes to splay, encouraging a forefoot strike.Running well is effortless in this shoe. The faster I go the more my form improves. My foot is well-protected, yet it gets good feedback. It has phenomenal traction: the many
small lugs are great on soft surfaces, while the sole sticks to big rocks beautifully. The 4mm drop seems to be the sweet spot for me. Best shoe I have ever worn! I didn't think it would be enough shoe, but I think I'm going to wear these in my first ultra this May.
Comments: Feeling pretty bummed that NB replaced the MT101, I thought I would try its replacement. I received them yesterday and couldn't wait to hit the trail. I ran on everything from steep gravel fire road to technical single track. I loved the traction and grip and to my surprise, I felt very sure-footed on the downhills too. For my running style, these are the closest thing to a custom shoe for me. With the 4mm drop, the inner mesh layer, and the support on the upper at my little toe (I blow out all my shoes here), the shoe has solved all my issues. I have found my go to shoe!
From: Buddy, Chino Hills, CA, USA
Comments: Honestly, I think this is the first shoe I've tried out and have HATED. I'm now sending back my second pair, both the wide and normal width feels like a rock is pushing into the outer part of your forefoot every time you land. Reminds me a bit of the MR10 and of course that is just sitting on my self getting no miles. I'm trying to find a good minimal replacement for the MT101, maybe the Merrell Mix Master will work for me. But I cannot stand the MT110, worst shoes ever.
From: Alex, Augusta, GA, USA
Comments: 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.
From: Chas, Cornelius, NC, USA
Comments: Shoes run a little longer than the 101's. I had to go up to 9.5 in the 101's, size 9 is perfect in the 110's for me. The lateral side of the arch is built up and feels as though it's turning my foot inward on flat surfaces, I don't notice this on the trail. The grip is 100% better on dry loose ground, I haven't tested wet conditions yet. I will say these are the worst shoes I have worn in deep sand... The mesh toe collects the sand and makes it very uncomfortable, I had to stop and empty my shoes several times on my last run that included some deep sand.
From: Justin, Wash, UT, USA
Comments: The finest trail shoe in existence. This shoe is not so much an evolution of the MT 101 as an entirely new beast that evolved in its development to a state of near perfection. Starting at the bottom, the outsole is fantastically grippy and sticky. It works well even on the local smooth topped limestone rocks that litter our trails. Yes, it will hold a bit too much mud, but so do nearly all others. Gravel? Got that. Sticks and stones and slidey scree? Got that covered. Midsole: It's very similar to the NB Minimus road in terms of feel. Flat, firm, and nice and wide in the forefoot. Upper? The dual layer syn/mesh upper is pleasingly soft to the sockless foot, and is remarkable in its being seamless. It secures your foot exceedingly well due to the lack of give and play as you skitter about on steep descents. Krupicka indicates that it is highly durable as well. Some have indicated that they feel a slight rise on the outer portion of the forefoot, but I believe this may be intended as it helps the foot grip the ground on trails. It becomes slightly noticeable on pavement, but disappears in dirt. Bravo New Balance, Krupicka, and Skaggs, bravo.
From: Joel, Austin, TX, USA
Comments: Great shoe. New Balance fixed the pinky toe rubbing problem and the tongue dropping issue. The 4mm drop is going to take a little getting use to compared to the 10 mm of the 101. No issues as far as traction in the mud (yes there is mud in San Diego). Very happy with these at this time. My only issue is I am in between a 11.5 and 12 so no size is perfect, but the 12 is good enough.
From: Steve, San Diego, CA, USA