Comments: I've had this pair for 9 months now, and while I really like the fit and feel, I won't be ordering them again. The uppers are falling apart in many places, both in flex areas and on the sides. I expect the uppers of any shoe to serviceable for much longer. They've seen normal use, what they seem designed for, namely a mix of pavement, dirt, and trail, but far less mileage than I usually put on a pair of running shoes. I like them, but their lifespan is too short. If there's a remodel with a different fabric for the upper, I'll try those.
From: J, OR&CO, USA. July 16th 2014
Comments: There don't seem to be many reviews of the 1690 around so I bought these shoes largely on spec and haven't been disappointed. They feel more suited to a light trail than to the pavement - I've still run a few roads but my other shoes seem more suited to that surface. It may have something to do with the pattern on the outer sole. The 1690s are listed as having a 4mm heel to toe drop but they feel less than that compared to my Kinvaras and Pure Flows which are both meant to have that same drop. They're also a bit firmer than those other two shoes without being minimalist (as in hardly any cushion). The other point to make is about width. I bought them in the standard fitting and haven't had a problem. On the other hand, I tried the NB Minimus 1010s and they were way too narrow and pinched my small toes like mad. No such problem with the 1690s and I noticed that the Shoefitter prediction was very accurate. The only change I've made was to take the plastic heel cups out because they aggravate my achilles insertion point. This is something that I do on all my running shoes and so it's no reflection on the 1690. In fact, by taking a razor to the bottom of the heel (inside the shoe) it's possible to cut the material at the insole level and remove the cups without changing the look of the shoe.
From: Greg, Sydney, Australia