New Balance MT1010 Minimus Amp Review - UPDATED 10/06/12, 11/13/12

So, I decided to go with the MT1010's, untested, for pacing Chris for the last 40 miles of the Leadville Trail 100 (read my pacer report)- and it turned out to be the right choice.  Here's why...

You probably already know by now that this shoe is a 'minimalist' shoe with a 4mm heel to toe 'drop'. It is a very durable and rugged shoe, designed for trail running in the most technical of terrains, and over long, ultra, distances. With that being said, I'm going to keep this review simple, like myself, so that you don't need to be a shoe expert to understand it (I hope).

As soon as the 1010's arrived on my doorstep on Friday night (I pre-ordered them from runningwarehouse.com) I laced 'em up. I wanted to get maximum time in them before Saturday night to help me make the best choice for shoe selection for Leadville (vs. the MT110's). I wore them around the house all Friday night, out and about doing errands on Saturday, and during my 2.5 hour drive to the Twin Lakes Aid Station - but no runs.

The first things I noticed were the weight, the tread, the big toebox, and the durability/quality of the upper (vs. the MT110) - and I liked what I was seeing and feeling.

Considering the cushioning, and the overall quality of the shoe, they are very light.  They look like they should weigh much more. Official stats tell me that they weigh 7.5oz, even with the extra cushion, vs. the MT110's. So, they are lighter than the MT110's (7.75oz), yet provide greater comfort and protection.

The tread on these shoes are amazing. The toe half of the outsole have directional tread that just dig into the terrain, and grip like crazy, for climbing. The heel half, just the opposite - directional tread for digging into the downhills so you don't slip and fall on your butt. I found that they offered tremendous traction in all the different terrain that Leadville offered up.

MT1010 directional tread

The toebox is big. One thing I felt about the MT110's was that the toebox could have been a bit bigger. When my feet inevitably swelled on long runs, the toebox got tight and my toes would hit the ends (causing me to lose a toenail in one instance). After 40 uninterrupted miles, and 12 plus hours in the 1010's, they are as comfortable, and fit just as well, as when I first put them on. No risk of losing a toenail in these. That also indicates that my foot is pretty locked-in, without much foot movement in the shoe - even on the downhills where your toes tend to jam into the ends. Not in these.

More than a couple of times at Leadville I kicked or tripped on rocks, roots, and other random things. One 'something' I tripped on at about the 30 mile mark practically ripped the shoe right off my foot. Had I been wearing the 110's, and knowing the durability of the uppers on those, I have little doubt my shoe would have been destroyed. The 1010's - not a mark on them, other than where the dust was rubbed off. I love the tough synthetic uppers on these.

MT110's - not very durable uppers. Lots of patch-work stitching.

Something definitely not to be overlooked in this shoe, is the Rock Plate in the outsole - with the extra cushion and the very flexible rock plate in the sole, I don't remember stepping on anything, over the 40 miles of rough terrain that Leadville offered up, that made me say 'OOOWWW!'  Definitely superior sole protection.

Blisters, hot-spots, rubbed raw, foot troubles? Not a one. At no point in time, over 40 miles and 12 plus hours of Leadville, did I have even one small concern about my feet. Were my feet feeling it? Well, sure. That amount of time on your feet, over that kind of terrain, and you're gonna feel it - no matter what shoes you are wearing. Was I 100% sure that the shoes would come out unscathed during the whole experience? I did have my doubts about that. Were those doubts justified in the end? Nope.

Uppers - a little dusty after one 40 mile, 12+ hour, run in Leadville, CO. 

Outsoles - after one 40 mile, 12+ hour, run in Leadville, CO.

Another thing I like about these shoes is that the tongue is attached to the shoe last (body) all the way up along the lace holes, which prevented very much junk getting into the shoe. I had a little bit of sand in there by the end, but nothing more than that.

And one last thing to note - I read in some pre-release reviews that you would have to tighten and cinch the laces so much with these shoes that the toebox would deform and buckle - I did not have this problem on the D width shoe. If it was the 2E version, then I could totally see having that problem.

I really do a lot of comparison of the MT1010's to the MT110's - because they are my favorite shoe - or should I say 'were' my favorite. After Leadville, the MT1010 is my new shoe-of-choice.

UPDATE: 10/06/12

On 09/24/12 I noticed something with my MT1010's, post-run. After 140 miles in them, and being only a little over 5 weeks old, the uppers are showing signs of wear. It's not severe, but it is a concern.

MT1010's - 3 wear points - same on the other shoe.

The two upper highlighted spots seem to be 'pucker points' on the shoe. You know, a place where the fabric bends and flexes a lot. The seemingly stronger, honeycomb-like, material seems to be intact still though, and might be helping to reinforce and hold things together. Another thing I've noticed is that now that my feet and toes have made their impression in the liner/in-sole, the small ridge that has formed along my toes, has started to irritate the very ends of my toes. The ridge is in both shoes, but for me, irritates the right foot index and middle toes only. Any long runs and I'll have to be taping the ends of my toes or their could be problems. My upcoming race on 09/30 has 12 water crossings in total and so we'll see how things go with that. The water will definitely throw a new variable in there. I almost wish now that I had tested the MT1010's without socks for a period of time, but, based on my sock-less MT110 experience (not good), I decided against it. Testing them out wet would have been ideal too.

The latest - Post Bear Chase Race - 09/30/12 (report) and here is what these spots look like now (though I only managed 9 water crossings in them before my DNF - and wished even more that I had tested these both sock-less and wet);

MT1010's - approximately 190 miles & 6 weeks old.

I e-mailed New Balance and informed them of the issues I was having when I first noticed it on 09/24, and sent them the first highlighted picture too.  And they were totally awesome and said they would replace my shoes, free of charge!  Having never dealt with New Balance support before, I was almost expecting the terrible customer service I got from Merrell when the soles of my Trail Gloves wore right through after only 200 miles in them.  You can read about that experience here if you so choose.  New Balance, based on their stellar customer service alone, has a customer for life in me.  And I still love the shoes but do wonder how long it would be until the structural integrity is totally compromised - like in the MT110's.

I'll post another update after the return process is complete and I have my new shoes.

UPDATE 11/13/12:

Sorry, I've been tardy - away on vacation and that kind of thing. New Balance had a brand new pair of MT1010's in my hands less than two weeks after I sent mine in. I haven't run in them yet as I've been running in my Vibram Five Fingers, Merrell Trail Gloves, and MT110's. Overall, I'm very happy with the MT1010's, but it's disappointing that they didn't find a stronger, tougher, more robust, material to construct the uppers out of.  While not a 'Minimus' shoe, I think I may try out the NB MT1210 'Leadville', when they come out early in the new year. And so continues the search for the 'perfect' shoe - fit, performance, longevity, and overall value.  The MT1010 is darn close though.

MT1010's Minimus Amp have arrived...

The New Balance MT1010 Minimus Amp arrived yesterday evening.  First impressions... They are awesome. 

MT1010 Minimus Amp - Right outta the box

I was concerned a bit about a review I had read about the toe-box being so big that it would bunch, and that you would have to cinch the laces completely in, and not have a good fit.  You can see from the pic below that I had no issues with the size 11.0, D width, shoe. I do have wide feet, but I think your feet would have to be like cross country skis for bunching to happen.

MT1010 Minimus Amp - See!  No bunching!

I've been wearing them non-stop since they arrived (not to bed tho!) and I'm really on the fence about wearing them in Leadville tonight. They are so comfortable, and fit so well, that I don't think I would have any problems with them.

I guess it'll be a game time decision on the old MT110's vs. the new, un-tested, MT1010's.

Anyways, Chris (#294) should be arriving at the Hope Aid Station any minute now - timing - he's doing great so far. Time for me to do my final prep and head out on the road. Should take me about 3 hours to get to the Twin Lakes Aid Station from home.

I'll attempt to upload the route to Endomondo periodically during the run, but no guarantees.

And, If I do go with the MT1010's tonight, I'll be sure to do a review on them.

Frankenshoes!

Frankenshoes needed some repairs but are now ready for the North Fork 50 Mile Trail Race on Saturday!