New Balance 630v2 heel-to-toe drop measurement?

edited April 2013 in New Balance
Anybody actually measure the drop on the New Balance 630v2? The New Balance site lists it at 12 mm, but I saw a pair at the local big box store selling for cheap and on the shoe's tongue, there's the same stitched symbol (the one that looks like this: < = > ) as that seen on the insoles of the Minimus Road and the New Balance 730, which makes me wonder if the figure listed on the site is an error and the shoe actually has a drop in the 0-4 mm range.  


  • I certainly hope that it is a typo on the NB site, otherwise they are overusing the "less is more" logotype! 12 mm seems more like the stack height, although it can't really be uniform unless it is a zero drop shoe (which is highly unlikely). The only reference to drop in this model is from a blogger who states that it is 3 mm, which would be rather unusual. It looks pretty low though, so probably somewhere around 4 mm.

    Could be a decent shoe for some easy road running.
  • ZedZed
    edited April 2013
    I thought it might be the stack height at first, but comparing it to the Trail Gloves I was wearing when I was at the store, it's definitely higher... at least 18 mm through the midfoot, I'd wager, but it does look like it tapers down towards the toe. The thing's forefoot is crazy flexible, though, which is why I was so intrigued by it in the first place. It's almost as flexible in the forefoot as my Trail Gloves and definitely much more flexible than the GOTrain and GORun that I was comparing it to.

    EDIT: After some digging around on the New Balance site, I've found that the 630v2 is built on the conventional RL-3 racing/performance last (the Minimus Road/Minimus 20v2 and the 730 are based on the newer NL-1 last). So I guess the drop is significantly higher than I initially thought it was and it might really be 12 mm. I guess the "less is more" badge on the shoe's tongue refers specifically to its lightweight upper (it didn't have the symbol on the insole like in the 730 and Minimus Road). Oh well.
  • I have not really reflected upon the significance of the placement of the logo before, but you might just be right about the upper/sole distinction. I had a look in my MT10's and MR10v2's, who are both in the official Minimus lineup, and they have the "less is more" logo on both the upper and the insole. The 110's, on the other hand, doesn't sport it at all, despite its low weight. It is not in the Minimus line though.

    Well, NB is very clear about the 12 mm drop on the 630's, so it seems like "random blogger girl" was wrong after all :) Too bad as the shoe is very lightweight and could work out just fine as an inexpensive daily trainer. Even though drop is not everything, I would be very hard pressed indeed to go back to anything above 4 mm.
  • I just bought these shoes as I found them for a good price, didn't actually even know about the shoe beforehand. The heel felt higher than 0-4 mm, but definitely lower than standard running shoes. I had to measure it after reading this post. I do it using a thin needle that I push through the outsole and the midsole and measure the part that went through - maybe not as exact as using calipers but the error shouldn't be more than +-1 mm. So I got the forefoot to be 12 mm and the heel 20 mm, that's an 8 mm drop. There's also a flat insole that is 4 mm, so the total stack height would be 16 mm and 24 mm. 
  • @Mishima: Yeah, a little disappointed in the drop turning out to be so high. I've drawn a somewhat arbitrary 0-6mm drop range for myself when it comes to running/cross-training shoes.

    @Cettu: That's actually a pretty creative method of measuring the drop, and is probably at least as accurate the "bar clamp & ruler" method Pete used to use before he got the fancy digital calipers. I might try that with some of my old shoes from the late 1990s... I've always been curious as to whether differentials were really so much higher back in the day.

  • Yeah, that bar clamp method was pretty crude :)
Sign In or Register to comment.