New Balance MT110W Sizing Question

edited December 2013 in Minimalist Running
I used to run a bit when I was younger, but never really fell into it too hard because I found it a bit tedious.  I recently made the switch to minimalist running with a pair of Merrell Trail Gloves and I've found it to be a completely different experience.  Sadly, the winter has hit and the Trail Gloves just aren't going to do it for me.  

I've ordered a pair of New Balance MT110W as reviewed by Peter Larson in February of this year (http://runblogger.com/2013/02/new-balance-mt110wr-winter-running-shoe.html) but now I'm worried about sizing.  When I went to get my Merrel's the salesman at MEC recommended I buy the smallest pair which felt comfortable, so I've been running in a size 9.5 (USA) with no problem.  

However, New Balance recommended I purchase their shoes in a size which gave me room in the front, so I've ended up purchasing 10.5 (USA).

Have I made a fatal error in my new shoe purchase?  I assume I may appreciate the extra room in the New Balance since I will need extra room for socks, but have I maybe added too much room?  I have about an extra half inch between the tip of my toe to the end of the boot.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Comments

  • I wear a 9.5 MT110 while my inov-8 and skechers are 9.0
  • With your MT110, have you left a thumbs with of room between the end of your big toe and the front of the shoe?
  • It might be worth noting here that most of the NB minimal shoes run small in size, and thus require a larger than normal size for most runners. However, this is the Winter version of the 110's, and while I have not tried it myself a commenter in the thread you linked to above noted that it runs even larger than the normal version. If that is indeed the case then sizing up from 9.5 to 10.5 may be a bit too much.

    I've been running in a pair of UK9 for a year now, and although they fit me just fine I have gotten a new pair in UK9.5 to get some more room up front. The difference in length is neglectable for me, but I figure that the extra room will feel good during ultra runs while also provide space for a sock during winter time. In the 9.5 I think I have about a thumbs width of space up front (and obviously less in the size 9).

    This is a question of preferences, and I am afraid only you can decide whether the extra half inch will be a problem or not. If you are in a really cold place, or get really cold feet, then an extra warm sock will be appreciated, but the construction of the 110 Winter already adds extra warmth to the feet, so it might not be necessary after all.

    If the shoes otherwise fit your feet, and you don't feel like you are slipping around inside them, then it will probably not be a problem at all.
  • I like my MT110's a half size bigger than my normal size, but I think I could go a whole size up and get away with it.  Part of the problem for me is the Minimus last which seems to taper in too sharply from the little toe.  Personally I prefer a more traditional toe box shape so I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with the new version next year.  That said I find them a great shoe for racing in and have run some serious mountain courses in them, but I've moved on now and prefer the feel of the new Roclite 243's.
  • Yes, with my 9.5s, I have a thumb's width space.

  • Thank you to everyone who took the time to respond to my query and double thanks to LateEntry for responding twice.

    I'm going to spend some time walking around the inside of my house in them to be 100% certain but thanks to all your feedback I'm much more confident I purchased the correct size for my needs and I can't wait to hit the trails again!
  • No worries, I hope you will enjoy them as much as we do! Though I am a bit jealous; can't get hold of the 110W here in Europe (as far as I know), and it will cost an arm and a leg to import it from the US. That said, I ran through last winter in the normal 110, sockless none the less, so I might not need them after all ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.