The past few weeks have been a whirlwind of travel for me, and my posting rate here on the blog has suffered a bit as a result. My most recent trip was a short jaunt to Boulder, Colorado to attend Newton Running’s annual retail summit. Newton was kind enough to invite me to serve on a panel tasked with discussing the “Elements of a Sustainable Runner.” In addition to myself, panelists included Danny Abshire of Newton Running, Blaise Dubois of The Running Clinic, ironman world champion and ultrarunner Heather Fuhr, Dr. Ivo Waerlop from Summit Chiropractic and Rehabilitation, and 1972 Olympic marathon gold medalist Frank Shorter. Stay tuned for more on this discussion as I am in the process of trying to get the audio up in an easily accessible format.
One of the benefits of attending the Newton summit was that all participants were given a pair of Newton’s forthcoming MV2 (pronounced MV squared) racing flat, which will be available for sale next month (MSRP $125). I learned quickly upon arriving in Boulder why people consider it to be one of the best locations for running in the country, and I more than took advantage of my time there by running about 20 miles over two days (elevation gain and altitude were tough!). About 15 of these miles were on the Boulder Canyon trail in the MV2, and I feel comfortable sharing my initial impressions of the shoe (I will update with additional thoughts if needed as I accumulate more miles).
Newton has long been a promoter of what they like to refer to as “natural running.” In a nutshell, natural running can best be defined as the form you would use if you were running barefoot – midfoot/forefoot landing close to the center of mass of the body (among other things). All of Newton’s shoes are characterized by having a relatively small height differential between the heel and forefoot, but until now most of their shoes have retained a fairly thick midsole (I have previously reviewed the Newton Sir Isaac and the Newton Distance Racer). With the MV2, Newton introduces it’s first ultralight racing flat (< 6 oz). Unlike many flats, the MV2 is true to the name of the category by being a zero drop shoe, meaning that the heel and forefoot are level with one another while the foot is inside the shoe (i.e., no heel lift). I haven’t had a chance to measure the total sole thickness yet, but it’s comparable to a typical road or cross-country flat.
I’ve been excited to try out the MV2 ever since I had the opportunity to take a look at an earlier prototype back in January, and because I have enjoyed running in the Distance Racer quite a bit (which is only about 2mm heel-forefoot drop). All Newton shoes are characterized by the presence of protruding lugs under the forefoot. The forefoot lugs depress when you contact the ground, and release on pushoff – whether this provides any meaningful performance benefit I can’t say, but it’s a novel concept. One of the few complaints that I have about the Distance Racer is that because it has only four centered forefoot lugs, it can be a bit sloppy when changing direction. One of the big changes in the MV2 is that Newton has found a way to add a fifth lug, and the lugs in the MV2 extend right to the border of the sole on each side (see photo below) – this provides a much more stable feel under the forefoot than in either the Distance Racer or Sir Isaac. Another thing I like about the MV2 is that the lugs are not as prominent – they don’t extend as far out from the sole of the shoe. This makes the MV2 a bit more comfortable to walk in than the other Newton shoes (walking in the Distance Racer or Isaac feels like walking over a speed bump with each step).
The remainder of the sole of the MV2 is similar to to that of other Newton shoes. The midsole is made of the same material as other Newton shoes, which means that the MV2 should retain cushioning better than EVA based flats (i.e., it will not break down with repeated compression like EVA does). There is rubber in all of the right places, so I expect durability will be good as well (after 15 miles I can barely detect a scuff on the sole of my MV2’s). The sole is quite flexible, and can be bent and twisted with relative ease.
The upper of the MV2 is very minimal and composed of a synthetic mesh that breathes very well. The mesh is a bit scratchy in spots, and I haven’t tried sockless running in them yet, so no comment on that yet. Aside from a very flexible heel counter, there are no structural elements in the upper. From an appearance standpoint, the upper retains the bright coloring of other Newton shoes, and color variants are in the works (see black/yellow version at bottom of post).
In terms of fit, the MV2 runs small, and I had to size up from a 10 to an 11 to get a comfortable fit (I rarely ever size up). Many people I spoke with at the summit sized up by at least a half size. If I had to change one thing about the MV2 it would be to widen the toebox. Like many who have made the move into more minimalist shoes, I have grown accustomed to wearing shoes that run wide in the forefoot, and the MV2 last is fairly narrow (far less roomy than other Newton shoes I have worn). The lateral edge of my foot hangs over the midsole when seated in the shoe, as it does when wearing most racing flats or spikeless cross country flats. I would compare the fit to a shoe like the Brooks Mach 11 or maybe the Saucony Grid Type A4. I didn’t find them uncomfortable at all on the run, but I’ll need to go for more than 5 miles in order to determine whether the tight forefoot fit becomes an issue. If you don’t mind a typical racing flat last, you probably won’t have any problem with this shoe. If your preference is for a shoe that fits like the New Balance MT101, Minimus, or Altra Instinct, then this one won’t suit you very well.
The sockliner of the MV2 is removable, though the material underneath is a scratchy mesh, so sockless running without the liner might no work too well. There is no noticeable arch support in the shoe, and the sockliner is completely flat. Newton is taking an interesting approach to their first zero drop shoe by including an oval-shaped wedge of 3mm-thick EVA that can be inserted under the heel of the sockliner for those who want to transition a bit more slowly into a flat shoe. I have not tried this “heel lift” yet, but I know a few people who routinely alter the lift of their shoes in this manner.
As I mentioned, I ran about 15 miles in the MV2 while out in Boulder (that’s me above in the MV2’s on a bridge in Boulder Canyon). All were mostly on either concrete path or gravel, and the shoe felt great underfoot, and the narrow forefoot didn’t bother me while on the move. The sole under the forefoot is extremely firm in the region of the lugs, and gives good ground feel. Because the forefoot feels firmer than the heel, the shoe actually feels like it might be negative drop at times during stance, and it gives the calves a really good workout. If you aren’t accustomed to running in a zero drop shoe, this one definitely demands a gradual transition.
In summary, the MV2 is an extremely light, zero drop shoe that will appeal to both Newton fans and those looking for a flat shoe that retains a bit of midsole underfoot. The lugs are not as noticeable as those on other Newton shoes, and the fact that they extend to the edges on each side is a big design improvement. I suspect that this shoe will retain the excellent durability of other Newton shoes, and thus may outperform many EVA based racing flats in this regard. Minimalist runners who prefer a wide toebox will probably not enjoy the feel of this shoe, but if you are accustomed to running in racing flats or XC spikes then this shoe will feel fine.
The Newton MV2 is set to be released in September 2011, and the MSRP is $125. They are currently available for pre-order on the Newton Running Website.
Update 9/16/2011: The Newton MV2 is now available at Running Warehouse.
Below is a fuzzy picture of a black color variant of the MV2:
You might also like:
Newton Distance Racer Review: Sir Isaac Gets it Right
Newton Sir Isaac Running Shoe Review: This Heel Striker Can’t Seem to Find His Forefoot
Merrell Bare Access 2: First Impressions and Giveaway
Review of New Balance MT101 Trail Running Shoes
Merrell Barefoot Trail Glove Review: Another Great Zero Drop Running Shoe Option
About Peter Larson
I’d love to get a pair of these. Looks like just my kind of shoe. Also fun to know you were out in my neck of the woods. Cheers Pete.
Very nice write up Pete, sorry I kept missing you out in Boulder. It was a great event and the running was amazing. I did some of the same runs and coming from FL it was a challenge to hit those “hills” I posted a picture of mine tonight after a beach run here. http://www.facebook.com/Island…
The black model looks fantastic. Nice to see Newton getting past its neon green phase (hopefully).
Yeah, the black one was really nice. Also saw a blue and yellow variant.
Great review as always… my only reservation with Newton shoes are their durability. I had gone thru 3 of their trainers a few years back and decided I couldn’t justify the cost anymore because they didn’t last. The lugs just disappeared. I worry even more about this shoe for the simple reason that it is not as beefy, it seems that it can be marketed as a minimalist trainer as well as a racing flat as you so explained by putting 20 miles in in 2 days. Did they feel they could live up to an everyday shoe or just for showing up on race day? I love their concept and the shoes when I used them, but I’ve since switched to cheaper shoes that may not “help” me run “barefoot like” as they last longer and I’ve learned to switch my gait as my shoes have become minimal.
What sort of mileage did you get out of your Newton’s? I used to chnage ‘normal’ ruuning shoes every 300-350 miles at which point the forefoot cushioning was completely dead (although the heel cushioning fine!). Yet I have 350 miles in a pair of gravity’s and they have plenty of life left in them. I expect to get 500 at least and then the price difference to a standard shoe isn’t so great
I got close to 900 miles out of my last pair of Newton Motus. I didn’t intend to put on that many miles, I just wasn’t paying close attention to accumulated mileage. They didn’t feel bad, but I replaced them with a new pair. I continue to be very happy.
I’ve heard of people getting 500+ miles in Newtons, and a few over 1000. Guess we all wear down shies a bit differently. The MV2 lugs don’t protrude as much and are covered by rubber, so I suspect they will hold up well.
Quick question, is the liner removable?
Thanks for the great website!
Yes, it’s removable. The liner is flat – no arch support.
thank you for the information,
I have a pair of the newton distance, I like the feel more with out the liner, and gives a little more room.
Have run in Motion (850 mi), Distance S (400 mi), and Momentus (250 mi). I am not perfect at mid foot striking and find these shoes to be much more durable than any Asics, Brooks, and Mizuno that I previously used.
Wait for a 25% off coupon from Roadrunner and you’re good to go!
Looking forward to when the mv2 makes it to the uk. I am a natural forefoot/midfoot runner (I actually find it very hard to heel strike when running) and have been in Newton’s for the last year or so. I currently rotate the gravity and the sir issac but have a pair of the distance on order and will reduce down the amount I wear the sir issac as I much prefer the gravity-style shoe. The mv2 looks like a good choice to gradually add into a shoe rotation and should have enough protection for a sub-3 marathon attempt next year!
Interestingly, I often get physio’s and health proffesional’s telling me they don’t like newton’s. I had a crisis of confidence with them a few months back and bought the kinvera. Interestingly, they are actually a very bad shoe for me. The wide forefoot where it splays out hits the ground too early and causes an increased pronation which is in no way controloled by the minimal upper. Having been analysed on a treadmill using them, a prodiatrist who is not a newton fan actually advised me to go back to using the Newton’s! I did and I am very happy. I find there is some advantage having the lugs quite narrow (foot width rather than shoe width) so it will be interesting to see how the mv2 compares with the lugs all the way to the edge. Of course cornering isn’t great in the gravity so that should be improved!
Stick with what works!
Pete
Hey Pete great review, do you know if the toe box is the same as the distance. I just started to run in the gravity and love them so far, had been running in kinvaras so the transition wasn’t that bad. Looking forward to trying out the MV2.
No, different toe box than the Distance. A lot more room in the Distance.
Sent from my iPad
Thanks for the info. I just bought my first pair of Newtons (Gravitas) last weekend. The sales guy showed me a picture of the MV2’s and said he was going to the conference as well. Are they planning the 5 lug system on new versions of existing models?
Good question about the lugs – not sure.
Thanks for the review. I’m a big fan of Newton’s shoes…have run in them for the past 2 years and am excited to try out the MV2s.
I got into a twitter discussion yesterday (which I guess is like a conversation with my teenager, short, sweet and without much detail) with Newton and some supporters. They also make the durability claim when i questioned the overall cost of the shoe, which is the only reason I don’t own a pair. My wife might COMPLETELY freak out if I bought another pair of shoes right now.
A question for you though Pete, they made the claim that they are a “Education company that just happens to sell shoes.” This to me seems a little bit disingenuous but I don’t know enough about their inner workings to judge for sure. Thoughts?
I give Newton a lot of credit for their educational outreach. The fact that they picked Blaise Dubois as their keynote speaker is a testament to the fact that they are open to an honest discussion about footwear – you’ll see what I mean when I get the audio of his presentation up. I think Newton is pretty genuine when they say things like calling themselves an education company.
that and you got a free trip to Boulder. Credibility. lost (not for going but for shilling)
Sorry but they are shoe company. End of story.
So serving on a panel with 4 others who are also independent of the company to discuss how to be a sustainable runner is shilling for Newton? If you go by my review of the Sir Isaac, I make a pretty lousy shill: https://runblogger.com/2010….
Furthermore, in my review here of the MV2 I pretty clearly point out that the narrow forefoot is going to make this shoe a lousy choice for minimalist runners who like a wide toebox (a pretty sizable segment of my blog readers). Would a shill say something like that?
I’ve never been anything but honest here. Newton is a shoe company, and their business is to make and sell shoes. But, they also do a lot of educational outreach, and for that I give them a lot of credit.
Am I seeing it right, it looks like it has drainage ports on the bottom? That is one thing I don’t like about the Distance, I sweat a lot and by mile 10 I start squishing and leaving wet footprints. I wonder if I can just drill holes in my Newtons to drain?
Yes, I think that’s what the holes are for. No idea how well they work.
I own two pairs of Newton Gravitas shoes and one pair of Racers. unfortunately I’ve found out that especially if you do lot of hill work the lugs ware out quickly. It’s very frustrating since the shoes are in very good condition apart from those worn out lugs. I think Newtons are too expensive for what they are worth. Honestly, I used to be a huge Newton fan but now I prefer NB Minimus line and NB MT101’s.
Andy – the MT101’s were on my feet the majority of the time I was at the Newton conference :)
MT101’s are probably one of the most comfortable running shoes I’ve ever worn. :) Amazing value for money and great trail racer especially if you’re willing to tinker with the heel.
Yep, I have a pair that are zero dropped – fantastically comfortable shoe!
Great post, Pete. It was great seeing you again out in Boulder, and running together. i agree with your review, the MV-@2226662be6629f2331600a459c266d26:disqus is a super addition to the Newton line up.
Kyle R., Revolution Natural Running Center, Milwaukee, WI
Been very impressed with my Newton distance. I have about 350 miles on one pair and probably will get around 500 on them. According to folks at Newton you may be able to get 250 miles on the MV2s as it is a racer and not as durable as the distance. Also the mesh on the MV2 will become standard on Newton shoes in 2012.
I had a similar problem as Dan when I started wearing my first pair of Newtons. But the problem wasn’t the shoes, it was my poor form. I was jamming my feet into the ground. I changed my form from jamming into the ground to lifting my feet higher, and thus landing more perpendicular. Now they do not wear as quickly.
I now have three different pairs of Newtons with 500+, 400+, and 300+ miles on them. Old NB shoes barely made it to 300 miles. For me they are worth the price with the added mileage. But it still may be time to try the MV2’s.
Thanks for the (p)review. Nice to see so many options out there for minimal footwear out there. Lost me with the narrow toe-box though – hate that.
Btw. always wondered how the lugs would affect ones form. Would it be possible to get a slow-mo of a foot-strike in these at some point?
Pete, thanks for the first impressions on the MV2. I desperately need a shoe that can handle the mileage I’m putting in each week. I just can’t find the perfect pair I like that can last, and these look awesome. I run in the Piranha 3’s right now, but because it’s a racing flat, they don’t handle mileage well. But I love the weight, fit, and comfort. Looking for something similar that can handle more miles, as I’m about to get a 3rd pair this year! So a few quick questions if you don’t mind:
– Any idea on durability over time/miles? Curious to know how many miles these can take.
– Any idea on weight? You did mention it was under 6, but any idea on official weight?
– Flexibility of the shoe. You didn’t mention anything regarding shoe stiffness or flexibility, could you provide some details?
A couple of different thoughts.
First is, finally a Newton shoes without crazy amounts of cushioning/elevation off the ground. Change to the forefoot lugs is welcome progress., but personally I’d wish Newton would just ditch this gimick – I’d much rather have sensible lugs across the shoe for grip, a more natural foot contact and better proproception.
Still aspects shoe look to be pretty daft. A forefoot shoe with such a narrow toe box that runners have to size up? This is a step back.
Also the front of the shoe is waaay off the ground, at what point do the toes ever get to apply load against the ground? The big toe supposed to be there for balance, yet it’ll be way off the ground for all but the toe off.
This really doesn’t seem like a shoe for a natural foot/ground contact. While it might be a shoe one can maintain a forefoot strike, and fixes some of the main problems with the other Netwoon shoes, it’s still lacking in a couple of areas for me to consider them as a decent running shoe. My toes need more room and contact with the ground!!!
A few other commentators have been mentioning the durability of Newton shoes, with figures of 500 up to 1000 miles being quoted – fo me neither figure is exceptiona. My pair of old pair Invo8 Roclite 315’s had 850 miles on them before I retired them from running service. Many miles or roads, mountains, fell races, trails, rivers, ice and snow – the only thing they haven’t run through is desert. I can’t image any Newton shoe handling the type of abuse I put this pair of 315’s through.
I put close to 900 miles on my last pair of Newton’s (the pair on the left, in the attached pic) with little noticeable wear and tear. I would suggest to you that your criticisms noted above are merely conjecture. I
run a half marathon per day in my Newtons. I don’t experience any of
your theoretical observations. I used to run in more traditional
Asics. I’ll never go back.
Hi Kevin,
Are you really saying that the pair on the left took no wear and you are a proper front foot striker? I have had 500-600 miles from a pair of gravities and admit they are very durable but the pair in the photo look like they are factory new. Somewhat missleading i think
Alex
what would be the advantage of the MV2 over a traditional racing flat? Seems like you are paying approx $70 more for not much difference.
Yes, pricing is always a concern with Newton shoes. Their response would be durability, but if you run efficiently, you can get a lot of miles out of standard flats.
what is it about their shoes that makes them more durable? The fact that you are midfoot/forefoot striking (and thus not wearing down the midsole foam in the heel as fast)? I’m not sure I buy that argument. Word is that the forefoot lugs wear down significantly after not too many miles. But maybe their argument is based on higher quality materials vs. traditional racing flats. I could buy two pair of racing flats for the price of the newtons, and have change left over.
Pete,
What is your take on Newton’s answer to one of their FAQs? I normally run longer distances, so I’m wondering if these would work for marathons/ultras.
What distances can I run in the MV2? – This shoe is engineered to run faster, shorter distances by people with natural running form. Experienced, efficient natural runners can run 5k to half marathon distances. For longer distances we would recommend our other Performance shoes.
http://www.newtonrunning.com/s…
Thanks,
Bill
If people can run marathons in racing flats, I see no reason why a properly adapted person couldn’t run one in these. Personally, I wouldn’t do it as I find that about a 4mm lift is helpful to combat calf fatigue since I don’t run 100% zero drop.
Relevant to the debate that happened just below, I spent the weekend running around in Newtons as part of a “Natural Running Clinic” put on by the company itself at a local running store. For a few hours, two Newton “running coaches” spend time with about a group of 30 of us going over the basics of natural running and providing drills and techniques for us. The only “newton” flavor for the whole clinic was the fact that Newton provided their shoes for us to run in for the clinic itself.
At the end of the clinic, there was a quick “pitch” about why Newton will further promote the tendencies of natural running form the coaches had taught us, but nothing much more than that (the main pitch was from the shoe store itself because it was offering 15% off to all clinic participants). However, none of it was over the tip.
Based on my experience this weekend, I can honestly say that Newton seems to put education first and then lets their product sell itself.
Another exciting and relevant experience: as a result of the clinic I was able to run a few miles in a pair of MV2. This is exactly what I have been looking for. I cannot wait for the release date (although I had to go up to an 11 for a better fit)
Just wanted to make a quick comment about Newton Shoes and Newton as a company.
First the shoes. I had been eyeing Newton shoes ever since I started changing my running form about 12 weeks ago. After trying on every single model they have, I can say for sure that they function as advertised and designed. If you are a mild heel-striker, you’ll end up running mid-foot. If you are already running mid-foot (as I was when I got around to trying out Newtons), then you’ll end up with a fore-foot strike.
The one thing that really bothered me though, and I think that Pete has touched a little bit about this as well, is that the raised bars on the forefoot area just make me feel a bit unstable. I really, really wanted to buy a pair, but in the end, it was that bit of instability on landing that made me hold off and wait.
As Peter Alford mentioned on the comments here, I too have been on a Newton Natural Running Clinic. I would say that the time spent was probaby 95% instruction and coaching, and 5% selling Newton shoes. They provided the shoes to those that wanted to try them and were them for the clinic.
Danny Abshire, one of the founders of the company, has released a book, which I bought and read. And in it was the same approach as the running clinic–the only mention of Newton Shoes was when he acknowledged that he is one of the founders and when mentioning a bit about how he did a custom orthotic/met wedge for one of his high profile triathletes/runners.
IMHO, this shoe is Newton’s flaw towards natural running. It is not barefoot style neither a racing flat. The shoe lacks width in the toebox and the lugs are so firm that is difficult to believe they generate something positive besides hotspots. Also, these lugs doesn’t allow your fingers to feel the ground and making a toe off. It’s a pitty to see a $125 price tag in a shoe with poor quality like in the mesh inside it; It is scratchy. This is a step backwards for Newton.
I actually like the firmer lugs on this shoe, but I agree that the toe box shape is off in this iteration. With a bit of work on the last shape this shoe has potential.
Sent from my iPad
I received my pair today and had a first (and hard) endurance speed work run. Toebox and middle of the shoe should undoubtedly be made wider. But this isn’t my main concern. I was wondering if there shoes could be considered as “minimalist” or “barefoot”. OK, they are zero drop but the raised bars under the forefoot area deprives the foot from feeling the ground, which is one of the most important component of a minimalist midfoot strike.
I comfortably run in size 13 Merrel Trail Gloves but a size 14 MV2 was too small, too tight in the toebox.
Any word on how they are on grass/soft surfaces?
Not a high traction shoe, and the fit in the forefoot is off.
Just a quick note here..
I just went for my first run in these. I have been running in a pair of Newton Gravity for 2 years now, they are my road and treadmill shoes and I usually run all my trail and dirt runs in VFF or New Balance Minimus.
I LOVE THESE SHOES. The lugs work as advertised and you don’t even notice them (unlike every other Newton shoe including my beloved Gravity)
I went up 1/2 size over the size of my Gravity shoes. I will probably keep these for treadmill work this winter.
Good times all around.
A few notes on what I have read:
First off, I have been running in Newton’s for roughly 3 years now. Starting out with the Sir Issac went through 4 pairs of the Distance and just did the Vegas Rock-N-Roll in the MV2’s.
Initially, my calf’s burned like crazy! Gnarly lower leg work out! But after the change over and becoming a fore foot runner, the pain goes away and the run times increase. I am active duty military in a “unique” field that tends to run a lot. Used to have timed 4mile runs, and after about a year I knocked my time down to sub 25min( in boots) and I no longer have knee pain(2 past surgeries in college and high school I stand 6’2 about 205lbs). With that being said, I can officially say that Newton Running and their shoes have increased my performance and decreased the wear and tear on my body.
As far as the lugs on the fore foot of the shoes go, well I only used the Distance shoes for road runs. To me and what I stress to anyone (which is a lot) is that if you spend the money on a set of Newton’s they are to be used only for running and in the manor described. I do not go to the gym in them, I do not walk around and go grocery shopping because I like the color, and i certainly do not play basketball or any other sport that would require me to change direction fast. They are running shoes! The lugs at times though have created some “traction issues” on some unstable ground ie; gravel, loose sand etc. I did not feel I was getting the same performance or equal effort as to what I was putting out and what the ground was giving me.
The MV2’s however seem to have fixed that issue. I have taken them on short, fartlek runs on sand trails, to LSD runs on pavement and to a 3:07 marathon all within 3 weeks of owning them. The wear on the shoes is on par for Newton’s and they are holding up well with close to 150+miles in those 3 weeks. So far the only complaint I have, is that I normally run barefoot. I get hot spots in the MV2’s and as stated in the original post, the mesh actually rubbed on my 2nd to last toe. A little superglue or body glide solves the issue for me, but still a bit annoying more than anything. Over all, another winner from Newton Running in my eyes.
What do you think about custom Orthotics?
I have no experience using them, so I don’t have much opinion on them. If they help you to be able to run, I have no issue with using them. However, I tend to think they may be overprescribed and I’d be hesitant to use a pair given to me by a podiatrist who is not very familiar with running mechanics.
Just wanted to add my experience. Newton runner here. Certified Newton Natural Running form coach and product tester as well. Going on 3 years in Newtons. Here is my added input on the MV2s: I have found every model of the Newton shoe line very durable with exception to the Distance and the MV2. My latest pair of MV2s (the new black and green ones) lasted only 77 miles. Both the MV2 and the Distance Racer have the tendency to blow out at the ball of the foot where the upper meets the sole (I’ve blown out of many a pair). All other models of Newtons have a reinforcement along the sole in this area. This is especially true if you have a wide forefoot. I’ve been giving this feedback to the company for years and though I love the Newtons for many of the other design innovations, namely the hard pvc footbed that gives efferent feedback of a hard surface landing, I would not currently spend my own money on the MV2. I am running the 2012 model of the Distance Racer and it has a wider forefoot box. Still no reinforcement along the forefoot but it is more durable upper than the MV2. I believe the MV2 sacrifices it’s structural integrity for breathability in the upper. The holes are too large and too close and tear too easily to withstand the impact forces caused in running. Play it safe with the Gravity and those babies will last forever! Once they widen the last and strengthen the upper the MV2 will be my favorite racing flat and possibly marathon racer. Thats my two cents..
I just bought a pair of Newton’s MV2 Shoes…..OH MAN, I ACTUALLY WON A RACE! I HAVE TO GIVE CREDIT TO THESE SHOES (and maybe to my endurance). Best pair of shoes to come out since …well, ever (in my opinion; I have to be bias)! And to support my opinion, I went to lower my P.R. from an 18:35 5K to a 17:54 5K (just this week; I won 1st place). I haven’t won a race since middle school. AND, the last 5K race I ran before P.R.’ing was 18:41. I’ll be buying from Newton’s for as long as I live! Now, if they only made a trail and road running racing flat. Either way, I am ONE HAPPY CUSTOMER!!! Now, if only I can answer the question of how I even managed to run under 18 minutes, under two conditions:
1. I am borderline overweight (173-175 lbs in a 5’10” frame)
2. I was in the best shape of my life in High School (135-145 lbs 5′ 8 1/2″ frame); when I ran a few C.C. races in High School, I only managed to run, at best, a 19:13 5K
NEWTON’S MV2’s = You complete me!!!
Note: I was supposed to take it easy during the race – which I set my P.R.; in fact, I stopped training 3 weeks before the race.
@df834f81f87906810d22df67384c9e93:disqus , I’ve put about 400 miles on my distance racers, and aside from lug wear, they’ve held up quite well. I’m thinking it depends on your form and weight.