Comments on: 2014 Shoe Previews: New Balance Minimus Trail Zero v2, 980 Fresh Foam, and 890 v4

By: Duncan Barrable

Duncan Barrable — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 21:03:57 +0000

The MT110s have been my favourite trail shoe for the last few years. I have experiment with a few others, but the 110 was always the shoe for race day. The 110 did need some improvement but not a complete change. The 110v2 is completely unrelated to the 110. The folks that loved the 110 will not find anything similar in the v2. Disappointed that such a great shoe is going to be discontinued.

By: BK

BK — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The New Balance Trail Zerov2 bears no resemblance to the MT00v1 because it's not a minimus! It's an update from a European model. It's a completely different shoe.

By: John

John — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It is a bit disheartening to see some of those changes in the trail line. They kind of dropped the ball there I think. Maybe they'll find a few new customers though, who knows?

The 980 looooooks interesting--I like that they've used a lower offset--but, HOLY CRAP! that marketing stuff is just this side of silly. The price point ain't bad either. (Prices are getting ridiculous!)

I'm most interested in the new 890 though. I haven't put many miles on them, but like that it is a great go-to shoe for a broad part of the running spectrum. No bells, no whistles. Just a good, functional trainer.

One of the things I've always liked about it was the full ground contact, which is one of the most underrated and underutilized design features. I know it is becoming more widely used--as it should be--and it is kinda difficult to market something so simple, but it is what makes a shoe so smooth in transition. The v4 looks a bit more segmented, which kindasorta tends not to work as well. The 890 didn't need to be more flexible, so I think that NB may have just been trying to be cute, trying to add some "tech."

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to Stefan.

Not sure about the PL4 last, would imagine it's not as roomy as the Minimus last
Sent from my iPad

By: Ashwyn Gray

Ashwyn Gray — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Yep, the decision to introduce the new fell-focused shoe as the MT00v2 is a strange one, especially since they already had a shoe like this in the UK! If NB wanted to bring that fell running shoe over here for the mud running target market, why not just bring it over as an entirely new model and gently update the existing MT00? Maybe the MT00 was selling really, really badly. (I didn't buy a pair).

This new version is more like the Inov-8 MudClaw 265, which is a splendid shoe. And, I like shoes like that. So, I'm actually more interested in this new version of the Minimus Zero than I was in the original. And, given that NB tends to price their shoes a bit less than Inov-8, perhaps the American company will have more success with this one than they did with the previous version.

By: Adolfo Neto (UTFPR)

Adolfo Neto (UTFPR) — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I like the MT00. My pair did not fell apart (around 300Km so far). However, I have used it mostly on (bad) roads, not on real trail.

And I also wear it to go to work. Enough space for my toes.

By: Conor

Conor — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I See MT00 V2 as a competitor to Merrell Ascend Glove and Altra Superior (or Lone Peak). NB didn't have a zero-dropped shoe in the space, and they saw an opportunity to use the MT00 name. I have said before that exposed foam on the bottom of a trail shoe doesn't make sense for most trail runners, and NB seems to get that now (except for on the 1010.)

By: John Williams-Searle

John Williams-Searle — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Looks like New Balance (Fresh Foam?) fears Hoka, but it's too late. Got a pair of Bondi Bs several weeks ago and the hype is real -- long runs with almost instant recovery. If Hoka dropped their prices by forty dollars and revved up their marketing a bit, the major shoe companies wouldn't be able to compete in the cushioned-shoe division. Hokas are that good.

By: John Shepard

John Shepard — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I had a chance to Wear Test the Fresh Foam shoes. I wish I would have had them longer. I didn't feel like a month was enough time to get these broken in. They were a pretty stiff ride and obviously cushy. However, the balls of my feet were pretty banged up (bruised feeling) after long runs. In time I think they would have softened up and not caused so many issues. Otherwise a good shoe with plenty of room (in a wide).

By: cesalec

cesalec — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I guess NB wasnt thinking on us tripophobic runners out there when they came out with that weird looking sole on the 980 Fresh Foam

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to Andrew Bentley.

Couldn't agree more. They had a range of shoes suited for different purposes and different consumers, you choose the one that suits your needs. Now they have different shades of grey. This makes no sense to me. The MT110 with a slightly modified sole and more tear resistant upper would have been fantastic. The v2 looks hideous and doesn't excite me in the least. Same with the MT00v2 - I have no need for a fell running shoe that looks like a zero drop hiking boot...
Sent from my iPad

By: Cliff C

Cliff C — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to Pete Larson.

I'm debating (agonizing really) between using a 'normal' shoe versus a racing shoe like the NB MRC1600.

I'd prefer a drop of at least 4 to 6 mm, and some cushion, but want to strike a balance because I think ground feel helps me remember to maintain strong form.