New Balance MT110 Review

[Ty Draney has been a sponsored ultrarunner for a long time. Patagonia and UltrAspire are currently lucky enough to have him on board. Ty’s also the RD for Wyoming’s El Vaquero Loco (he’s a Spanish teacher) and the author of the following review.]

In the midst of a tough weekend at the Outdoor Retailer Show in Salt Lake City last month, I was hanging out with Bryon after the Jupiter Steeplechase in Park City when I caught wind that he had a pair of New Balance MT110.  I instantly pounced and begged, whined, and haggled my way into borrowing them for a test run myself.

New Balance MT110

I have been wearing the NB MT100 (review), MT101 (review), and Minimus Trail (review) for several years and was anxious to see the new upgrades to one of my favorite shoes.

First Impressions
I first tried the shoes at the “Boxing Bear” night run during OR.  The fit is definitely slipper-like.  I opted to go sockless because I typically wear a 9.5 and sample size is 9.  The upper consists of some sort of plastic compound completely lined with a soft breathable lining that makes the shoe very comfortable with or without socks, my concern was with how well they would breath and absorb water.

New Balance MT110 lateral upper

When I put them on it felt like I was meeting the offspring of the 101 and the Minimus Trail.  They are much more comfortable and pliable than the 10, but much more protective than the minimus.  The 110 are built on the same last as the Minimus and have a heel to toe drop of 4 mm.  The outsole is two-piece with a nice toe wrap/bumper that is protective, but not too bulky.  The tread is much better than its predecessors, with cleverly trimmed directional lugs that give you traction going uphill on the forefoot and downhill on the heel.  The exposed, foam midfoot area also has lugs.

The Big Test
I put in about 50 miles in the shoes before the big test: 80 miles in the Wind River Mountains.  I ran enough in them that I was confident that the shoes would hold up, but I was a bit worried about my feet.  I was also confident that the Wind Rivers would be the perfect testing ground for the new shoes.  The route Jared Campbell had planned for us would include rocks, sandy trail, boulder hopping, snow fields and 12,000-foot passes to negotiate – pretty much Hell’s Kitchen for shoes.

I was pleasantly surprised at the performance of the upper.  They drained quickly and looked brand spanking new every time they got wet.  The lining remained slightly damp, but didn’t cause any problems.  The wet lining may only be problematic if your feet tend to blister when they get “pruney.” Between the lining and my wool socks my feet never completely dried, but they were never “sloshy” despite the many snowfields we navigated and all the creeks we crossed.

New Balance MT110 medial upper

The best feature of the shoe is the outsole.  It is made of a nice sticky rubber that was stellar on the entire boulder hopping and cross-country slickrock we crossed.  The tread was just enough to keep me upright on the snowfields and the mud, while the toe bumper was just enough to preserve my toes of the more than occasional kicked rock.

New Balance MT110 outsole

After 21 hours of tough mountain running my lower legs were a bit sore, but I was very pleased with the result.  The 110 provided just enough cushioning, flexibility, and protection and are in every way as superior shoe to its ancestors.  I am looking forward to getting my feet in a pair of 9.5’s as soon as they are available.

New Balance MT110 outsole closeup

(After nearly 200 miles and 30k climbing and descending through the toughest terrain I could throw at them, they are showing a little wear.  The liner is starting to wear on the heel slightly and I had a branch stab and rip the plastic upper on my instep. The toe bumper is peeling slightly.  Still love the shoes.)

NB MT110 blowout

NB MT110 blowout

Additional Information
For more info, check out our technical preview of the MT110 as well as our in-depth Making of the MT110 article with Anton Krupicka and Erik Skaggs interviews. We highly recommend reading all three pieces.]

Call for Comments
Are you looking forward to the New Balance MT110? What have you thought of the NB MT100, MT100, and/or Minimus Trail?

Bonus Images

Ty Draney MT110

Ty Draney kicking it in the Wind River Mts in his MT110.

NB MT110 sockliner

The sockliner of NB MT110's AK (Anton Krupicka model)

There are 95 comments

  1. Alex

    Seeing so many glowing reviews for this shoe, so long before it's available, is tough. I run almost exclusively in the Trail Glove, which required very precise foot placement on more violent trails. Especially for race purposes, it would be nice to have something – nearly as low – that would allow for more aggressive running.

  2. Jason

    Extremely excited about the 110. I run almost exclusively in the 101 right now, with the Minimus Trail being my 2nd choice (typically for shorter runs) – so naturally I can't wait to get my feet into these. Sexy too! Thanks for the pics/info.

  3. Bart Smith

    Great review, thanks Ty.

    Bryon, I have already expressed my opinion to you regarding the MT101. Great shoe; I loved it and completely wore out two pairs this summer. When I went to purchase a replacement pair two weeks ago I discovered that NB had stopped production (after less than a 9 month production run) and were no longer available. In the interim loyal NB customers can 1) wait until February 2012 for the 110 while running what is left of their 101’s or, 2) find another manufacturer that has a little more concern for their customers. Especially in light of the fact that NB has been telling the retailers there no need to carry a large inventory in the 101. In any case 101 users are out in the cold while we are seemingly left to comfort ourselves for the next 5 months with glowing reviews and more marketing hype about the 110. Thanks but no thanks; I am not going down the same road with the 110 as I did with the 100 and the 101. The NB marketing ploy of creating a market by prematurely ceasing production has become old with me. I found a great Inov-8 shoe that does everything the 101 does and more and based on Inov-8’s track record I am confident this shoe will be around for a while.


  4. Adrian


    It's killing me that these reviews come out so many months before they're publicly available! I don't blame you, if I had these shoes I'd be talking about them too :)

    Just a question for the minimalist/flat shoe runners: how do you go down hills? I've heard a lot of people (including Kilian Jornet) say they go down on their heels but I've been staying on my midfoot. I wonder if there's a better way. Is there some technique to making sure your heels don't get to bashed up in the process?

  5. tom wilson

    I've run in all 3 – 100, 101 and Minimus. The 100 was a good start and the Minimus doesn't feel like quite enough shoe while the 101 has been my go to shoe since it dropped. I'm looking forward to the new outsole and added protection to the Minimus last-built shoe.

  6. mtnrunner2

    I liked the 101 but the upper was a bit thin and I had to heat-shape (hair dryer) the foam under my ankle bone to relieve a hot spot. Good that it can be formed at least. The rock protection was great and grip was good.

    So, I look forward to a possibly more structured upper. I hope the rock protection is still good.

    I like the last photo, since that's where I'd be running in them, at least some of the time :) I like the fact that I can buy mass-market shoes designed for my local trails!

    Adrian, I'm no racer, but I've run trails a while and run mid-foot. I'd try short quick midfoot strides with minimal braking downhill (just let your momentum carry you) and see how it suits you. It's more demanding to keep from tripping — so take it easy at first — but stresses the legs and feet less. Either way I think the key to downhill is minimal braking and fast turnover (adding up to minimal time touching the ground). Can't comment about heel striking.

  7. David Henry

    @bartman Not sure where you are trying to get your 101s, but has them instock in every size for only $55 with not hint of discontinuation at this point. I'm not crazy about the 101s personally because of toebox shape and too much drop for me (although I had mine zeroed which helped).

    @Adrian I agree with mtnrunner2 keep the turnover high (actually higher than on flat or uphill) when going downhill and it is perfectly normal to land more mid-foot with some small amount of braking with the heel traction; a key too is to not resist the downhill but go with it (I've got a lot of work to do here). I will say the steeper the downhill the more your heel might engage in braking (not necessarily taking impact), but if it is that steep your speed should be lower anyway.

  8. Thad Sweet

    I too have loved the 101's, and actually was disappointed when I heard about the 110 coming out. I'm thinking about snatching up as many pair as I can from (where I got my first two pair). I've run everything in the 101's and saying they are my "go-to" shoe would be an understatement. GREAT shoe at a GREAT price! But, before long I'm sure I'll give the 110 a go, and see what happens. I've got a pair of Trail Minimus as well, but have only used those on shorter road runs. I just love the 101 too much to NOT use it on my trail runs.

  9. michael c

    They're coming out with no colors, no? The current yellow/blue/blackish synthetic star trek themed thing isn't working for me.

    Overall I have worries about this shoe so far. The 101 had a more "organic" feel… it looks like a trail shoe. I'm not entirely sure if using input from the Minimus line is a good thing for this product line. Everyone loves the 101 already… just give it some more tread with stick rubber and make the inside of the shoe more comfy and that's it. I just hope I can still find the 101 because it's an amazing shoe given a couple needed improvements.

  10. Adrian

    @mtnrunner & @David Henry – Thanks, I'll give that a whirl after work with my Trail Gloves. If I am hitting the heels too hard, they'll let me know!

  11. shoe nerd


    your statement about the 101s being out of production just isn't true. whoever your retailer is who is telling you that they are out of production probably didn't order enough of them when they had the opportunity and now there aren't many more for them to get. that is simply how the industry works. shoes are sampled and shown to retailers about 6 months in advance and based on the orders, then they go into production. also keep in mind that every shoe from every major company has a year shelf life before it gets updated and yes, changed in some ways (sometimes more drastically than others). a company such as inov8 is much smaller and may not have the resources to be updating their shoes on a yearly calendar schedule, so they will keep their models in line and available for retailers for a longer period of time. the challenge for them is to keep their retailers excited about a shoe that's been in their store for 2+ years when every other shoe in there is being updated. a retailers biggest fear is being stuck with stale product they can't move. it's sort of a prospecting game. that doesn't make new balance nor inov8 bad companies. they simply operate differently and will offer you product in different manners and on different timelines. it sounds like the manner and timeline of inov8 suits you better for now, but know that the 101 is good and stocked at many retailers, maybe just not your local one. check out or where there are plenty available in all sizes and where you will see the 101 go on sale as it gets closer to the release of the 110. if you love the 101 you better buy 'em all up!!

    just thought i'd clarify a bit of the behind the scenes for you of how it all works. you can't make sweeping statements about a company not supporting its customer base when it's just not true. once we find that perfect model of shoe that does everything we want, we want it forever, but the industry and subsequently consumer behavior have dictated it to work much differently. it's a business like any other business, and whether you like it or not, businesses don't grow and show profit by creating the same product year after year. if that were the case, we'd still all be driving model t's. in other words, as they say "don't hate the player, hate the game"….

  12. shoe nerd

    @Michael C

    the 110 will be available in two colorways for men and two for women. the second men's colorway is a silver and red that you may find even more "Trekky."

    to speak on the synthetic upper versus a more traditional mesh upper material, the shoe was initially prototyped in both a mesh upper and this new synthetic upper that they were considering. they sent both prototypes to many wear testers including Anton Krupicka and Erik Skaggs who were also skeptical of the synthetic upper, but after putting many miles on both prototypes, they all came back saying the synthetic upper was superior for various reasons. so they continued on with the synthetic upper. Anton says that this is hands down his most favorite shoe ever, and as we know, he's not the sort to make such a sweeping statement if he doesn't mean it, and this coming from one of the most "organic" runners out there.

  13. Terry Miller

    Waiting IMPATIENTLY for this shoe. Sounds perfect from what I've read. WANT. IT. NOW.

    @Adrian; Depends what you mean by minimalist; in my Minimus I'd have a really hard time landing on my heels unless it's a smooth, not-too-steep downhill. Anthing technical or steep and it's all on the forefoot. Usually in a shoe with a more substantial sole, I find myself using what I've heard referred to as a "proprioceptive" heel strike. There is a lot of heel-strike phobia right now, but I don't land with all my weight on my heel-the heel just touches the ground and helps me balance while the real weight comes down on the forefoot. I suspect that is what Kilian is referring to.

  14. Tim

    Thanks for the review! I would be interested in knowing what shoe companies have for their life expectancy on some of their models. Granted their are many variables but for the crowd that runs frequently lets say, trails only, mixed rock, loose gravel, mountain passes, water crossings etc etc 60-80 miles per week, I think companies are NOT producing a durable shoe(s). That is MY opinion. I had a frustrating experience with Cascadia 6's (been wearing them since the they produced the 4's) less than 200 miles bottoms blown out. Durability of the 4's and 5's was excellent. It looks like this review also showed some significant wear on the shoe after 200 miles granted it was the Winds which I have been to twice, I think companies can do better across all brands.

    1. Ben

      Tim, I completely agree with you. My older pairs of shoes, (several of which have well over 700 miles on each) still have traction on the soles, and the uppers are still holding together as well. Currently, I'm running in the Saucony Peregrines and Montrail Mtn Massochists and I get about 250 miles out of each before the outsole is really worn down and after 300-350 miles, they're done completely. Same for the Montrail Rockridge. The rest of the shoe seems fine (upper and midsole) but the outsoles aren't lasting very long and the shoes now cost 10-20% more than they used to. Hmmm… More $$ and less miles/life. Not good.

      Is it the softer and stickier rubber compounds they're using now that is wearing so quickly?

  15. Spencer

    @adrian, I don't know if this helps, but I try to almost sprint down, keeping my feet going at around 220 steps per minute. Also I was watching some videos of kilian jornet, when he wants to brake, this technique is excellent, he spins his arms backwards, countering the movement of body wanting to continue. Also he uses slaloming, where he goes back and forth across the trail, I think this works really well especially on wide single track that has huge slopes where you can just go back and forth.

    @ben, I think it may be the stickier midsoles. I us merrel trail gloves on the road, I ran about 300 miles on trails, about 30 miles on the road and the sole was already wearing down. If you're doing some of the stuff where you're mixing scrambles across scree and climbing up rocks, you're going to want a very sticky compound.

    I am really excited for this shoe, due to the fact it is a mix of the mt101, and the mt10 since those are my two favorite shoes. The thing I didn't like about the mt101 was then I go downhill with it, it isn't flexible enough to allow good downhill technic. Whereas with the mt10 going across scree, rocks would kill my feet.

  16. erik@runningwarehous

    I work at Running Warehouse and can tell you that for now we do have plenty in stock of all colors and sizes of the 101. But what we have in stock will be all we have until the 110 comes out in January. New Balance is indeed out of stock so no others will be shipped after these are sold out. Shoenerd already gave an outline of the business works so I won't rehash things. The 101 has been a great shoe and a personal favorite of mine. I pushed NB to keep it in the line and add the 110, but they said the 110 is a superior shoe. I haven't had a chance to run in the 110 yet, but from what I've seen it isn't an update as much as an entirely new shoe. New last, new upper, new outsole, less of a drop. I think the 110 will gain some users who thought the 101 was too much shoe and will loose some who feel the 110 is too little shoe. I think both could have survived in the line, but I don't get to make those calls. All I know is I will be picking up a 2nd pair of the 101s before they are gone. At the same time I can't wait to get my pair of 110s and head out to the trails.


  17. Garth

    Like lots of other people it seems, I can hardly wait to try this shoe. I really like running in the Minimus Trail and they fit me perfectly, but the trails I run on have lots of small, sharp rocks and I have crushed my metatarsal (always the same one on the same foot!) enough times now that I have to admit that without any sort of rock plate the Minimus is just not a safe choice for me on many trails. I also really liked the MT-101, but after a couple of races in them I realized that something is just "off" with the shape of the toe box and I got some terrible blisters. I talked to other people who have the same problem with the MT-101. A shoes built on the MT-10 last, but with a little more protection sounds perfect.

    In the meantime I just got a pair of innov8 x-talon 190 and I have to say they feel just like a comfortable slipper, no blisters, and just enough cushion underfoot to run with confidence speed over the rocks and roots.

  18. David

    Long time reader – first time poster. How would you compare the MT110's to the La Sportiva Vertical K's in terms of cushioning and foot protection?

    Dave in VA

  19. Yeivier

    If anyone of you travels to Hong Kong, they are selling the MT101 at NB's store at the mall next to Hong Kong airport for around USD30 a pair. I just bought 2 pairs in August.

  20. Ty

    David, the 110 has much more protection than the verticle k bus not quite as cushioned nor nearly as flexible. By design i suppose. As i understand it la sportiva designed the shoe for running uphill more than down.

  21. Rolf

    You can still get MT101s at great discount from the NB website and from Just bought my 3rd pair ($59.59 incl. shipping and tax).

  22. mike

    absolutely. if you want a shoe that will last forever, you are going to sacrifice a lot of the things you are likely looking for in a shoe – lightweight and good traction being two of the most important. trail running is tough on shoes, and while shoe companies could use more durable compounds, they wouldn't be lightweight, and it wouldn't be 'sticky rubber' (as you mentioned).

    i'm with you on wanting shoes to last longer, but i don't think the technology exists to create a lightweight shoe with great traction that is incredibly durable as well.

  23. KenZ

    Just ordered my MT110s. Running Warehouse is reporting an expected stock date of 16 Jan. Absolutely love my 101s, so I'm soooooo looking forward to these. When I put the 101s on my feet, I get this urge to run. Fast. Light. Long. If the 110s are even better… but is that possible? How could anything be better than the 101? Time will tell.

    1. Bryon Powell

      "How could anything be better than the 101?" I REALLY liked the MT101… in fact, I have a ridiculous number of trail shoes, but I still picked up two extra pairs of MT101s when I heard the MT110s were coming out. I've not worn the MT101s since the MT110s arrived.

      1. KenZ

        The 110 is THAT good? In all seriousness, the way I saw it was the 101 could have only been made better if it was:

        A. Weightless (note: it's pretty darn close)

        B. Free (note: for a superior running shoe, it's pretty darn close)

        C. Last forever (OK, I'll admit it doesn't last forever)

        So, basically, you're telling me that even though the 101s are down to like $60-ish or so, I shouldn't bother getting any in addition to the 110s. I'm good with that.

        By the way, happy holidays!

        1. KenZ

          Well, OK, with this one caveat to the 101 I've noted elsewhere: in really slippery mud in places like the UK, they're a personal sized slip and slide. But really, anything but a spikey Inov-8 is going to be a fall-fest in those conditions.

  24. Danny Smith

    On Dec 31st I finished a 16 mile run in my NB 101′s and went to the local NB store. They had the 110′s in size 13, with a military discount they were 80 bucks. Can’t wait to run in them tomorrow. What a way to start the New Year. :) 6 miles down with my new 110s and I love em'. Thank you for the review, it was helpful!!!

  25. Garth

    Here is my own micro review for what it's worth. I was surprised to find my local store had these already this weekend, although they only had the silver ones. I bought them and did a good 12 mile run the next day.

    – Grip of the shoes is MUCH improved over the 101 and seems to me good enough for pretty much any conditions. (And I can use my X-talon 190's as a reference for that)

    – If your route is partly on pavement it is no problem

    – There is plenty enough protection on the sole to run fast downhill over small stones and roots with confidence (something I cannot do in the trail minimus)

    – The cut/fit of the shoes is indeed more like the minimus which has to be a plus for most of us over the 101.

    – My perception was that the 110 is slightly more rigid and less flexible than even the 101

    – Unlike the 101, there is something of a heel counter.

    – It is a very good shoes and runs great, but perhaps somehow misses the effortless feel of the 101, and also the totally connected feel of the trail minimus.

    – The lateral edge of the shoe seems higher than the medial edge and encourages pronation. I have no idea if that is good or bad, but it stood out to me right away on a hard surface.

  26. Lance

    Any word on the sizing of these shoes? The 101 8.5's fit perfectly, but how do these shoes compare to the 101's being built on the Minimus last?

    1. Erik@runningwarehous

      Just took a size 11.0 out for a spin. I wear a 11.0 in the Minimus Trail (MT10) and MT101. These fit perfect and felt great.


      1. Lance

        Thanks for the response Erik, since you are from running warehouse I'll take a shot: why must I (and I am sure many others out there) wait until the 20th for a size 8.5? ;)

        1. Erik@runningwarehous


          For some reason New Balance was unable to ship our order complete. The 8.5 and most of the 9.0's were not included in the original shipment. Our most recent information shows those sizes were shipped from New Balance yesterday and we hope to have them early next week. The date shown on our site is a few days later than that date because of certain delays we have experienced in the past due to shipping and processing. If you place an order and the shoe arrives earlier (which we expect it to) then it will ship when it arrives.

          Let me know if you have other questions.


  27. Ben G.

    these are way too narrow for me compared to the 101. Went for an 8 mile run before coming to terms with this since the shoe is great otherwise. Not sure work in going to do with these now.

    1. Andrew B

      I was beyond excited for this shoe. My MT101's are worn out, and I wear the MT10 for softer stuff. I thought this would be my new race shoe. The MT110, even in 2E width is much too narrow through the outer midfoot. Like most runners, I have major impact zones on the outer edge of my foot and these are caught on the raised edge and the upper of the shoe as they spill over. This results in the shoe forcing me to over-pronate even when I'm standing still. So disappointed, I think maybe the minimus road last would have been a better idea.

  28. Jack

    Hey all. Great discussion on this topic. I wanted to add my 2 cents after a week of running and near daily wear. I think that the shoe is the closest thing to perfect I've experienced to date in a running shoe. I do have one caveat however. As garth mentioned at the end of his post, the lateral side of the shoe is noticeably thicker than the medial side. It is quite annoying at this point, but I hope that some more break in time will remedy the problem. I have pretty flat feet. I am comfortable with flatter shoes, but have a huge aversion to anything that further encourages pronation of my feet and ankles. I have noticed the thicker section of the sole seems to correspond to the area where the orange rubber trails off in a tear shape (rear facing). You can see this in the photos available all over the web. I wonder if the glue applied in this area was perhaps too thick creating a fatter section of sole there. Otherwise, it may be that the blue mid density foam compresses more on the inside of that section of the sole resulting in the whole platform tilting inward towards the arch. This may not have been an issue if the sole material was continuous without the break in the orange rubber. I hope this wears in as I stated earlier, but right now I feel almost as though I'm standing in an old claw foot tub when I'm wearing these.
    Not a perfect shoe in my opinion, but with each iteration nb seems to be getting a little bit closer to the perfect trail shoe. For now I may just need to get out a utility knife and shave off a couple of the more offensive lugs.
    Anyone else find this annoying?

  29. Andy

    We have been snow-deprived here in the Northeast (other than "snowmageddon" in October) and just got our first 4 inches of fluffy white, which afforded the first opportunity to see how the 110s accommodate Microspikes. The way the outsole wraps into the toe bumper has *got* to be made with this in mind, because despite the shoe's meager bulk it held the 'spikes better than any shoe I've worn. It seems NB, Anton, and company really thought through every detail.

    Sorry to hear others are having trouble with width, medial bulk, footbed, etc. Other than the perforated upper which is prone to rip, I agree with others who've posted that the 110s are the closest thing to the perfect trail shoe yet.

  30. Jared

    I really really wanted these shoes to be awesome, but took mine back after one run because I that thicker medial side was too much mentioned above. I don't get it – the shoes are responding (at least in part) to the interest of folks in minimal shoes, and yet the sole seems to be trying to make my foot do something it does not want to do. No need to figure out some puzzle, just give me a flat, consistent sole across the forefoot and I'm happy.

    1. Jack

      Jared, I hear ya!

      I'm on the fence right now regarding the extremely uneven feel of the sole and whether or not I'm going to send them back or not. The more I wear them the more frustrated I become, and the less I think that they will ever wear in enough.

      I've now shaved 10 of the outer most lugs off of the left shoe in an attempt to try and get a more even feel out of the sole. Oddly, the right one doesn't really present any problems (that combined with the fact that not everybody seems to perceive unevenness in the sole makes me think that this is really just a manufacturing defect, perhaps too much glue applied in the thicker areas).

      I have also noted one other thing, which maybe some of you other folks out there can comment on. If I view the shoes from behind while placed on a flat table top, I notice that the seam up the back of the right shoe is more or less perpendicular to the surface of the table. On the left side however, the seam tilts in toward the inside of the shoe quite noticeably. It's as though the whole left shoe is built crooked with respect to it's platform (sole). Obviously, when worn this is going to create a feeling of thickness in the sole, or the uneven "canted" feeling that I, and a few others, have noticed.


      1. Jared

        Apologies. I said medial but meant lateral. I felt the outside portion of the forefoot raised as compared to the inside portion. It was definitely not flat, and when the new shoe was placed on a flat surface like my counter, the middle of the forefoot lugs didn't even touch the counter. I felt it more pronounced in my left foot than in my right.

  31. Lance

    It is unfortunate to hear some people having trouble with the MT110's. When I first put mine one I did notice perhaps a bit of a rise in on the medial side, but whether I really did notice a rise of I was predisposed to expect a rise after seeing these comments we may never know. When running on pavement this rise was noticeable but not uncomfortably so. On trails I don't feel it at all. I would be interested to hear Anton's thoughts on this "defect".

    One thing I did notice was that the out-sole seems more "stiff". I suppose the new stickier rubber out sole is inherently a tougher rubber than in the MT101's which would account for this.

    1. Jack

      Just wanted to note that a whole mess of people have been calling the outside edge of the shoe the 'medial' side. The medial side is actually the inner side, where your arch is. The outside is called the lateral side. Just sayin'..

        1. Jack

          True Bryon, but I have yet to read a review of the 110 where somebody comments on the arch of the shoe being built up. I think that we're all really discussing the same issue.

    2. Bryon Powell

      Anton has commented on the lateral lugs (and it is the lateral lugs per Anton, Erik Skaggs, and) the barefoot blogs here:…. Search for "lateral outsole lugs" in that article.

      Erik Skaggs also commented on it in the same article: "They raised the lug height on the lateral side of the forefoot. We brought that down a touch on the outside lateral edge because it was built up a little more than the ones I have now. I think that felt weird when I was running and now it lays down better."

      However, I've chatted with the NB product manager and the lug heights are the same medially and laterally, so either the "feeling" is propagating due to the predisposition you suggest or there's something else going on with the shoe.

  32. Fred Liebes

    I got the MT110's after much anticipation. I love the MT10's, but wished for the "rock plate" in the 110's, as some of the trails I run on are pretty rocky. But, I find the toe box on the 100's too low profile, and they mash my big toes! I'm surprised the outer skin is rigid! The MT10's are a flexible mesh, and cause me no problems. The only thing I can do is cut a slit in the upper to let my toes have some room. Anyone else have this problem? I can't even run 5 miles in them before I'm in major toe pain.

    Now I am happier yet with the MT10's. The rocks have become less of a problem now that I've adapted to the Minimus sole. I hope New Balance will address this problem.

  33. David

    Do you find that this tilt causes your foot to roll so much as that it irritates your ankles or knees?

    I love the MT101 (both the US and UK versions) but I'm a bit worried that the unevenness of this heel will cause issues overtime.

  34. Garth

    I was planning to follow up on my original post with a suggestion to just ignore it and enjoy the shoes ;-) They run great and I can't say the "high side" is something I notice while running on trails.

    And then just yesterday I inexplicably developed severe pain mid way up my achilles at the end of a 12 mile run, and now it's clear I am out of action for at least a couple of days! I hope that was just some kind of "sh*t happens" moment, but I can't help wonder if some shoe-induced over pronation got to me.

    I don't know, but I really enjoy running in them and will definitely use them for some upcoming races.

  35. Jack


    I'm starting to think that after a break-in period of about 30 miles this unevenness may not be a problem. I did however take 10 lugs off of the outermost part of the sole on the left shoe in attempt to even out the platform of the shoe. I think I cut off maybe 4 or 5 on the right shoe (there was considerable difference in feel between the 2 sides). Whether or not the shoes would have broken in the same way without my modification, I cannot say, but they are certainly more even now.

    Another thing I'd like to note is that I did develop a bit of ITB syndrome in the left side (an affliction I've never suffered before on that side.. on rare occasions it'd present on the right side). I suspect the shoes may have been the culprit, but of course, there is no way for me to substantiate this

    1. Jack

      [continued from previous post]

      The ITB has quieted down after a few days rest, so I wouldn't consider this to have been a lasting effect, and who knows for sure what the origin of the problem was.


      I know exactly the feeling.. It's natural to try and attribute a sudden injury to something specific in an attempt to avoid doing it again. Hope you feel better soon.

    2. David

      Thanks to both Garth and Jack. As scary as it is to hear that both of you received nagging injuries, that may or may not be related to the shoe, I think I'm going to give it a go.

      I really appreciate the feedback. I suspect it won't take long for me to figure out if the shoes are torquing my legs in a way that isn't healthy.

  36. Anthony

    After reading the initial article on these shoes, I was completely ready to buy a pair. However, having read all of the above comments I can't help having second thoughts. Is there anyone out there (other than Ty) with what they consider to be normal, healthy feet who's had a great experience with them?

    1. Jack


      FWIW- I'm starting to like the 110 a lot more than I had initially, after having had more time to break them in. They're certainly worth a try.

      Probably rotating them into my running schedule (something requiring some self-restraint, of which I generally lack) may also have enabled me to avoid getting hurt.. if it was the shoe's fault to begin with.

      Good luck.

  37. David Henry


    I have been using the 110s since they came out and know 4 others who have also done so regularly. We have all had no problems with the shoe and although I have noticed the lateral forefoot being just a hair higher (likely because of the beefed up lugs there) it in no way has caused any problems or discomfort and was only really noticeable when standing (not even when running) on pavement. I think for the money ($85 retail and as low as $69 at places like running warehouse) it is probably one of the best deals for a trail shoe period. They are fairly minimal which may be seen as a positive or negative depending on your stance, but the fit on them for tech. trail is spot on. One of the best trail shoes I've ever run in.

  38. Anthony

    Thanks Jack and David – sounds good! I'll definitely give them a go in that case and, as you rightly point out, for the price it's a bit of a no-brainer. I appreciate the feedback!

      1. John C


        Will be my first attempt at a trail run outside of the UK so may be a bit of trial and error. Will get some mountain runs done in the build up to see how the shoe or more specifically my feet cope with long runs in the hills.

  39. T

    Response from NB Customer Service


    Discussion Thread

    Response Via Email (Karolyn W.)

    Dear t,

    Thank you for contacting New Balance Consumer Support concerning the ! The outsole on this style is beveled to be more accommodative on uneven and irregular surfaces. This should aid you on trails and should not negatively affect your stride.

    Please let us know if you have any additional questions or concerns by email or at 1-800-622-1218.


    Karolyn W.

    New Balance Consumer Response Team

  40. Ken Bess

    #1 problem with the MT110 is that the upper is not cut down low enough, when running downhill my ankle bones get trashed from the shoe pounding into them. I have to leave my shoes tied loose, which causes all sorts of other problems.

    The sole on the shoe is just fine, after 20 miles they feel great. The tread is fantastic as is the rubber, super gripy. The sockless liner does a good job. The upper material is bomb proof, BEST UPPER EVER! It dries super fast and is indestructible. The upper does start to come unglued from the sole around the flex area but due to problem #1 I haven't been able to log enough miles to see if it becomes an issue.

    Best shoe ever, if it doesn't destroy the soft tissue around your ankle bones.

  41. David

    Well, after using the shoe for a short time, I am having knee pain. The pain occurs only after running in the MT110 and goes away once I switch to another shoe. I'm hoping that the shoe will break down over time, since right now I can only attribute the knee issue to the shoes.

    For now I'm only going to use the MT110 sparingly, and for short runs. Time will time if it breaks in, but I'm going to try and minimize my use of the shoe. Heck, even as I type this I'm re-thinking that logic. Maybe I'll just hand the shoes off to someone else. Because, would the benefit of the shoes really be worth the risk of injury? Doubtful.

  42. Andy

    Have posted about my love of these shoes already, but have now put them through a fair test – TNF Bear Mountain 50 miler this weekend (previous long run in them was a rocky 50k 3 weeks ago). I had a pair of PureGrits stashed at mile 40 in case my feet were trashed, but never even thought about changing. The 110s supported and protected the feet throughout and performed spectacularly on a very rocky/technical course. And without any rips in the upper! The course was muddy with numerous stream crossings but the 110s drained instantly, even with a pair of Injinjis (I know they are made to run sockless but I still prefer the light barrier). Still not sure if they are enough shoe for a very technical 100 but they have not disappointed yet.

  43. Mark

    My thoughts on the shoe:

    The 110 could have been a great shoe, but after running through 4 pair I've given up on it. If you snag the toes on a root they can rip, the cushioning is only good for about 100 hard miles, and the sole is not flat and causes excessive pronation. I started having the same shin pain that has kept Anton injured all year (I have a hard time believing it is a coincidence.) as soon as I switched shoes it resolved. The heel on the MT110 also has stitching on it, which is a TERRIBLE place to put seams, and I get massive blisters where the seam ends on the lateral side of the heel. Lastly, the shoe just stinks, literally. The mesh that they put in the toe area traps all kinds of bacteria, stinkiest shoe I’ve ever owned.

    This is supposed to be a sockless shoe but it's one of the only shoes I've ever owned that I cannot run sockless in.

    1. Andrew Meisler

      Interesting how every foot is different. I agree with all the faults you point out, especially the sole pronation factor and the seams in the heal. Yet I have loved the shoe, and they have served me well in races up to 50 miles on technical terrain. Still, with all the flaws, I'm hoping to replace them with the 1010, and remain hopeful that the new shoe will have benefited from trial and error(s) with the 110.

  44. MikeZ

    Mark summed up all the experience I had with MT110 except the smelly shoe bit because I started wearing socks after a couple of nice blister :). I am still having issue with my shin i.e. tibialis posterior injury which I had been reluctant to blame it totally on the 110 alone…. although I have never been injured from running. My only suggestion to NB is that putting extra bits of rubber on where there's high rate of wear & tear (lateral side) is NOT a good idea at all.

  45. Steve K

    Loved these shoes when I got them, especially because they felt much more protective on rocky ground than my Minimus Trails. However, after a few months it feels like the cushioning is gone (or at least rock hard), and the balls and insides of my feet hurt when I wear them on runs of more than a couple miles. For now, I have returned to my old traditional shoes for my long runs. I like the NB fit, so maybe the MT1010 will be a better everyday shoe for me.

  46. Jason E.

    I've got about 75-80 miles and about 30k of vertical on my MT110's so far. Pretty happy with this shoe. They still look pretty mint. Recommended. I'll probably buy another pair.

  47. JP

    I've seen at least one new colour scheme for these recently, and am wondering if there is any update on whether NB did anything to address people's perception that the outside edge of the shoe is too built up?

  48. Andrew

    Hi Byron

    Just wondering if you can confirm the lower lateral edge for sure?

    I'm about to order my second pair on 110s and as I am in South Africa, I want to make sure that it's worth the extra as I have to buy them off ebay or similar.



    1. Bryon Powell

      I've not seen nor measured the 2013 colorway MT110s for the lower later edge, but have no reason to doubt previous NB statements to that effect. Again, this would only be in the MT110s made for release this year. The safest way to know that is to get a new 2013 colorway.

  49. Shane

    I went from running in the original MT 100's to these and I have been seriously injured ever since. I ran hundreds of miles in the MT 100's with NO issues ever. Took the new 110's out for a 6 miler with about 100 ft elevation gain and they felt ok (I started to form a blister on the medial (inside) side of the ball of my foot but thought little of it. My calves and legs overall felt fine. Did a second run ( about 7-8 miles of trail) and had the same hot spot but felt overall ok. That night I was woken up by throbbing pain in in the medial side of the ball of my left foot. I haven't been able to run since (6 weeks !).The shoes seemed to fit fine and I have used minimal type shoes (mt 100's) for years. My calves felt fine (so the 4 mm drop I don't think play a factor).My mileage was also the same as it had been for months. My running is ruined for the whole summer(at least ) most likely as I still have pain. Going to podiatrist today as I think it is sesamoiditis. I have never had a foot injury in my life and I am sooo disappointed. I honestly feel these shoes are the primary cause and if that is the case I may as well have just run in cowboy boots because my foot is destroyed. I have used NB trail and road shoes for over a decade and will NEVER use them again. I just hope to be able to run again at this point. I give the MT 110's 2 thumbs down.

  50. Martin

    Just got a pair of 110s and although on the inside it says 2013 I can still feel that unevenness in the forefoot. I'm not shure if NB really made that much of a change to the sole and am now debating whether to run in them or to send them back. Bummer since I've been very happy with the mt10 and also quite a bit excited after all the good things one can read about this shoe.

    1. Jack

      I highly recommend that you don't run in them. I spent most of last spring with horrible post tibial tendon pain after just a few runs in the 110. I threw them away shortly thereafter. The unevenness may not be an issue for some folks, but it wreaked havoc on my feet and ankles. I can say that the new 1010 (v2s) are much flatter feeling, and a very comfortable ride. Planning to use them for at least part of a 100 next weekend, in fact.

  51. Martin

    Hi Jack!

    Sorry to hear you got hurt but thanks for the warning! I contacted the retailer and I'm gonna send them back.

    I already tried

    – the 1010 V2 (didn't like the upper because it somehow got strange wrinkles when running which could be felt on all toes)

    – Sense Mantra (which felt really stiff; I own the Sense but want to use it in races only)

    – Asics Fuji Elite (too narrow in the midfoot for me)

    I'm looking for a shoe with a little more cushion for the longer training runs. Seems like I'll just have to stick to the MT10 for now and be patient. Any suggestion would be welcome!

    1. Andy

      I have been a devout lover of the 110 and now 1010, but have not found them to be sufficient cushion for over 50 miles. Have been pretty happy with the LS Helios. It's quite a bit more shoe than the others, but does have a light feel and a fairly roomy toebox (though not as roomy as the 1010)

        1. Andy

          great sticky rubber, even on wet rock, and I'd say traction is at least as good as the 110. But the tread pattern is not really lugged so not good in serious mud (though few shoes are).

Post Your Thoughts