NB110 vs NB WT10

which is better for mud?

1 to 20 of 23 messages
29/11/2012 at 14:39

Would be grateful for any thoughts on the above, especially relating to performance on muddy trail

 

29/11/2012 at 17:31

Hi Goji,

I have the MT 110's and love them. The WT10's have less cushioning (ie. very little) The 110's have a nice wide forefoot, drain quickly and are dead light. Do you heel/mid/forefoot strike? I have learnt over the last few months to mid/forefoot strike and find there to be enough cushioning on the 110's but wouldn't want any less! I think the 110's have a slightly more agressive tread too. You can also pick them up in places like Sports Direct for £40 which is a bargain as they wear really well. Good luck!

29/11/2012 at 17:56

Thanks, I run with midfoot strike and my road shoes are minimalist-ish Brooks pure flows, but was looking for something that can deal with mud on trail and the pure grits have not convinced me.  I found MT110 on amazon for under £40 so I guess I will get these

thanks again 

29/11/2012 at 23:52

In the grand scheme of things 40 pounds is worth the risk. I'm interested in your thoughts on the pure grits, was looking at those for my next pair. Let me know how you get on!

30/11/2012 at 06:00

Neither of those shoes are any good in mud Goji....

30/11/2012 at 19:54
MT 110 just arrived, tried them on but not sure about the fit :/ the plasticky upper seems unyielding. Probably too short in lenght but strangely shaped toebox. I think these will go back - that will teach me try before I buy

Runboy I haven't run in grits - just that the sole looks unconvincing for what I have in mind(very muddy hills), also read reviews about them being more for genteel trail.
Roland, thank you for this tip - which would you recommend then? I would prefer modest cushioning but not outright barefoot.
30/11/2012 at 22:17
I'm a NB101 fan. Cheap, low, snug. 8.5 is close on me - normally 8 elsewhere
01/12/2012 at 10:35

If you are going to be on proper muddy hills then yes, something with a more aggressive grip would be better, Inov8 do more aggressive soled shoes (Mudclaw is one) I agree with Steve, the MT 101's are good too, I have a pair of nearly new size UK 9's that are a little small. (plug) They have a bit more cushioning than the 110's but still nice and light and quite flexible. Think they are discontinued now but they can be found. I found the 110's a bit of a weird fit to begin with too, it looks like they kinda push your toes inwards! After going out in them though I love them! The upper is fine and doesn't cause me any probs, cleans up easily and seems pretty tough.

Steve, do you have a Pompino? I must applaud your choice of bike! Mine is tucked up in the shed until it warms up a bit!

01/12/2012 at 16:32

Goji, I wouldn't send them back just because they look wierd - the're just foot shaped  and they make more sense when you run in them (honest!).

However 110s do come up small so if you think they are too short, they probably are! - my first pair were a bit marginal (never caused a problem, but I felt they had the makings of black toenails) so when they came up for replacement, I sized up. I'm now on my 3rd pair!

Before the 110s, I had 3 pairs of 101s which were also great but more restricted in the toe-box and I soetimes got a rub on the side of my little toe from the stitching of the overlays (Note: I always run sockless) which appeared to be a fairly common complaint.

Neither of these shoes is a true UK-muddy-conditions shoe, though the 101 is better than the 110 by some margin - I wish someone did the 110 with a Mudclaw sole (and at New Balance prices!).

01/12/2012 at 16:32
goji wrote (see)
Roland, thank you for this tip - which would you recommend then? I would prefer modest cushioning but not outright barefoot.

It all comes down to you Goji and be honest here...do you run at a decent pace or will you slow down and tip toe through the gloop...

 

01/12/2012 at 17:12
OldAndCreaky wrote (see)

Goji, I wouldn't send them back just because they look wierd - the're just foot shaped  and they make more sense when you run in them (honest!).

However 110s do come up small so if you think they are too short, they probably are! - my first pair were a bit marginal (never caused a problem, but I felt they had the makings of black toenails) so when they came up for replacement, I sized up. I'm now on my 3rd pair!

Before the 110s, I had 3 pairs of 101s which were also great but more restricted in the toe-box and I soetimes got a rub on the side of my little toe from the stitching of the overlays (Note: I always run sockless) which appeared to be a fairly common complaint.

Neither of these shoes is a true UK-muddy-conditions shoe, though the 101 is better than the 110 by some margin - I wish someone did the 110 with a Mudclaw sole (and at New Balance prices!).

I liked the 101s, and the grip was OK, but not great - studded enought but easily clogged. The big downside was they are so lightly constructed they fall apart evry quickly, especially when wet/muddy.

The closest I've found to a 110 with a Mudclaw sole for NB prices is the La Sportiva XC - on sale at Pete Blands for £40 - absolutely brilliant in the mud!

04/12/2012 at 14:30
runboy wrote (see)

Steve, do you have a Pompino? I must applaud your choice of bike! Mine is tucked up in the shed until it warms up a bit!

I do have a Pompino, tremendous bike. It's kind of the NB101 of the bicycle world. Stripped down, minimal, a bit of an unloved ugly duckling and great offroad. There back on topic.

If anyone's still reading this and think about NB you might think about going up a whole size - I got a blackened toe at the weekend in my 'half a size too big' pair. Not enough to be a real bother - I still have another pair in a box the same size, I won't bother trying to change them (that'll be my 3rd pair too). They're finding their limits in this really sloppy stuff, but still my preferred shoe for hilly trails with the odd bit of tarmac.

For Runners, By Runners still have stock.

Edited: 04/12/2012 at 14:31
04/12/2012 at 23:16
Thanks guys, maybe i'll just try to exchange for bigger size and give them a go..
05/12/2012 at 15:26
110 are brilliant in everything; a perfect compromise. I've used mine on boggy fell races and mucky ultras and I've yet to find a shoe that does everything quite as well. Go up a size, maybe 1.5 sizes.

Can't really compare the low slung stable form of the 110 to the skyscraper midsole of a la sportive.
05/12/2012 at 16:31

You must be thinking of the Crosslite sean - the La Sportiva XC has a pretty minimal midsole with just a 5mm heel drop (compared to 4mm on the 110). Hardly a skyscraper!

 

05/12/2012 at 20:39

ha, 1mm makes all the difference. You're right though; i was thinking of the Wildcats.

 

08/12/2012 at 07:33
I started a thread on the 110s a few weeks ago when I first got them, I was quite impressed. Since then ive become even more impressed. I think that they may be the perfect shoe. I'm buying a second pair before the new model comes out.
08/12/2012 at 12:15

How are the uppers holding up in the mud and wet?

08/12/2012 at 15:46
Fine, I've been running in all conditions and they are an excellent all rounder.
08/12/2012 at 22:33

One to consider then....

1 to 20 of 23 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW competitions

RW Forums