An uptight yuppie of the 1980s, I always envied the laid back hippie lifestyle, but the closest I ever got to living it was an occasional trip to Whole Foods. Lately though, bored with running through the concrete jungle, I heard the call of nature and got into trail running. I first started trail running in the Five Finger Trek Sports but the material on my Five Fingers Trek Sports ripped along the toe, I decided to return them for a refund and search out other options. My inner hippie was an easy target for the New Balance MT101 trail shoe, designed with the help of ultra marathoner Anton Krupicka. So, I ordered a pair.
The MT101 is an updated version of the popular MT100. All of the changes were made to the upper and involve updated styling and function. Justin looked at my pics and said they reminded him of a bug. Well, what is more natural than bugs? The styling changes hit the sweet spot for me and I really enjoy wearing them casually. While the comfortable green mesh upper is at home on desert and mountain trails, its styling would also be welcome at any sit-in, vegan pot luck dinner, or Greatful Dead concert. Though not seen while wearing the MT101, I really dig the paisley pattern on the insole.
But what kind of trail shoe is it? And why is a shoe like this up for consideration in the minimalist running community? Find out after the jump.
The MT101 is not a Barefoot Running Shoe
First things first, the New Balance MT101 is not a barefoot running shoe as it has a substantial heel-to-toe drop (will go into this more below) and has a good bit of cushioning in the sole. However, the New Balance MT line has been a popular subject amongst minimalist runners — probably because Anton Krupicka has been helping New Balance shape this line and he’s known for modding his shoes to make them more neutral/minimalist. Krupicka has been a key tester in developing New Balance’s NB Minimus trail running shoe (which is a “barefoot running shoe”).
A few minimalist runners have gone so far as to mod MT101s and MT100s (the predecessor to the New Balance MT101). Rockrunner, at the Minimalist Runner Google Group, zeroed out a pair of MT100s and extended the rock protection through the heel using a thin cutting board. The Rockstop™ protector appears to be made of similar material. Speaking of zeroing out MT100s, Tuck recently posted about having a cobbler zero out his MT100s and MT101s.
Anyway, as I was looking for a trail running alternative to Trek Sports, I decided to “bug out” and get the MT101s for a bit of one-on-one testing. Below I’ll talk about how they performed on the trails as well as get into details about the shoe design.
Trail Testing
Like some crazed middle aged Krupicka fanboy, I decided to take them out on my local trails…ah natural. Yep, no socks, just the way Anton does it. These are fast shoes and I was blazing through the trails about a minute a mile faster than my normal pace. Oops, at the 3.2 mile mark, I felt a dreaded “hot spot” on my left pinkie toe. Obviously, I am no Anton Krupicka. My feet are definitely not trail hardened and I would be lucky to run the 100 miles he does in 16 hours in 16 days. Anyway, when I stopped for socks and tape, I noticed there was an identical hot spot on my right foot. It turns out that there is a lot of raised stitching inside the shoe at this spot that caused the rub. Luckily, a little tape and socks and I was good to go. I finished 10 miles at quite a bit better pace than usual.
I have subsequently logged around 50 trail miles in the MT101s, always wearing socks, with no blisters. These shoes work great for me on trails. They are light for a trail shoe, give GREAT rock/root protection, yet still have a nice ground feel. They are very roomy and comfortable and even though the specs say they have a 10mm drop, they feel flat to me.
The Upper
The upper material is a strong and comfortable green mesh with a thin backing. The overlays that extend from the laces to the sole provide good foot stability. The dimpled rubber toe protection is durable and should handle the beating trail running can deliver.
The Laces
The eyelets are plastic on the outter side of the shoe and cloth on the inner side. While the plastic eyelets have a clean finish, the cloth eyelets are roughly sewn and have jagged edges. Some folks might not like this, but I think it adds to the funkiness of the shoe. The laces are what New Balance calls the Sure Lace™. They vary in diameter and are supposed to stay tied better. I have read some folks complain that they come untied. I have not had this problem at all, but often tie a double knot on all my running shoes to insure they don’t come loose.
The Tongue
The tongue is made of the same lined mesh fabric used on the upper with some reinforcing material at the top. It is light and flimsy, but stays in place well and is comfortable against my foot.
Under the Hood
The most striking feature inside the shoe is the roomy toe box. There is plenty of room for my toes to do their thing. The green mesh upper is lined inside with a thin lime green material and the hip green paisley insole is glued to the shoe. I have not tried taking it out.
The Heel
The EVA foam material used in the heel and collar surrounding the ankle feels similar to a Nerf™ football. It stretches nicely when getting in and out of the shoe, but maintains its shape and firmly holds my heel in place when the shoe is on. I really like this feature. The previous version caused some people to get blisters from a sharp edge rubbing at the top of the heel. This is now more rounded and the problem seems to be solved.
The Midsole
The midsole is made of a foam New Balance calls ACTEVA™ that is light and cushiony, and designed to resist compression. The 10mm drop was concern for me. Heck, that is a whole centimeter! What I found is a shoe that has no arch support to speak of and feels very flat. Whatever drop there is, it seems very gradual from heel to toe. I have become very skeptical of published drop numbers for shoes. There is certainly no regulating body and results can vary widely depending on where the measurements are made. Bottomline, a forefoot strike stride is not a problem for me in these shoes.
The Sole
The Rockstop™ that protects the forefoot is really nice! The Rockstop™ is a thin layer between the outsole and midsole. You can see parts of it exposed in the holes next to the word “Rockstop™” in the picture above. I worried it would take away from the road feel, but surprisingly, it is thin enough to protect my feet from rocks and roots while still flexible enough to give great feedback. Unfortunately, I don’t like the way these shoes feel when running on asphalt or concrete. This may have something to do with the Rockstop™.
The rubber outsole is relatively thin with low profile lugs compared to many trail running shoes that feature cleat like lugs. They provide adequate traction on the light to medium trails that I run, but might slip in tougher conditions.
Conclusion
Since I have been running in Five Fingers and ultra light racing flats (See my reviews of the Nike Air Zoom Streak XC 2 and the Saucony Grid Type A4), the MT101s are a tiny bit heavier at 7 oz. than what I am used to. On the road, I would rather have a shoe that is lighter, flatter and more flexible. On trails, I don’t notice the weight at all and am thankful for their excellent stability and the protection the Rockplate provides. In summary, I think it is a great trail shoe that looks great for casual wear.
The MT101 is a more minimal trail running shoe relative to other heavier trail running shoes that typically weigh a good bit more. Again, it is not a barefoot running shoe by any means. It is designed to run trails fast and hard. I suggest those looking for a barefoot trail shoe consider the Vibram Five Fingers KSO Trek with its heavy duty sole (as compared to other VFFs) and tough kangaroo leather upper.
17 replies on “New Balance MT101 Review”
Thanks for such a comprehensive review. Great photos!One question:Is the upper mesh lined so that it will be warm enough for winter trail running in New Hampshire (ie: 0° to 20° and snow? I’m looking for a trail runner now that my toes are too cold in the Treks.
Thanks, Noël. The MT101s are light and airy and won’t protect you from the cold. Maybe you could use socks for warmth.
Try the bamboo/wool socks made by Feetures for the cold. I love them!
And great review on the 101’s. I’ve thought about buying a pair, but I’m holding out for the Minimus!
Nice review Britt. You’re really raising the bar with those snazzy shots. What did you use for the blue background?
Thanks, Tuck. The shoe is on a glass desk in a room with a blue wall. Not planned, just happens to be in our house and seems to be a good place to take pictures of shoes.
I too recently picked up a pair of the NB MT101 (love the green color), as I was looking for a replacement for my beloved Inov-8 f-lite 230s. I’d say that in comparison the NBs have a stiffer sole which makes it a little harder to maintain a midfoot strike, but the plus is that rocks and roots are less likely to be felt. The NBs are also less expensive than the Inov-8s. I plan on wearing my new NBs for a couple of 100-mile races in early 2011.
Looks pretty much like the MT100, also an ok minimalist trail shoe. My beef with this NB series (795, MT100, MT101) is the lack of more aggressive sole, that has mostly relegated my prior owned models (795, MT100) to either dry, non-technical trails or road runs (they slip like crazy on wet surfaces!) IMHO, while Inov-8s may cost a bit more, they are well worth it as the traction is second to none under most trail conditions, especially the X-Talon 212 or any of the RocLite line. I’ll give the pending Minimus (road version) a shot when they come out, but I’m sold on Inov-8s for the trails…
Thanks for the great review. I too just got my first pair of MT101’s. The big difference is that I am a long time heel-striker who is finally beginning to see the error of his ways. I am slowly trying to minimize my foot gear and the 101 seemed like a natural first step. Any advice on switching from a traditional running shoe?
Thanks for the review. I just picked up a pair last weekend and love them. I was running trail in my sprints, but since the leaves have all fallen in New England I can’t see the roots and rocks. The shoe is great and doesn’t do much to my form or my feet. I wanted to wait for the minimus, but with the dropping temperature and my love of the trails I couldn’t. These are a fun, great alternative to minimal shoes on the trails.
@Chris, the best advice I can give to run barefoot or in Vibrams to perfect a good forefoot strike. Also, take it slow because it can be really tough on the calves.
Britt, thanks for the review. I have a question. I have been running in treksports for 3 months now, but am looking for a shoe that offers more protection but is also minimalist for extended trail runs and some long hiking. I like the 101, but am concerned about the 10mm heel lift. Is this a problem of the trail? Can you keep a forefoot stride in these shoes? I wish I could wait until the minimus comes out, but can’t.
@John When I wrote the review I said a forefoot strike was not a problem for me in these shoes. Afterwards, I did a 25k trail run in the MT101s and felt like they performed well and didn’t have much calf soreness. Recently though, I have been running in the Minimus Roads and I have experienced some calf and Achilles soreness, which makes me think I wasn’t running on my forefoot in the MT101s as much as I thought. Hard to say for sure. In varied terrain like a trail run my foot lands all over the place just to keep my balance. When on the road, my stride is consistent and it is easier to focus on on maintaining a good stride. There were lots of roots on the 25k course and the rock plate worked well for protection. The MT101s do have a drop though, and that probably does tend to keep you more on your heels. Have you looked at the Inov-8 X-Talons or F-Lites? They have a 3mm drop and are a pretty popular trail shoe. I haven’t tried them or the Minimus Trails, but would like to.
Britt, thanks for the quick reply. I have heard of Inov-8’s, but have never looked into them. I will definitely do that now. Thanks for the recommendation. Cheers!
@Chris, I’ll echo Britt’s advice. i got a pair of Vibrams this summer and eased into them slowly. i started at 1/2 mile in my Vibrams and the rest of my run in old shoes (yes, i had to develop new routes to end back at home to switch shoes!) i added about a mile a week to my Vibram route until I eventually was able to go my entire run in them. it worked for me. only pain was a bit of heel pain as i eased into a better forefoot strike.
Great reviews – I bought a pair of these, mostly because the minimus was not wide enough for my foot… I bought them on Saturday, loved the feel in the store – and ran the north face 50K the next day… brilliant shoes up and down, wet and dry… loved them. No hot spots, no blisters, great shoes!
These shoes are the best pair of shoes I have ever owned. I used them for Track practice and racing only. I’m going on 3 years running with them and I want to buy stock up on few pair before they disappear never to be seen again. I’m not into that barefoot running mumbo jumbo because you cant set any PRs like that. I race with these puppies on trails and road and have marked my best times in them. These shoes are fucking magical, yep I’m that much in love with them.
I have severe metatarsalgia due to an accident. I basically have no natural padding on the ball of my foot. I do not run, but do try to walk. It seems like a shoe with a substantial toe drop would be beneficial to me. What shoe would you recommend. Thank you.