Printable View
No 10.5's available... from my experience with the NB 101's I'd think I'd need a 10.5, my normal size is 10. Would I get away with an 11...? *hovers over add to bag button*
Hey inov 8. That's the "price point" most of us would be happy to pay. We're not all triathletes/crossfitters you know.
11 should be fine. I went up a full size with both these and the minimus trail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Twister
I'm a 10.5 in Walsh PBs and a 10 or ideally 10.5 in Inov-8 but an 11 in the MT110 is cosy. To be honest I wish I'd ordered a 11.5 but the 11 will be about okay I thinkQuote:
Originally Posted by Conan187
9 mile/2000ft straight out of the box with no problems. Covered the full range of underfoot conditions from the stones of the Rooley Moor Rd to the wet soft ground on Top of the Leach. I was very impressed with the shoe and will be going to see if the store have another pair in my size.
Tried a pair on last night, same size as my 101s, right length but much too tight across the fore foot. Didn't have time to try a larger size.
I take a 7 in inov8's reckon i go for an 8 or stick with a 7?
I ordered the same size mate, will report back tomorrow when I pick them up from work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleeter
If I was you I'd go with an 8. I sized up 1 full size and they're a good fit. Not super snug like a fell shoe, but then you wouldn't expect or want them to be. Nice bit of room for the toes to spread. Anything smaller would have been a bit of a pinch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleeter
In relation to other shoes I wear a 6 in talons (snug fit), 6 in 285's (bit of room trail fit), 7 in minims trail (same last as 110's nice fit with room for toes to spread). Also have a 6.5 230 as I bought them for the road, and tbh they're a bit big. Hope that helps.
Thanks for that, been using a worn pair of x talons or f lites for my more traily running but wanted a pair of these since i heard about them, and at 40 quid i can justify adding to my running shoe collection :w00t:
5mile of hillier running than yesterday in mine. I think the MT101 was / is more comfie but the grip and lower diff of the new shoe makes for a better product
MT110's arrived today. First impressions are good, great design, and really snug fit.
Not sure about all this getting the size up, but the size 12's are size 12's and I take size 12 Large in normal boots too.
They same lighter than my F-195s as well!
I'm a size nine in all my New Balance shoes. The shoes they make on the Minimus last are pretty snug, but I think they're supposed to be like that, there's always room for your toes to spread out.Quote:
Originally Posted by ukhursty
Guess it's horses for courses with sizing. I didn't want them to be as snug as my my talons as these will be a more all-round shoe. The longer I've had them on my feet and compared to my minimus they do feel a little bigger, which is surprising as it's supposed to be the same last. A 6.5 would have been my preferred fit but they don't exist. Don't think it's worth missing out on such a good shoe over half a size. Hursty and Dan are you going for the same fit as fell shoes with your trail shoes? How are other people sizing there trail shoes?
I've been wearing size nine Inov8s too, but could probably go half a size smaller truth be be told. I find the 110s are tight to get on, but once your feet are inside they fit very well - supportive across the forefoot and room for your toes to spread out. What size are you in the Minimus?Quote:
Originally Posted by Conan187
My minimus are a 7 and definitely wouldn't want any smaller. The 110's do feel bigger and they certainly aren't tight to get on. Now wondering if i'm unlucky and this shoe just doesn't fit me. Might have to consider taking them back which is a shame as they look amazing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dynamo Dan
What does they feel like to run in? If the Minimus fit you these should too - they're built on the same last.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conan187
They feel ok up and down the street, but don't feel i'd be as happy off road. The left foot seems to be more of an issue. It's strange as the minims are fine, might be something to do with materials or construction. Anyway I've decided they are going back, pretty gutted that I'm going to miss out on this shoe. Even more gutted that sports direct don't do refunds! :angry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dynamo Dan
Though I acknowledge it's my fault. I clearly got too caught up in a shoe i've been waiting for finally being out and for a very cheap price, rather than looking at them objectively and taking my time when trying them on to consider fit etc. Probably wouldn't have happened in a decent shop but there you go. Won't be doing that again!
Nipped to sports direct before, the 8's were too big but 7's feel great so stuck with my normal size, will report back after a trot later
Just back from a 40 minute run around hartshead pike on muddy tracks, trails and fields, well impressed, and at less than 50 quid i think they are onto a winner, they seem a great all round shoe, take note inov8
Will there be a full UK release in summer? If not i may have to stock up
I don't suppose anyone who has these, has/had some Roclite 295s, and can give an idea on sizing? Since trying other shoes out, I now know the 295s are very roomy for a 9.
...for the record, I have tried on a NB MT101 in 9.5 and it felt a touch tight across the toes.
Just picked up the MT 10's as well, same fit and size for me on 12's :)
The MT10's are well gucci! Had many adoring fans in work this aft, especially from the crossfit crowd.
Confused as to why my mt10's fit and the 110's were too big. Must be something weird going on with my feet. I've not lost hope though, just waiting with fingers crossed for the female version. Just hope the colours aren't awful or highly feminine.Hursty how come you went for the mt10 and not the mt00?Quote:
Originally Posted by ukhursty
Mainly because I preferred the look of them, and they were on offer!Quote:
Originally Posted by Conan187
Just back from first gym sesh in them, awesome bit of kit, they are like my F-195s but more glove like on the foot. The laces are a tad excessive though!
Perfect fit :thumbup: ThanksQuote:
Originally Posted by Derby Tup
Great news. I think they'll suit your style of runningQuote:
Originally Posted by Baggins
Well this thread got me all excited as I have a Sports Direct locally but it was clear that this shoe isn't meant for my feet. I wear size 8 everyday shoes, size 9 trainers generally but the MT110s, even in a size 10 were way too tight width wise. No problem with the toe box which is very generous but a very narrow last. Uppers didn't look at all durable either although I grant you the proof of the pudding is obviously in the wearing.
Not sure what you mean by a not very durable upper, they certainly look more durable than any inov8 shoe I've worn!Quote:
Originally Posted by runningfool
Well, managed to try some on in my local SD.
...and it's the strangest thing. The width and length of the shoe, a 10, was fine, but my big toe on the left foot was jammed up against the roof of the toe box, as shown:
http://i.imgur.com/FheJK.png
...guess I must have weird, bent toes.
Very strange, in that picture the left foot looks considerably bigger than the right though?Quote:
Originally Posted by barrierfreeman
Nah, my right is my bigger foot. My feet are not lined up in the pic.
Could try a 10.5, but think I will wait till NB get them in and order online, that way I can order several and get them delivered/return for free.
....or it might just be the case the shoes don't fit me. In which case, it's wait for the Trailrocs to come out, but I bet £40 they will not be £40.
Well I only said that they *look* less durable. The uppers appear to be constructed out of perforated sheet material with no hint of any fibre inclusion as opposed to the more normal woven materials used. They look to me like they could tear easily or suffer fatigue cracking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dynamo Dan
As I say, that just my opinion based on how they look. Be interesting to read accounts of how well they last in practice.
The perforated plastic is round a fibre sock.Quote:
Originally Posted by runningfool
Just back from my first run in them, did 20 miles on the NY Moors, round the Osmotherley Phoenix route-ish!
Fantastic shoe, straight out of the box, obviously need a bit of wearing in, but got round without much teething pain at all, no blisters.
Must say its a very fast shoe, great on all terrains I encountered today, albeit mainly trail.
If they make this shoe with bigger lugs for the heavy fell terrain they will be laughing.
It´s not a fell shoe nor a orienteering shoe but a trail shoe. And a great trail shoe it is! Grip is OK but not what i prefer racing in muddier conditions / orienteering. The upper´s to weak for that to.. But the rubber compound is OK on wet rock and the logs got dencent grip, even downhill.. It´s a great all terrain shoe, even for long distance. It´s what we in Sweden call "lagom", or moderate..?
Yeah deffo agree, a cheap trail shoe as well, should do well against the new inov8 trail rocs, which will be at least double the price.Quote:
Originally Posted by swedentrails
I got MT101 to and i think the outsole on MT110 is a big step up! It´s grippier, a lot better on wet rock and shred mud better to.. I really dislike the lugs on MT101, slippery when wet, collects mud and they´re even unstable sideways. But MT101 feels great on my foot (except it´s heel-drop) and the heel cup is the best iv´e tried.
I do most of my training in Adidas Kanadia and will need to replace the latest pair in a month or so.
Expect some of you will have run in both so how would they compare ? I use the Kanadia as I like the comfort and cushioning they give.
This was my problem when I took my normal size in the 101's I guess sizing up is the only option. Funnily the Merrel Trail gloves are a bit like that - my toe touches the top, but when I run in them they seem to be fine. When I ran in the 101's my feet just felt too cramped up and horrible.Quote:
Originally Posted by barrierfreeman
I think that inov 8 will have to drop the price of these trail rocs - unless - they are the BEST shoe ever, then people may buy them for the reported 110 smackers.Quote:
Originally Posted by ukhursty
By BEST shoe ever I mean this - They will grip on all terrain, they will be light with a bomb proof upper, they will shed water like a sieve, they will have loads of room for the toes but at the same time allow for contouring. They will be suitable for short races, long races, ultras and training. And... They won't fall apart after 30 days of normal use.
If they do all of that and more I MAY part with the 110 pounds.