Following on from last week’s review of the excellent Salewa Wildfires, this week I’m looking at a pair of New Balance 810’s and finally next week, I’ll finish with some Brooks Cascadia 7’s.
New Balance 810’s. Notice the wear inside of the heel and the sole slightly coming away at the front. Read on!
Again, the New Balances have been thoroughly battered and bruised, they’re not shiny and new from the box. This particular pair in a rather striking silver and orange (it at least makes one look like they know what they’re doing), treated me very well on EL Camino this year where they pulled in around 400 miles from the start before I switched to the Salewa’s, purely because my feet had grown slightly as they tend due when thru-hiking.
On the Appalachian Trail last year I started hiking in a pair of Inov8 Roclite 286 GTX’s. They were left over from my Pacific Crest Trail thru-hike and because of the addition of Goretex, were far too sweaty to wear in the heat of the PCT. They fared very well on the AT, with its slightly wetter climate and got me, amazingly, to the half-way point at Harpers Ferry, around 1,000 miles before giving out. I switched to a pair of Brooks Addictions for a short while which had to deal with the rocks of Pennsylvania, a renowned section of the AT once described, in reference to it’s rough surface, as where boots go to die. I found out why first hand when the Brooks were on the tail end of a pretty brutal shredding and were finished after a mere 200 miles. I had been hiking occasionally with Chris ‘Juggles’ Chiappini and we had a couple of discussions on the subject of our wider fitting. He had walked regularly in 810’s and sung their praises, so when we got off trail in New York for a couple of days, a trip to the local New balance store was arranged.
They fitted well, and were generous in the front area where my wide feet always seem to have problems with a lot of other brands, so I walked out with a pair in black and yellow and merrily returned to the AT.
Hitting the 2,000 mile mark on the Appalachian Trail – On the left my Brooks Cascadias, to the right Juggles and his New Balance 810’s
The AT is a harsh testing ground. Shoes will get a fair mix of pretty much all terrain and all climates. From run of the mill woodland tracks with soft peaty earth, to sandy sections, rock and mud. They had to deal with a smattering of rain here and there and get me at least 500 miles before I would think about replacements.
The 810’s, as with most of my thru-hiking choices, are in fact more of a trail running shoe. I prefer the lightness, the low cut, the improved breathability and just the freedom of movement that trail runners bring. There is a sacrifice with this type of footwear in that durability is compromised over traditional full blown, ankle length boots and their low cut cousins. It is a trade I’m happy to accept for the reasons I have just mentioned but in my experience I would demand at least 500 miles from shoes of this type, otherwise I’ll look at something else because it would just prove far too expensive.
They did exactly that, seeing me through around 500 miles to where I switched to the Cascadias. There were some niggles I shall go through but overall, they were a sweet pair of feet cushioners which I can recommend. I subsequently bought another pair before I left the States, predominantly because they are cheaper over there and this is the pair I used on EL Camino with the photos on this post.
The manufacturers claimed weight is 387 gr / 13.65 oz each shoe, although a size is not advised; actual weight on my scales is 374 gr / 13.19 oz. for size UK 8 (EU 42 / USA 9). I would consider any shoe under 400 gr a decent weight. As mentioned, the wider fitting at the front served me well and is a well-known feature of New Balance so if you also have this issue; they’re a decent brand to take a look at. Sold as an off road running shoe, they boast New Balances ‘AT Tread’ (no relation the trail but I thought it a good omen), which is a little more rugged than road runners, especially around the edges. The N-ERGY sole claims more cushioning and shock absorption with a C-Cap midsole claiming the same. A synthetic upper mesh cradles the feet offering good breathability.
To be honest, I ignore most manufacturers jargon when it comes to describing their products. Most of it is branded rubbish designed to make us go ‘Ooh’ and ‘Ahh’ and in fact is just a collection of posh names and logos , with short pre-fixes. Think along the lines of car makers with GTI, EXI, CDTI, ECO, blah, blah, blah . . . you get the picture.
The only points I concern myself with when thru-hiking concerning my footwear is first – comfort. They must fit well, otherwise there’s no point. This is why as good as a pair of shoes sounds on the brands website; it’s of no use at all if they don’t fit your feet. Go to a decent shop, get your feet measured and then, they should be able to tell you what brands suit your feet.
Second, durability. I expect at least 500 miles and generally, most off road runners would reach this. If they don’t, I’d look at another model from the same brand with suspicion the next time around.
The addition of a decent toe rand would benefit the 810’s
Third, breathability. I gave up Gore-Tex a long time ago for trails. OK, going up a Scottish mountain in the middle of winter fair enough but a waterproof promise means one thing, my feet will sweat. If they sweat it means my feet are uncomfortable and the inevitable result is blisters.
The 810’s came good in all three points. Comfort – spot on. I knew they wrapped well around my feet because I had already tried them on in the shop, and I was aware of NB’s reputation with wider fitting. There was plenty of room up front for my feet to wiggle around in. The heel stayed put, no slipping around even though I picked a size marginally too big for me which is how I prefer things. This is down to feet swell which occurs once your feet are warmed up and it also gave me a margin for error if my size increased (during the course of thru hiking, it is not uncommon for feet to increase in size. On the PCT I went from a size 8UK at the start to a 9UK at the finish).
N-ENERGY, AT TREAD, GTI, whatever, the footbed was impressive. Jargon aside to whatever the manufacturers claim, my only area of concern is whether, or how much, I can feel the trail through them. Some fare worse than others but off road runners are usually improved in this area to cope with the harsher terrain expected. I could feel sharper rocks at times but only marginally and nothing that concerned me. I had no issues with the grip. If they went up a steep section of wet rock with slippery tree roots with no problem then I was happy.
The acid test of a good pair of footwear is how your feet feel at the end of a 25 miler. Wrong type of shoe, bad fit or just bad design means you’ll be pulling them off as soon as you hit camp and trading them in for your Crocs. I always wore camp shoes in the evening anyway but I was in no rush to get the 810’s off and if I hadn’t had any camp shoes, it wouldn’t have bothered me.
Despite a tongue loop for the laces, the tongue itself had an annoying habit of slipping over to the outside of the shoe
Next, durability. They performed well here as well. 500 miles is what I expect and this is exactly what I got. They could have done another 100 miles but at that point of the AT, I had around 500 miles to the finish and was in town at the time so traded them over.
They gave out in three of the usual places. The toe rand at the front, not so much a rand as where the sole curls up the front of the shoe and is either glued or stitched in place. It’s a common fault and I expect it, sometimes squeezing a little Seamseal underneath helps which may last another 100 miles. It’s not serious either, there’s no reason why they can’t still be walked in so more cosmetic that anything.
The inside of the 810’s at the heel section wore down to a hole. This may be something do with my mild over pronation (landing on the outside of the feet and rolling over to the inside), but I’m not an expert. Again, not serious and nothing a little duct tape didn’t sort out although I must remember to stick a piece of the wonder stuff in from the start with my next pair of so it hopefully would sort the problem before it arose. A little wear as well on the inside heel, again due to my over pronation and expected.
Lastly, breathability. The whole point of running shoes is, for me at least, to get away from leather, Gore Tex and the higher density/ thickness materials common with the more durable choices. Mesh is wonderful, your feet don’t sweat anywhere near as much meaning feet are happier. For those who question not wearing Gore Tex I’ll try and explain. I get the theory, keep your feet dry, and Gore Tex does this admirably. What it does do is make your feet sweat worse than Fidel Castro carrying a suitcase full of cocaine at USA immigration. It’s just plain uncomfortable. Also, Gore Tex and similar additions take an age to dry out; meaning a wet pair of shoes will still be wet when you slip them on the following morning. Nice. With a decent breathable mesh you will of course get wet feet in the rain (to be honest the AT was so wet in sections that even Gore Tex was failing), but at least in the morning after a night of airing they were usually pretty dry the following day.
Heel adjustment. Frankly, er, rubbish !
There is a couple of niggles with the 810’s. Firstly, the tongue. Despite a lace loop they constantly slipped over to the outside of the shoe. It didn’t affect comfort to much; it was more of a mental niggling thing that annoyed me. Even trying to vary the lace set up was useless, after a couple of miles they just slipped again.
Also, there is an addition on the outside of the heel at the back of some cord running back and forth with a plastic pull at the top. Some brands extend this cord round to the first lacing point and it is designed to tighten the heel around the foot to reduce slipping. I’ve never seen a system, or heard anyone talk about them with glowing feedback. The 810’s is basically rubbish. It doesn’t tighten the heel anyway and even if it did, there is no way to lock it in place. Pull on the plastic tensioner, let go and it just slips back to where it was.
There is no decent toe rand wrapped around the front and sides of the 810’s. Knock or scrape your pinkies and you’ll feel it.
Overall the 810’s are nice contenders for a thru-hike. They score in the important boxes and the negatives are minor enough to not really worry about.
This model (MT810GO) is still sold although there is a newer version now on sale, the 810 V2, strangely with no tension system on the heel?!
Price, as always, varies according to suppliers but in the UK, expect to pay around £50.00 to £60.00. Our American friends, less susceptible to our rip off prices here, can get them for as little as $39.99 after a little googling, an absolute bargain.
Up next week, the final participant in the three shoe review – the excellent Brooks Cascadia 7’s.
Other shoe related posts: