Minimalist Trail Runners

[tackdr1ver]

I have a pair of Merrell MOAB's that are pretty grippy tread-wise. I wear those for shooting all the time, they are really comfortable and light weight for their size. I also have a pair of Merrell Intercepts which I like even better and I have worn them to countless matches and they have only slipped once and that was on a muddy patch where I don't think cleats would have been too much better. The only downside I can see to Merrell is price, I just picked up a pair of Nike cleats at the Nike factory outlet for $25 all of the Merrell's are well over a Benjamin.

[diehli]

Your foot is not on the ground. It doesn't matter the height of the outsole, your foot can slip on an insole if it doesn't have either perfect and rigid encapsulation or Spider-Man-like adhesion with the insole. That feet move in shoes is not speculation, it's physics, just like tires sliding on asphalt.

Rolling is a different, if related, issue and may or may not be a problem depending on the individual. Irrespective of sole height, at some point the way the shoe would rotate around one's foot as it slips would either require the foot and ankle to rotate or the shoe to flex like a sock. Since soles tend to have some rigidity, particularly in the lateral plane (and it's intentionally built in with some of the minimalist ones with their rock protection layer), it's much more likely that one's foot (and, subsequently, the ankle) will torque before the shoe gives, whether through "simple" biomechanics and physics or avoiding the pain of the metatarsals twisting.

Back to foot movement so that I can provide my own anecdotal evidence. First, foot movement in my shoes is something I experience every day with how I move in my relatively minimal shoes: various styles of NBs built on their RL-3 last. I primarily rotate between 3 pairs of 871s, but also have single pairs of 1520s, 572s, 573s, and 101s that I wear on occasion.¹ Although my feet slip, they slip much less than in other shoes where the heel tends to be wider to accommodate my wide forefoot. As for the rest of my size, I'm currently pushing 340 (need to get back on the wagon) and have thighs around 31" (though it's been awhile since I leg-pressed 1500 lbs, so they're less muscle than they once were; I buy pants and shorts a couple sizes larger than my waist size so that my ass and thighs fit). How much those size stats impact how I move, I dunno, but I'd venture to guess that they do (F=ma and I'm not a lumberer). I've also got pretty good balance (love walking on skinny curbs, which is probably made easier by my 22" lower legs and wide forefoot).

And, FYI, I just played with my 101s, which I have a reported 7 or 8 mm drop (not insubstantial, but not as much as others) and I can see that if I got unlucky that slippage would cause rolling—mostly because I'd want to avoid torquing my metatarsals—which may lead to an ankle injury.

So, like I said in my original post, YMMV.

¹That's all gonna change by the end of this year as I'll need to start wearing dress shoes daily. *shudder*

[warpspeed]

I love Merrell shoes in general so I will have to try a pair of the Trail Gloves it looks like. I'd like to wear those five toe things but they just don't fit my foot.

[Seth]

Great post.. The two issues -- internal slipping on the insole and rolling need to be separated, obviously. I have a bad knee (partially torn ACL) and abused feet. My big toe on one foot was broken severely about 20 years ago and the joint is destroyed. Needless to say I get a LOT of pain in my big toe if the shoe is too restrictive and my knee starts to complain if the shoe rolls at all.

Going from a traditional running shoe to a zero drop I immediately noticed a couple of changes physically. First was my knee stopped hurting after running. I suspect that since my foot was hitting the ground squarely and not wobbling over a cushioned heel it wasn't being tweaked laterally. The pain in my big toe also went away as the toe box was large enough to accomodate the room it needed.

The knee pain returns immediately if I run in older running shoes. If they have more than a couple of hundred miles on them, they're too soft and the foot rolls over the sole. This problem is nearly impossible for the minimalist shoe. Even cutting and turning, there's no elevation to speak of over the sole and you're basically sandwiching foot to ground via a thin patch of rubber, so I found that I'm not rolling over the sole.

INTERNALLY, I could invision a big guy moving around in a minimalist shoe if they didn't snug nicely. Certainly the sock/ insole interface could have some movement, but I would be inclined to attribute that to fit. Certainly the two issues are connected....

[diehli]

I'm on my second ACL repair (first one in '98 with my patellar tendon, second one at the beginning of 2010 with cadaver hamstring; also had several other things done each time the surgeons were in there, including bone, cartilage, and meniscus work), so I feel you on the knee issue. I don't doubt for a second that there's something about the position that 0-drop shoes put you in that's biomechanically better for you than shoes with drop. It may be something more than the wobbly cushioning, like putting you in the right position for how you're built so your bones and muscles fire how they want to.

For how I balance on my feet (I put more weight on the balls of my feet, which likely contributes to my calf size), I like some rise so that when I'm on my heels, I don't feel like I'm going to fall backwards. Throwing shoes (for shotput and discus) are the perfect example of shoes that do that to me. The 101s feel like they put me more on my heels when standing, too.

Don't forget that the force acting on the foot isn't directly at the opposite edge of the foot's interaction with the insole or ground and what I'm describing even happens to y'all little folk (think center of gravity). It's just that I generate more force and can more easily overcome coefficients of friction in my shoes.

As far as cinching down shoes, I've got an older pair of Bates boots (my primary shooting boots from years ago) where the leather is pushed out laterally over the sole in the forefoot. I had a horrible tendency as a kid to underpronate, so I suffered through a lot of ankle strains, sprains, and one break. Still tend to hit on the outside of my foot, which may be why I like the NB 871s so much: they have a little outrigger on the forefoot which seems to keep the forefoot from rolling. My point is that even with shoes like my Bates, which were sturdy leather construction, ain't nothing gonna keep things 100% stable (well, not without transferring it to other body parts, like with ski boots).

Bottom line: people are different. If someone's good with mesh forefoot shoes (or the shoes one wears are reinforced to help subdue lateral movement), then rock 'n' roll. But feet can move in shoes, so it's something to be aware of in case you're one of the folks that deals with it, underpronation, and/or other ankle issues, even if you wouldn't classify the issues as "problems".

BTW, all this shoe talk lead me to find the NB 673s, RL-3-based hiking boots, so a bonus for me.

[Bear23]

Just wait until you step onto a sharp rock.

We have a lot of lateral movement, explosive entry and exit maneuvers in action sports. I would advise more robust shoes. Merrels and Keens!

[blu46and2]

I use these for IDPA, nice and aggresive and very grippy: http://www.salomon.com/us/product/speedcross-3-cs.html

[PistoleroJesse]

I don't mean to sound defensive but I thought you could all use a little background on my physiology so you can have an idea of what I mean by: I'm not concerned with rolling my ankle.

I'm 5'4" and 155 lbs, was a wrestler/running back in middle school through junior year of high-school, also a snowboarder from middle school through college, took up Judo and Aikido in college and hiked an average of 20 miles a week in the summers (most of that in Chacos), now I shoot because there are no mountains where I currently live. Through all of that I've never had a problem with ankles and very few with knees. Blisters, on occasion.

Guess I'm going to be the guinea pig on either the Inov-8s or the MT20v2s because both Inov-8 and New Balance have a track record with me of proven fit as I own a pair of Inov-8 Mudclaw 270s and NB M730s.

I'll report back my findings and observations. And remember everyone the specific application of these shoes is for IDPA and trail running, not solely USPSA. Traditionally there has been much less movement involved in the local IDPA matches compared to the local USPSA matches.

Finally, this thread was not meant to be a discussion of minimalism vs non-minimalism, but a word of advice from any one who has used any of these shoes, and better yet if you have used them in competition. Sorry for not making that more clear.

[The Antichrome]

I had the Trail Gloves, I even shot a match or two in them. They're ok.

I'm using Merrell Bare Access shoes for my 'indoor' match shoe.

I have some NB Minimus, similar to the ones you're asking about. I like them better than the Merrells. I've worn them in matches too.

I have Inov-8 Talon 212's and Roclite 285's ...very nice shoes, unfortunately, as much as I like them, Inov-8's dont fit my feet as well as some other shoes (too pointy)

LaSportiva Crosslites continue to be my favorite, but they're not really a minimalist shoe.

[The Antichrome]

... Something at least water resistant would be nice also.

Merrell makes a GoreTex waterproof version in the Glove series.

...Just wish i could find a pair of dress shoes to wear to work that felt as good.

Tough Gloves are the dress version.

[RWilke]

I'll report back my findings and observations. And remember everyone the specific application of these shoes is for IDPA and trail running, not solely USPSA. Traditionally there has been much less movement involved in the local IDPA matches compared to the local USPSA matches.

Finally, this thread was not meant to be a discussion of minimalism vs non-minimalism, but a word of advice from any one who has used any of these shoes, and better yet if you have used them in competition. Sorry for not making that more clear.

I think you will find insufficient traction to be a problem. But good luck.

[markcic]

id prefer something with more ankle support. Something at least water resistant would be nice also.

Vibram Bormio

[calvary45]

I'll report back my findings and observations. And remember everyone the specific application of these shoes is for IDPA and trail running, not solely USPSA. Traditionally there has been much less movement involved in the local IDPA matches compared to the local USPSA matches.

Finally, this thread was not meant to be a discussion of minimalism vs non-minimalism, but a word of advice from any one who has used any of these shoes, and better yet if you have used them in competition. Sorry for not making that more clear.

I think you will find insufficient traction to be a problem. But good luck.

I also wear inov8s and i get some of my best traction wearing inov8 shoes, just as sufficient as my vibrams. After all thats whats they were designed for.