Shoe designer Brian Best and his New Balance MT110

What was the mandate for the MT110? It look like the illegitimate child of the Minimus and the MT101.
The goal of the project was always to evolve the 100 series. Bryan (my project manager) is always looking to continue a story and not just start over from scratch. We were getting closer with the 101 to what Tony was looking for in a shoe, but we thought we could push it a bit further. I think you definitely see some of the Minimus influence in the design of the 110 which was something we definitely tried to do. We also wanted to carry over some themes from the 101 which you’ll pick up if you look closely.

The New Balance MT101 has always been a reference for trail runners. Were there any fears in fixing something that was not broken in designing the MT110?
That’s a good question. When we started the project, we weren’t really sure how far to push the update. The 101 was really receiving a lot of great feedback, but at the same time pushing the needle just a little bit is almost never a good idea or fun for that matter.  It was a 2 quarter project (projects are usually 1 quarter), so we had a bit of time to try some things. We ended up going to first prototype with two patterns. One was very similar to the 101 and the second was the current 110. We wanted to test our concepts with our athletes Erik and Tony before making that decision. In the end they preferred the 110 made out of laser [perforated] synthetic so we went in that direction.

I’ll be honest: Since trying on the 110, I don’t ever want to put my feet into the 101. Ever. So we can always improve, right?
That’s great! I’m glad you like them. It means a lot to me and the team. We’re always keen on compliments. There is always room for improvement though!

Our goal has always been to make a pair of shoes that Tony doesn’t cut up!  Sounds funny but it’s true.  He has some pretty specific tastes and I think as the shoe has evolved from the 790 to the 100 to the 101, Chris (the designer on the 790, 100, and 101) took his feedback and really moved each shoe closer to something that Tony would wear without modification.  I know the biggest improvement for the 110 was using the Minimus last.  It seemed like a perfect fit for tony with a 4mm drop and expansive forefoot area, it meant that Tony wouldn’t need to perform a manual drop on his heels (i.e. cut the rubber off) and we could finally give him a pair of shoes he’d be comfortable running in without any modifications.  So far I think he’s been pretty happy with the shoe and we’re definitely looking forward to making the shoe even better as we move forward.

So far so good. I know a lot of people are really excited about it. It was a major update in a lot of ways, but we also tried to keep some things familiar to the predecessor(s). You’ll notice some lineage in the medial support story, the foxing shape, and the forefoot support visual (crossing over the met heeds).  We wanted people to feel like it was part of the 100 and 101 family.

I think the biggest thing we tried to do on the 110 was to push how far we could simplify the upper design while still having it perform better than the 100 or 101. I thought about soccer boots and how well they hold up over the course of a match and thought that it would be interesting to see how that type of shoe would hold up on a 100 mile run through the mountains. Obviously it might be too hot, so that’s where the idea of laser perforating the upper for breathability came into play. I think it also became a really interesting concept in that most shoes you’re adding things to make the shoe more supportive. With this shoe, we were removing material to create the supportive areas.

What are the advantages of using a laser perforated upper?
I think support is the biggest advantage of using the synthetic. The real test was getting it on Tony’s and Erik’s feet to see how it performed, and in the end they really liked it. The other cool side effect that we didn’t end up exploring too much was having the flexibility to laser perf custom patterns for different runners. I’m hoping we can play around with this a bit more on the v2.

The remarkable aspect of the shoes is the fit. Is this because of the new upper?  
That was the goal. I think we had that in mind from the start.  Something that was really supportive and felt like a driving glove.  A second skin almost.

Are we going to see that upper in other shoes in the future? Other than trail?
It’s a possibility for sure. On the v2 we’re looking into some new applications, but we are still definitely open to an evolution of the current construction.

Any fight to validate the concept with your design team? I mean, an upper full of holes seems to be the worst idea ever for trail shoes, no?
At first I think the team was a little unsure just how it would look in 3D once the design was finished.  We initially had two different upper patterns. One was a true evolution of the MT101 (mesh upper) and the other was the layered synthetic option. We went through a lot of prototypes and it wasn’t pretty at first. Once we got the pattern locked in, I think everyone saw how unique the shoe was and really liked it. I think the true validation was when we sent Tony and Erik some initial prototypes to run in and they both were 100% for the synthetic version. That was pretty exciting!

Why use the Minimus last with a 4 mm heel drop?
The 4 mm heel to toe drop came straight from a lot of bio-mechanical testing in our Studio group over the course of a couple years. We spent a lot of time testing different drops while developing the Minimus last and that one ended up being the sweet spot. I know a lot of natural running enthusiasts are adamant about a zero drop, but I think for longer runs a lot of our athletes seem to be more interested in something with just a little bit more cushioning, so that 4mm drop ended up being the best number.

Can you tell us about the Rockstop feature? 
Rockstop is something that we’ve carried forward in our line for a while now. Essentially it’s a TPU plate in the forefoot that protects your foot from sharp rocks. It’s evolved over the years, but it’s definitely on most of our trail product.

The 110s feature a low toebox height? On paper, this usually results in « black toenails »!
The forefoot shape is an attribute of the Minimus last. It was developed to allow the forefoot to splay a bit and mimic a barefoot experience.

The wider forefoot allows the foot to expand laterally on impact. It’s another aspect that seems quite exclusive to the 110.
The Minimus last is being used on a few different shoes right now. The MT10, MR10, and 0’s all use a form of the Minimus last so there should be some similarities, but also at the same time the pattern of the upper will account for some variables.  For example the MT10 has a rubber strap in the forefoot which a lot of people really like and some say fits a bit snug. Something like that can definitely have an impact on the final fit of the shoe. I think the 110 is pretty successful in that it is really simple having only a few layers of material so it’s got a nice fit. Not too tight or too loose.

New Balance works a lot with user feedback. My only criticism of the 110s is aimed towards the outsole. The rubber seems softer in order to provide traction. Yet this yields a shorter lifespan of the outsole. Is this a sacrifices faced by designers when creating racing specific trail shoe?
We ended up using sticky rubber on the 110 and it’s gotten a lot of really good feedback. Knowing it’s a bit softer than traditional rubber, we ended up adjusting some of the lug designs to compensate to help the outsole hold up a bit longer. You can see some of the lug adjustments on the lateral mid/forefoot crash area. We noticed some of the lugs were wearing away quicker than the rest of the shoe so we beefed them up a bit. It’s definitely something we’re working on in future projects.

Is the 110 racing specific?
No definitely not. I personally put a ton of miles on a few pairs of prototypes and was really comfortable running 4 or 5 road miles at a time.  These shoes are great for Tony running 100+ miles at a time or someone like me that is only going to run 25 miles a week.  We want the shoe to be for everyone including our athletes.

The killer aspect of the shoes is that with all these new and unique features, the shoes retails for only $85! What’s the catch?
It’s actually kind of funny! I didn’t realize it was only going to be an $85 dollar shoe until much later in the project (I think I thought it was going to be like $110 or something like that). Had I realized that earlier on in the project I might not have tried laser perfing the synthetic seeing as it’s not the cheapest treatment available to a designer.  It’s just a credit to the great team we have here. My developer Steve Norton and Project Manager both did a great job trusting me throughout the project and I don’t think we would have accomplished what we did on this shoe without them.

Your boss told me that you are already working on the 110’s next version. Is it going to be a major or minor update?
I think that some aspects of it are going to be minor but we have some new ideas to improve the design. We’re always trying to do things a little better over time. We update shoes. This project is no different. As much fun as the v1 was to work on, I’ve got my list of things I’d like to improve upon. We’re still really early in the design process, but so far I think the team is really excited about the direction. I’ll keep you posted!