New Balance surprised many wearers of the original Minimus Trail in late May or early June when a few photos of the MT20 appeared on ShoeMart's website. Without much of an explanation to accompany this alternative to the MT10, speculations and theories about the Minimus Trail 20 went wild: Was it a replacement for the MT10 in response to perceived complaints about the original model?Was it an update in the product line for the sake of an update? If so, why so soon? Was it the promised zero-drop version that so many of us had been wanting in the initial Minimus?DISCLAIMER: This post is silly. I have no excuse for spending so much time comparing the aesthetics of two perfectly good shoes. If you are not interested in nerdy shoe stuff, you'll probably want to read someone else's blog before this post takes up anymore of your time.Answers to these questions have not been readily apparent. But, RunningPundit's stellar investigative skills produced an insightful timeline of inquiry that probed the rationale behind NB's release of the MT20. So, go there to read what one or more NB reps have said about the differences between the MT10 and the MT20.Stay here to compare the MT10 and MT20 from an artsy-fartsy perspective. As an aesthetically inclined fellow, I appreciate things that look nice, products that exhibit good design. And, I'm more than happy to subject two seemingly similar products to my unfounded opinions. So, let's begin:MT10 vs. MT20: ProfileFrom the first time I saw photos of the MT10 last Fall, I was enamored with it's unique design and ambitiously minimal construction (for a mainstream shoe company). Once released to the general public this past March, the MT10 met my expectations in spades. It looked great right out of the box. And, one of it's most conspicuous physical attributes is the toe spring.That toe spring really adds some charm and down-to-earth ruggedness to the MT10. You can imagine your feet nimbly traversing rocks and roots on the trail when you look at that toe spring. The MT20, on the other hand, seems to exhibit a much more minimal (pardon the pun) toe spring. In fact, from the profile, the MT20 resembles a sleek sports car or shark with the way the shoe's nose seems to form a blunt point.Sports cars are cool. And, I like sharks even more. But, as far as trail running goes, I prefer the rugged, more loosely fashioned toe box profile of the MT10. I mean, yeah, of course, a shoe as light as the MT10 or MT20 should evoke a sense of speed. But, there's just something about the MT10's profile that makes me want to run on the trails more than the MT20's does.Moreover, comparing the profiles of these companion shoes, I prefer the linear balance (omg another pun!) imposed by the strong lines on the side of the MT10. There's that black line extending from the midsole at the front of the heel up through the back of the "N" to the laces. This line is not present on the MT20, which really emphasizes that curved band running from the back, top of the heel to the midsole at the forefoot. With that black line missing as a counterbalance on the profile of the MT20, there's an impression of front-facing heaviness while the lighter orange color seems to beg for something to weigh it down, something like your heel. So, if you look at the black lines on the MT10, you see that they appear to emphasize a foot strike towards the midfoot. And, the upward momentum of the toe spring gives a sense of active flow to the design. But, the MT20's black lines put a lot of emphasis closer to the base of the forefoot, leaving the heel area open and a little incomplete. Plus, the flatter toe box seems to put a stop to the forward momentum that those black lines imply.MT10 vs. MT20: From the TopOnce again, the MT10 and MT20 direct our attention to their toe boxes. Each shoe clearly has a wide toe box with ample room for most runners' wiggly piggies (especially true since the Minimus is available in widths). And, while these two photos read more..
No comments:
Post a Comment