Article by Renee Krusemark, Derek Li and Sam Winebaum
New Balance Fresh Foam X 860 v14 ($140)
Introduction
Sam: The 860 has been New Balance’s moderate stability/support daily trainer. With the v14 they jettison the “traditional” firm and rigid foam medial pronation support post and substitute a thin hardened EVA Stability Plane plate. The entire midsole is now dual density with a soft (similar to the 1080) Fresh Foam X underfoot and a slightly firmer foam (similar to the 880 v14) below and focused on the medial side. It gains 2 mm of heel and 4 mm of forefoot stack height to become an 8mm drop shoe while its weight drops 0.1 oz/ 3g.
This more gentle approach to stability, and both the foams are by no means firm, reflects the latest trends in this category of shoes towards less obtrusive support elements at the arch and towards more inherent stability and guidance of the foot. Neutral shoe fans don’t stop reading now. I rarely get along with traditional or some of the high on the midsole “rails” based approaches to stability (Brooks GTS, Nike’s plastic clips etc..) but here New Balance has really nailed a combination of soft underfoot and slightly firmer below Fresh Foam X with some geometric support from the medial sidewalls and the new Stability Plane plate.
In fact, for me it is their best Fresh Foam X ride to date as in the past Fresh Foam X has been overly soft (1080 and More) or borderline overfirm (880 v14). Here we have a nice “balance” of forgiving cushion and gentle support.
Pros:
Dual density foam and the plate energizes and stabilizes what is a softish ride: Sam/Renee/Sally
Smooth flowing at all paces: Sam/Derek
Notably secure comfort oriented upper, especially at the rear of the shoe: Sam/Renee/Sally
Cons:
Heavy for a modern daily trainer at about 10.5 oz US9: Sam/Sally/Renee/Derek
D width plus stretch of engineered mesh in the toe box may have narrower feet reaching for a B width ( 4 widths are available): Sam
Outsole could use more profiling: Sam/Renee
This neutral runner felt the stability elements in medial forefoot more than desired (in B width):Sally
Most comparable shoes
Fresh Foam X 880 v14
ASICS GEL Kayano
Saucony Guide 17
Salomon DRX Bliss
Brooks Glycerin GTS
Stats
Approx Weight women's 8.9 oz / 251g US8 :: men's 10.45 oz / 296g US9
Official Weight: men's 10.8oz / g US M9.5
Prior Version Official Weight: men’s 10.9 oz US9.5
Sample Weights: men’s 10.2 oz / 289g US8.5
women’s 8.9 oz / 251g (US W8)
Total Stack Height: 35.5mm heel /27.5mm forefoot, 8mm drop (prior 10mm drop)
Platform Width: 90 mm heel / 80 mm midfoot / 110 mm forefoot
$140 available now.
Sam’s Video Review of the 860 v14
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Renee: I’m not a stability shoe fan, although I think the 860 checks all the boxes for its purpose. Runners who need a high stack, soft shoe with a comfortable upper and a slight amount of guidance will like it. I have no complaints about the upper fit or comfort. The shoe ran a bit long for me, so runners between half sizes might need to half size down. The upper doesn’t have the best breathability for hot days at fast paces, which is not much of a factor given that the shoe is best for casual/easy paces.
Derek: I don’t usually need any stability in my shoes, so I don’t get to test a lot of them. The last stability shoe I tested was the Saucony Tempus, and even that was not a very typical stability shoe.
Stability shoes tend to be on the heavier side as they pack on more weight from stability elements, but more importantly, they tend to be firmer underfoot as softer shoes are deemed to be inherently less stable. I don’t think that is necessarily a requirement anymore with the use of modern foams, and newer approaches to achieving medio-lateral stability in a shoe (such as raised midsole sidewalls, guide-rail designs and wider platforms), but in general, manufacturers tend to be wary of using soft foams in a stability shoe.
The NB 860 I received comes with a rich blue upper and it really didn’t feel all that heavy in my hands, contrary to what the scale said when I measured its weight.
The fit is true to size and the overall fit is quite relaxed. Heel and midfoot volume is quite typical of what you would expect from NB, while the forefoot is slightly wider than the last couple of NB trainers I tested (Rebel 4, 880v11). Those first couple of steps jogging around in my home, the Fresh Foam X was surprisingly soft, and while I can just about feel that there medial part of midfoot is a tad firmer underfoot, the lateral part of the shoe where I tend to land first felt quite indistinguishable from a neutral shoe. That is to say, the stability elements in this shoe focus more on managing over-pronation than under-pronation.
The upper material looks like perforated mesh, but in hand, it actually feels more like a single layer synthetic mesh with reinforced stitching in some areas to improve lockdown. The material itself is not thick, but there aren’t any big vents in the mesh.
Up front, there is the traditional internal toe guard, which is quite flexible and made of a thin layer of laminate. The tongue itself is well padded, and gusseted on both sides, which help to provide a bit more hold at midfoot.
As you can see, there are only 5 primary rows of eyelets (excluding the heel lock eyelet) and there are fairly widely spaced. Keeping with recent design trends at NB, the eyelets start relatively far back toward midfoot (~1 finger breadth back of the metatarsophalangeal joints). There are pros and cons to this approach, the big pro being that you effectively bypass any potential rubbing from eyelet laminates that tend to occur at the level of the metatarsophalangeal joints where the toes bend during the gait cycle. The downside is that you don’t have as much of a snug performance feel across the met-heads, no matter how tightly you lace the shoes up. I think in the case of a trainer, this is perfectly acceptable.
The resultant fit of this shoe is more on the relaxed side for me, but comfort is likely the priority here.
Toward the rear of the shoe, we have a rigid heel cup that provides plenty of support and blend well with the padded heel collar to give a secure heel hold. Note that the rigid heel cup is not limited to stability models with NB, as they tend to like rigid heel cups for their neutral trainers too.
All in all, the upper does a decent job and holds the foot well. There is no bottom-heavy experience here. My main concern relates to the breathability of the upper. As it doesn’t really breathe all that well, the shoe can feel quite warm if you are running in temps north of 85degF. I got around this by using very thin Steigen socks.
Midsole & Platform
Renee: The midsole immediately under the insole is soft, but the feel is not mushy thanks to the Stability Plane and the “bottom” midsole layer which is more dense (see the graphic at the start of the article). The underfoot feel is very comfortable and the stability aspect is not intrusive for me, as someone who much prefers a neutral shoe. The 860 is a cushy beast. For long runs or easy miles, the midsole checks the boxes. Adding in tempo or faster paces during long runs (3 to 4 hours for my testing) is not possible for me because of the weight but stronger runners might disagree.
Sam: I have never been a huge fan of “Fresh Foam” either overly firm and dead riding as in earlier shoes or mushy and energy sapping for me in the 1080 v13. Here the 3 part combination of softer Fresh Foam X underfoot, the thin but front to back Stablity Plane plate, and firmer towards the ground “solves” the long dilemma of either too soft or too firm.
As a runner who prefers neutral shoes and really can’t stand firm medial posted, top of midsole rails or overdone mid foot rubber the 860 v14 strikes a nice balance. Yes, some support beyond my preferences is felt from the vertical medial side walls but it is not overlay firm. Cushy as Renne says but never mushy the Stablity Plane is a great concept.
Outsole
Renee: For review, I wore the 860 on dirt and gravel. Sam’s note about the outsole profile made sense for me. At first I thought the high stack and rocker was causing some slight slipping on loose gravel, but the outsole itself is fairly soft and forgiving. I see this as an asset for walking though. The exposed midsole area has some wrinkling, but overall no durability issues.
Derek: There is a generous amount of rubber coverage here, and most of it is quite soft and likely blown rubber. Here again, you can see there is a prioritization of over-pronation control, with more continuous outsole rubber coverage along the medial border of the shoe. I think NB did a good job of choosing a softer rubber compound to make the overall underfoot experience softer and more forgiving. I’ve mostly used my shoes on wet and dry roads, and so far, outsole grip has been good, and the outsole is holding up fairly well to wear as well.
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Renee: The midsole feels comfortable with an easy roll forward thanks to a rocker geometry underfoot. The only stability aspect I feel is from the “stability” plane sandwiched between the midsole layers. Unlike stability shoes of previous years, there’s no overwhelming guidance from “rails” that inhibit a natural ankle moment or at the arch from a firmer foam insert post.
The ride feels best at slow paces for me, striking at midfoot or heel. I did short strides on fresh legs striking more naturally at my forefoot and the shoes felt fine, but most definitely this is not an uptempo shoe. The overall weight of the shoe, stability aspect, and soft midsole make the 860 best for easy paces, or dare I say it: walking. While it’s not my pick for a running shoe, it is very comfortable to wear for walking on tired legs. My score is based on my preferences, so I’ll stress that the 860 will be great for other runners who need the stack and stability.
Renee’s Score: 8.4/10 (-1 heavy, -.6 best for easy/slow efforts only)
😊😊
Sam: The "stability shoe", often in my view "over prescribed" continues to evolve with more guidance oriented approaches that adapt to the runner rather than firmly control. While here New Balance does keep the vertical medial side walls of such shoes, the foams are relatively soft and consistent throughout the midsole with no firm posts or plastic top of midsole rails or hard sidewalls. The Stability Plane plate provides moderate support while not in the way of my stride or shouting at me at the arch. As such, if you are support/stability shoe runner who wants to tone down on the older overt approaches it offers a still solidly stable transition away from the old school stability shoes.
I would love to see some form of the Stability Plane incorporated in lighter lower density midsoles, for example the Rebel v4
The ride is comfortable, consistent and protective making the 880 a reliable if somewhat heavy and not particularly exciting daily training companion. It is a great choice if you are unsure just how much "pronation control" you really need, so beginner runners in particular, or if you feel more traditional approaches to support are too overbearing.
Sam's Score: 8.9/10
Deductions for weight, and related, dense not particularly exciting midsole foams
Derek: After multiple runs in the shoes, I have come to accept that this shoe is primarily going to be a recovery day shoe for me. The ride is very smooth and predictable, and the stability elements are not very overbearing.
I do find that the shoe struggles to pick up the pace, and I think it is just a combination of the softer ride, and lack of snappiness through the toebox, and maybe even the lack of a snug performance wrap for the upper. Based on these attributes, that takes out the ability to handle uptempo work. It was also when I attempted to do strides or faster surges that I really noticed the weight of the shoe holding me back.
Most of the time, the shoes just disappear on your feet as you glide along.
Then there’s the issue of the upper being on the warmer side. It is not too bad and generally quite tolerable for runs up to an hour, but on longer runs, I do find that the heat starts to build up a bit too much in the shoe, then I start to think a lot more about whether hotspots are building up, rather than enjoying the run properly.
As a result of all these factors, I think easy runs up to an hour are the best use case for me. I think the fit of the shoe is such that it should work for almost every foot shape, with the exception of narrow and lower volume feet; the latter group may find that the toe box is just a little too sloppy for them. Given the higher weight of the shoe, I think lighter runners may find that it is just too much shoe for them, and conversely, it is likely to be more effective for heavier runners.
Derek’s Score 8.425 / 10
Ride (50%): 8.5 Fit (30%): 8.5 Value (15%): 8 Style (5%): 8.5
Smiles score 😊😊1/2
Comparisons
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
New Balance Fresh Foam X Vongo
We have not tested the Vongo. It is a bit heavier as it is more shoe in terms of cushion stack. It has the same heel height as the 860 but with 2mm more upfront cushion as 6mm drop shoe.The Stability Plane is full length on both sides of the shoe unlike the 860's which is partial on the lateral side.
Saucony Tempus (RTR Review)
Renee: The Saucony Tempus is a light stability shoe, but one that basically rides neutral. The Tempus is a lightweight shoe for its stack as compared to the much heavier 860. The Tempus has some pep to its ride and works well for uptempo paces. I overwhelmingly prefer the Tempus, but would suggest the 860 for those who prefer softer cushion underfoot. Sizing is comparable with the 860 feeling slightly longer to me.
Derek: I wear US9.5 in both models. The Tempus is actually a slightly lighter shoe on the scale than the 860v14. The key difference for me is the rocker of the Tempus. There is enough flex in the 860v14 that any rocker profile is not noticeable during the run. In contrast, the Tempus is a bit stiffer and more deliberate in prescribing a forward rocker motion, and that is enough to make it easier to holder faster paces in it, while not feeling too awkward at slower recovery paces. It is still a lot of shoe, and not my best choice for uptempo work, but between the 860 and the Tempus, I would say the Tempus is the better all-rounder. Like Renee, I prefer the Tempus as a stability trainer, being the more versatile shoe.
Shopping at our partners below for the 860 v14 is much appreciated and helps support RoadTrailRun
Tester Profiles
Renee is a former U.S. Marine journalist, which is when her enjoyment of running and writing started. She isn’t that awesome of a runner, but she tries really hard. Most of her weekly 50-60 miles take place on rural country roads in Nebraska, meaning mud, gravel, dirt, hills, and the occasional field. She has PR’s of 1:30:59 for the half marathon and 3:26:45 for the marathon.
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
Europe only: use RTR code RTR5ALL for 5% off all products, even sale products
2 comments:
Interested to know whether you prefer the 860 v14 or the slightly firmer 880 v14? I don't need to the stability of the 860 but have heard the 880 is overly firm. Cheers, Tom
I'd love if someone who actually normally wore stability shoes would review the 860 v14. I appreciate the reviews here, but they are all from people who admit in the review that they don't normally wear or even like stability shoes. I love the favorable reviews, but it would mean much more coming from someone who overpronates and normally wears a stability shoe.
Post a Comment