[phlegm]

[Yep, could be a cross-post to the Apparel subforum, but I'm too lazy.]

I love my old Shimano MT51s, but they are getting a bit ragged. I also just realized that they are tanks:



Didn't realize I was riding with more than a kilo on my feet, so I figured I could do better than that pretty easily, but still get a quality, properly fitting shoe. Also, when we consider Weight-Weenie-ism, we typically like to focus on "rotational mass" and how a light wheelset is easily noticeable. What about rotating shoes? Huh? What?

Anyway, I really like how the Shimano shoes fit, and given that I'm ordering online, I wanted to be confident in sizing. Aside from the fit though, the MT51s were bombproof.

Shimano has a surprisingly good website dedicated to shoes now, which a lot of details and a great comparison chart:
OFF-ROAD - CYCLING FOOTWEAR AND PEDALS - LIFESTYLE GEAR - SHIMANO

As a starting point, we see their XC90 top-end shoe with custom molding. They're pretty light at a crazy 627g for the pair (claimed, size EUR 40), but very pricey.

I finally settled on the XC51, which is far cheaper, and only 1g heavier (claimed) than the more expensive XC70 shoe. I am trading away a carbon fibre cleat plate for a cheaper, and presumably less stiff polyurethane version, but I figured I'd give it a shot.

I opted for the "'N" or narrow version of the show, which interestingly sports a different colour variation, which I prefer anyway. I'll call out a couple of disappointments that you can see in the pics below:

1. There's a cheesy shine to the shoe that I'm not a fan of.
2. While it can accommodate front spikes, the "plastic" in the sole lugs seems like something you'd find on a child's toy - or at least that what it looks like to me. It seems like rubber would be better.


Don't look directly at the shoe, else you risk blindness.


Might be hard to see, but the sole lugs strike me as being made of a hard plasticky substance, as opposed to grippier rubber.



The fit is perfect though, and the narrower version was a good choice. I'm snow-bound for the next couple of months, so no way to judge the stiffness of the cleat plate, overall fit, and get a sense of durability.
The weight is also another disappointment. I realize the weight claim of 633g total (317g per shoe) is for a smallish size (EUR 40 / ~ US 7.5), but it seems like a big weight difference @ 382g for a EUR 44 / ~ US 9.75:


False advertising by Shimano, or does the weight jump drastically as the size increases?


Maybe it's still a good deal @ $120 and good weight for my size. I'll report back as to durability. I also should mention - in fairness to weight on the old MT51s - is that I'm trading off some ankle coverage with the new low-cut shoes. I'm not sure if I'll really like that, as I suspect the old shoes saved me from a few ankle bone scrapes.

In the meantime, if you can share some other good, lightweight shoes, I'd appreciate it.

 

[nunokas]

Ok. There goes my latest aquisition:

These in size EUR 43.


Regards

 

[phlegm]

That's great, and I like the look better than my shiny ones above.

What model/name is that shoe, and what was the cost BTW? I know Pearl Izumi stuff isn't generally cheap.

 

[scant]

Bont are also very light. I use there road shoes & they;re also very comfortable
Bont Cycling Shoes :: Vaypor XC

 

[CuddlyToast]

I used S-Works shoes for the last season, and they have held up pretty darn good. The fit is incredibly tight, but they fit almost like a hockey skate, so I'm used to the feel. Their website has their weight at just around 370g for one.

Specialized Bicycle Components

 

[nunokas]

That's great, and I like the look better than my shiny ones above.

What model/name is that shoe, and what was the cost BTW? I know Pearl Izumi stuff isn't generally cheap.

Hi phlegm. They cost 140$ on amazon

They are way lighter than my mavic tempo and very comfy. The ruber on the sole has a lot of grip. I like the small touches that PI put in their project-x shoes. They have a new line with BOA system

Full carbon sole:

Old tempos weight with cleat:

regards

 

[lRaphl]

I've been using these shoes for the past 3-4 years and they really are nice. Maybe not the lightest available but you can form them to your feet exactly like you would do with hockey skate of ski boots. You put them in the oven and after that in you feet and let it settle...perfect fit! I was using Shimano shoes before.

Louis Garneau T-FLEX 300


Claimed weight: •Approximate weight (size 42/1 shoe): 365 g/12.9 oz

Mine are size 43 but I don't have a scale!

 

[nunokas]

I've been using these shoes for the past 3-4 years and they really are nice. Maybe not the lightest available but you can form them to your feet exactly like you would do with hockey skate of ski boots. You put them in the oven and after that in you feet and let it settle...perfect fit! I was using Shimano shoes before.

Louis Garneau T-FLEX 300


Claimed weight: •Approximate weight (size 42/1 shoe): 365 g/12.9 oz

Mine are size 43 but I don't have a scale!

Hi.

Those shoes look good and i like the specs/price of it.

That's another brand which isn't too common in Europe...


regards

 

[machine4321]

I have the flex ls 100. Carbon sole with boa. Pretty sure they were under 360g for size 45. So far they are great, they only have one boa dial but it works well for me. I would recomend them.

 

[RS VR6]

S-Works Trail. Hardest pair of shoes I've ever worn. So stiff the uppers hurt my feet.:madman:

 

[WR304]

S-Works Trail. Hardest pair of shoes I've ever worn. So stiff the uppers hurt my feet.:madman:

Is that an extremely small scale or a massive shoe?

 

[phlegm]

Is that an extremely small scale or a massive shoe?

Ha! He might work in the circus in between rides.

 

[RS VR6]

Its a really small scale. I wear a size 7.5.

 

[phlegm]

Interesting, so if you wanted something to seem much larger, you should put it on that scale. The possibilities!

 

[RS VR6]

Objects on scale are smaller than they appear.

Shoes are all US 7.5 / Eur 40

Northwave Striker Carbon 5 / Crank Bros cleat and shoe shield

Specialized Comp / Crank Bros cleat

Specialized Pro Road shoe / Speedplay Zero cleat

The Northwave is the most comfortable out of the three pairs of MTB shoes I own. I can't tell the difference in weight when they are on my feet.

 

[WR304]

Here are some scale shots of the shoes I've got at the moment. I did have a pair of new 2015 S-Works XC MTB shoes but they weren't right and have gone back. I didn't weigh them. They felt light though with minimal padding and a much narrower fit than other Specialized MTB shoes, including the 2015 S-Works Trail shoes (I measured the S-Works XC MTB shoes as 6mm narrower than my other shoes across the toe box).

All these single shoe weights include a set of installed Shimano SH51 SPD cleats, 52g per pair. (Deduct 26g approx for the cleat from the weights below).

This picture shows a 2015 Specialized S-Works Trail MTB shoe in a Euro Size 44, stock insole and Shimano SH51 cleats. 438g

This picture shows a 2012 Giro Code MTB shoe in a Euro Size 43, stock Giro "supernatural fit" insole and Shimano SH51 cleats. 409g

This picture shows a 2014 Northwave Extreme Winter GTX winter shoe in a Euro size 43, stock insole and Shimano SH51 cleats (lighter than phlegm's Shimano summer shoes in the first post! ) 488g

As I was weighing shoes I thought you might like to see some insole weights too.

Stock Specialized BG foam insole Euro size 44. 25g

Giro "supernatural fit" foam insole Euro size 43. 26g

Solestar Kontrol footbed Euro size 43. 67g

This is a shaped carbon fibre footbed for increased foot stability. You can get a custom version but this is the off the shelf model.

I've been trying to sort out my pedalling a bit. My thread about cycling shoe insoles is here:

https://forums.mtbr.com/xc-racing-training/cycling-insoles-948947.html#post11798733

.

 

[phlegm]

Great post WR304. Great point re the cleats. My monster MT51s had Crank Bros cleats installed - deduct 30g from the posted weight. My new XC51s did not have a cleat, as pictured.

 

[WR304]

It would be interesting to see how weights scale across different shoe sizes. I don't think I've ever seen where someone has done that publicly - weighed each size of a particular cycling shoe and listed them all side by side.

Some shoes come with toe studs fitted too. Claimed weights from manufacturers probably exclude these.

 

[machine4321]

Weighed my LG tflex 100. One shoe was 410 with shimano cleat. Pretty nice weight for half the price of the sworks I was looking at.

 

[WR304]

When you're looking at shoes there are a few pointers towards what's likely to be a lighter shoe:

- A summer shoe with lots of thin mesh in the upper for ventilation has less material so will save some weight.

- A shoe with just velcro straps is likely to be light. The ratchet binders on higher end shoes add weight. Along with the ratchet mechanism itself the shoe upper has to be re-inforced with extra stitching and inserts to stop the ratchet pulling out of the shoe under load.

- A shoe with a minimal sole tread is probably going to be a bit lighter than one with a full tread. A chunky tread across the entire sole adds weight.

- A carbon fibre sole doesn't seem to automatically mean a lightweight shoe. The lower end plastic soled shoes are just as light. You're not guaranteed a super light shoe by going for a carbon fibre sole.

Here's an example of this with an expensive shoe and a relatively cheap shoe, save 11g per shoe for $175 USD:

Specialized 2015 Sport MTB shoe (velcro straps, plastic sole) $100 USD Size 42 Claimed weight 360g

http://www.specialized.com/us/en/ftr/shoes/mtb-shoes/sport-mtb

Specialized 2015 Pro MTB shoe (boa fastener, carbon fibre sole) $275 USD Size 42 Claimed weight 349g

http://www.specialized.com/us/en/ftr/shoes/mtb-shoes/pro-xc

There are some important caveats to this. Ratchet fasteners are usually more secure than velcro (especially in mud) so your shoes will stay at the tightness you intend.

Carbon fibre soles are vastly stiffer than plastic soles in cycling shoes. In mountain bike shoes this means you are less likely to get hot spots and discomfort under the ball of your foot when pushing down hard on small pedals and you also get some (debatable) power transfer benefits. For me those two factors are very noticeable.

Shoes that claim to have "carbon re-inforced" soles for added stiffness are often expensive but in practice these soles are frequently closer to a shoe with a plastic sole and can still give hotspots under the cleat. A full carbon fibre sole, as seen in shoes such as the Giro Code MTB and Specialized S-Works Trail is a whole different level of stiffness. The downside of a full carbon sole is that a very stiff shoe isn't as easy to walk in off the bike.