-Reduced weight from previous model.
-Low volume upper, shallow toe box.
-Lacing system may cause discomfort on the top of the foot.
-New Balance updates the popular 890 with a lower drop and stack height but many runners are complaining of the shallow toe box. Overall a great shoe for neutral or mild overpronators who are looking for a durable shoe.
-Neutral runners, mild overpronators, looking for a fast responsive ride. Mileage hogs will love how the 890V2 holds up over time.
After loving the first incarnation of this shoe (read about it here) I was encouraged by some of the subtle changes that New Balance had leaked prior to the release of the 890V2. I wore out my original 890s after 600 miles and they were my go to long run shoe for several months.
The V2 promised a slightly lower profile achieved by reducing the overall stack height of the shoe and the heel drop aimed at improving an already very smooth transition. New Balance also stated they were shaving the weight of the shoe down which is always a positive change.
After digging out my old 890s for comparison I stepped into the V2 to find that the volume of the upper has been reduced quite a bit. I was a bit alarmed by this and not having a high volume foot I am not used to having uppers fit tightly. After comparison with the original 890 I found that NB kept the forefoot width the same but made the toe box volume shallower by increasing the tautness of the fabric over the toe box.
Looking at my old 890s the toe box fabric had becomes stretched and even wrinkled when I had them on allowing quite a bit more room for my toes to wiggle up and down. I was alarmed enough by this change that Ruggero, the original runningshoesguru, made inquiries at New Balance. Sure enough, this was the intended design and although I was discouraged I was motivated to test out what is guaranteed to be a great ride due to the Revlite cushioning system.
Besides the aforementioned fit issues in the toe box the V2's upper is a study in comfort and sleek design. Welded overlays similar to those in the original 890 cover an open mesh that changed geometrically in its design but functions just as effectively.
The heel collar and cup of the V2 stay almost identical but New Balance changed the eyelet lacing system oh so subtly. The flat laces remain and should reduce the amount of pressure on the tops of my feet but I've noticed that the V2 has a pressure point on the inside top (medial superior) of my foot. This pressure has effected a tendon on my foot and has caused me to lace the V2s very loosely to avoid any shooting pains. This does not happen with any of the other shoes in my current rotation or the original 890. I believe that the culprit may be a welded overlay on the inside of the shoe that terminates as a lace eyelet. Whatever the cause, I didn't notice this sensation until I'd had over 50 miles on the shoe and now it happens every time I wear them unless I lace them very loosely.
As much as I loved Revlite the first time around New Balance has managed to improve the feel of this midsole. By reducing the stack height (28mm-20mm vs. 32mm-21mm) the V2 amazingly maintains the same great responsive cushioning by feels more stable and agile, and nearly one ounce lighter.
This shoe performed well on a variety of surfaces including loose gravel, rocky trail, and sandy hills and the shoe never felt sloppy. The Revlite seems to be one of the most resilient midsole materials out there and this guy has over 1,000 miles on them. After a 20 mile run in the 890 V2 the midsole still feels springy and responsive.
The geometric design of the 890 V2 does add some medial support and I have seen runners who moderately pronate get away with wearing the 890 which is advertised as a neutral shoe. I have also heard testimony from heavier runners who have told me that the Revlite withstands a good deal of pounding.
Some of the lug design changed on the 890 V2 but the basic design of the outsole remains the same. Unfortunately, this small change causes the outsole to pick up a lot of little rocks but doesn't effect performance in any way. It is amazing how little wear my original 890s outsole show and I would expect the same type of durability from the V2s. A lot of surface area means a lot of contact with the ground and great traction on a variety of surfaces.
At first glance it seems that New Balance did very little to change the 890 which was one of my favorite shoes of 2011. Some of these changes were great, such as lowering the stack height and drop of the shoe.
The 890V2 feels faster, more stable, and it is lighter weight. However, this improvement is weighed against the shallow toe box of the upper and the possible lacing issues I recently started to experience. I have found myself simultaneously wanting to wear the 890V2 more for the great midsole cushioning yet reaching for them less and less each morning.
I have to emphasize that the 890V2 has one of the most responsive cushioning platforms on the market today and the Revlite foam is simply remarkable. I love the ride of these shoes and the heel to toe transition is one of the smoothest I've ever worn.
This is a shoe that can be worn for just about any type of running as the Revlite really firms up at faster paces. Some runners will not be bothered by the shallow toe box and I am able to ignore this fit issue to some degree by wearing my thinnest summer racing socks.
I would still encourage any runner looking for a great lightweight high mileage shoe to give these a try as I have not heard of any runners complaining of the lacing issues I am experiencing. Hopefully, New Balance keeps the positive changes they made to the 890V2, but as far as I am concerned they can keep the old upper. If they did this shoe would certainly receive five stars.
We thank the nice people at New Balance for sending us a pair of 890v2 to test. This did not influence the review, written after running more than 50 miles in the shoes!
how will these feel for a flat footed runner?
I tried these after much debate and research. N/B really has a special shoe here—light,plush, and responsive to the road. I kinda gave up on the Minimus because of the lack of an insole or base; I cringed at every rock. I have not noticed any discomfort in the toe or the top. There is good traction on the road and sidewalks. I plan to run a marahon in them in a few months. Try them out…you won't be disappointed.
Thought I would save a few bucks and try the V2 instead of the V3. 14 2E just arrived. I keep checking the size tag to make sure it says 2E. I have had NB's that were D width with a wider fore foot. Can't decide if I will run in them or send them back. Just for Tom's reference, I had run in the NB 82X – 83X series since late 1999, really liked it. Stocked up on the 825, but they're toast and I'm ready to get back to running after a long layoff (running and other). If you really like some width for your fore foot, this may not be the model for you. If there are any suggested alternatives for the 825 which was a straight last, I would appreciate the recommendation.
I just bought these shoes and I can tell u that they are fantastic.The best running shoe i ever bought!
I wear the 890BOSv2 (Boston edition) and my only complaint is the tongue moving to the lateral side and is too puffy…is it just me or for others? Love the lightweight, looks, and responsive sole. The toe box is rather snug, but doesn't bother me…I like a snug fit. Feels much more stable than Mr Adidas F50v2 (which I hated). No issues as a mid-foot striker. Not a cushy ride if you are used to that or are a heel-striker. Exceptional traction and gives me confidence on wet surfaces.
After about 70 miles I love these shoe overall, although I have the same problem with the upper (medial superior) part of the shoe. I did a couple shorter runs, then 12-miler with no problems. But after hitting about 50 miles in these I have some pain on the top of my foot even after shorter runs. No problems with the toe box though.
Any suggestions for a similar shoe in terms of weight/drop/cushion with a better fitting upper?
This is a tough one. I would look at the Brooks Launch (10mm drop) or the Brooks PureFlow (5mm drop). The drop of 8mm, which I think is perfect for a road shoe, doesn't exist in each company.
If you're willing to go lighter check out our Saucony Kinvara 3 review here. I'm assuming you want this shoe as an everyday trainer that can handle all types of workouts. Check out some of the above and let me know what worked for you! Look for new reviews for 2013 shoes coming out this fall here at RSG!
Absolutely would NOT recommend the Brooks Pure Flow if you're liking the NB 890's. I bought a pair of the Brooks thinking that they'd be similiar, and haven't ever been able to run more than 5 miles in them due to developing shin splints as these shoes force you WAY out front in your foot…little to no heel strike support. These are not similair shoes (other than weight), IMO.
I loved the 890s. Went through 8 pairs in 2 years of running lots of miles. Tried the 890v2 and could not take the narrow toe box.
I loved the first 890's and was nervous about the switch to the V2's. I liked the balance of cushion and stability that the 890 has so I figured they couldn't have changed that much. Wrong! I immediately developed the tendon pain on top of my right foot and I've noticed a sponginess to the V2's that wasn't apparent in the original 890's. I can barely do 15 miles without ripping them off because if pain. When I slip in the old ones, though worn, everything is right with the world. Too bad. Time to find a better shoe.
This is the best shoes i ever had.
I'm close to 500 miles in these shoes now and I'm liking them more and more. I recently ran a 50 mile non-technical trail race in them and they help up wonderfully. The longer I wore them the less issues I had, but always the first mile or two that spot with the lacing/ tongue digs in. I always wear thin socks to help with the shallow toebox. Glad to hear you enjoyed them. I'm ready for another pair, the Revlite is outstanding.
The best shoes I have ever worn. I ran 160km with them so far, including a half-marathon, without any discomfort.
I am pronator but they work great for me. I believe this is because the small angle (8 mm) forced me to adapt my technic (more on the toe, less on the heel), and that's precisely what I was looking for.
Did not find the toe box shallow at all.
No discomfort due to lacing system.
I chose them in the store because they were the smoothest.
I think 890V2 is the answer to the old minimalist / classic debate.
I recently bought the 890v2. I usually run in the Kinvara and Altra Instinct, but I was trying a shoe with a bit more cushioning as most of my Sunday long runs are preceeded by refereeing a rugby match on Saturday. They felt great in the store, very cushioned and I could still run with my natural gait. A few short runs of 4-6 miles were fine, although I could never get the heel tight enough. I had one long run of 14 miles in these shoes and could barely walk the rest of the day, my feet hurt so bad. The lateral side of both feet were just completely sore. I suppose I'm too used to the low and zero drop shoes. I would love this shoe if it had a tighter heel and lower drop.
I too found the medial overlay irritating immediately and new it wouldn't work for me. The original version feels more stable to me. Love the smooth quiet ride though.