Norda - 001

I require a wider toe box as well, and the mafate has it. I had mafate first and then tried speedgoat and they were terrible for me. Mafate for much better. I currently have Norda 001 and the toe box isn't big enough 

I got a pair of 001s in late January for $120usd. I wasn't sure on sizing but at that price I was too curious to pass up the deal. I have about 300 miles on them now and used them for a bit of everything through this rough Michigan winter. They were great in the snow and ice and have been great on the trail now that weather's allowing us on them. The outsole really only has one wear point so far in the middle of the forefoot basically where I land. Otherwise they've been great. Feel really similar to how they felt new. I'll undoubtedly get 600+ miles out of them. I liked them so much I splurged on a pair of 005s which are also pretty wicked.

I ran in their standard 001 version last winter in Michigan and it worked fine. Traction was sufficient for the most part and the upper is already not breathable so helped keep moisture out.

001s are worth it if you can find them for $150 (I got mine for $100). I was able to stack over 500 miles on them before I retired them to be my golf shoes. I went a full size up and the fit was ok. Not overly spacious but accommodating. They also run very warm but made for a great winter running shoe since they don't let water in (or out). A very boring and firm shoe that just kept going. 005s not worth it. They are light and the upper is more generous than the 001 but the lace bite through the tongue is miserable and the heel cup jabbed into my achilles like a dagger. The midsole was smoked after about 200 miles for me. I'm not big by any means at 5'9" and 170lbs, so the midsole flattening this early left me pretty disappointed. I only got 260 out of them before tossing them in the trash. I logged 100 training miles in them before running a full 100 miler in them. After those 200 miles I tried logging runs as little as 5 miles and rock hits were piercing through the shoe and my feet would kill me afterwards. So it's hard for me to recommend or justify them at their insane price tag of $325. For half the cost, the Mount to Coast H1 seems like a superior buy in almost every aspect. Heck I ran my latest 100 miler in a pair of cheap ($80) Merrell Nova 4s and they were an excellent shoe. A brand that gets slept on in the trail running space.

I really like the 001's. Put just over 700 miles on one pair before recently retiring them to walk around shoes (they could have gone longer still). I'm 6' 175lbs, so a bit smaller than you but still larger human than the average ultrarunner. I'm wearing the 005 model for the Zion 100mile this weekend. I've also been enjoying them. Only notes in both, the heals don't work for everyone, I had to KT tape at first on the 001, but it got better.

I have a pair of Norda 001 with over 700 miles on them. The tread is worn down as expected, but the foam still has plenty of bounce left. Two weeks ago I ran a 25mile training run in them with zero issues. The foam is fine. I'll continue hammering them until they truly die. Then start on another pair.

I second this! One tip though I would consider staying away from the super squishy shock absorbing shoes like a Norda 001 or Speed goat 5. With a back pack the higher stack height might make you more prone to rolling ankles. I’ve done some long 100km plus fast packs in a few pairs of trail runners and do recommend it, you’ll just want to keep your pack weight down. Hiking is much more fun with a light pack anyway!!

Norda 001 has been absolutely amazing so far for me too

I tried these and they felt so awkward and just didn’t work for the kind of trails I run on. Norda has since been the replacement and nothing but gold from the 001

Take your time with this, try on a bunch, and work with your salesperson. More likely than not, you’ll probably go through a few pairs before you settle on one. Are you only looking online right now? You really should go into a store and try them out at the store, and try the ones that you take home with you, *at home* (so you can still return them if necessary). Of the ones you’ve listed, Hokas have always been a favorite of mine, as they typically fit the width of my feet nicely. Salomons are far too narrow for me. These two pairs alone are going to feel vastly different no matter what foot shape you have. Are you a pronator/supinator/neutral? All questions that need to be answered through trial and error and working with someone that knows how to do a proper assessment. Also, are you looking for a trail runner or more of a hiking shoe? The ones you’ve listed include both. I would suggest a trail runner might be more suited to do double duty as a hiker, rather than a hiker being used for trail running, particularly if you are concerned about weight. Lastly, I know everyone has a favourite, most awesome shoe that they recommend. The one brand I might suggest in that regard is Norda. It’s a Canadian company, which is nice. And although the shoes are eye-wateringly expensive, the majority consensus seems to be that they last, and last, and last. I did multiple demos in the Norda 001, and they felt so, umm, reassuring I guess is the word I would use to describe robe them.

I don't mind their marketing. It's different than typical active wear marketing and I applaud trying to differentiate your brand by doing something different...

To each their own. I have bought Nordas both at full price and discounted... even at full price, with the mileage I get out of them they end up being cheaper on a $/km basis than all other trail shoes I've tried.

I am 6'3 200 lbs and have put over 1300km on technical trails, gravel, dirt, ankle deep mud, ice and snow on my first pair of Norda 001... and this was a "deffective" pair! 001s are now my goto shoes and I sprinkle a few runs in 002 too. The fit is particular so I strongly recommend trying them on before buying them. On a side note, I am curious to hear why you want to drop weight? In my opinion, trying to cut weight while training for more volume and longer races is a dangerous game and the risk of underfueling is greater than the potential benefits or losing a few pounds.

Switched to Norda 001 2 years ago and have never looked by... simply added a sprinkling of 002, but the 001 are what I wear 90% of the time when I'm out running on trails OR even on snowy streets during the winter.

Although the Salomon Sense Ride 4 has a special.place in my heart for being the shoe I used for my first 50k, the Norda 001 is by far my favorite shoe ever and the one I now go to 95% of the time...

Was going to ask if they had tried Norda 001s. I really like mine

lol, I did get mine for around 70 euros so that wasn't bad but they are on sale for the double right now

Was going to say Norda too. Great shoes but I use the 001s and just got the new 001A too now

I ran in their standard 001 version last winter in Michigan and it worked fine. Traction was sufficient for the most part and the upper is already not breathable so helped keep moisture out.

If you have a pretty standard footshape I think the fit will be just fine. Didn’t want to come off as dissuasive but just pointing out a caveat if your feet have any quirks. Enjoy!

001s are worth it if you can find them for $150 (I got mine for $100). I was able to stack over 500 miles on them before I retired them to be my golf shoes. I went a full size up and the fit was ok. Not overly spacious but accommodating. They also run very warm but made for a great winter running shoe since they don't let water in (or out). A very boring and firm shoe that just kept going. 005s not worth it. They are light and the upper is more generous than the 001 but the lace bite through the tongue is miserable and the heel cup jabbed into my achilles like a dagger. The midsole was smoked after about 200 miles for me. I'm not big by any means at 5'9" and 170lbs, so the midsole flattening this early left me pretty disappointed. I only got 260 out of them before tossing them in the trash. I logged 100 training miles in them before running a full 100 miler in them. After those 200 miles I tried logging runs as little as 5 miles and rock hits were piercing through the shoe and my feet would kill me afterwards. So it's hard for me to recommend or justify them at their insane price tag of $325. For half the cost, the Mount to Coast H1 seems like a superior buy in almost every aspect. Heck I ran my latest 100 miler in a pair of cheap ($80) Merrell Nova 4s and they were an excellent shoe. A brand that gets slept on in the trail running space.

Not my jam, personally. Fit was weird even 1/2 size up and gave me blood blisters on my big toes during a 4 hr race. They feel pretty blocky underfoot and a tad heavy. Other than that I can see they’re really durable and the outsole is quality. The heel is pretty minimalist but it didn’t give me any issues while wearing long socks

Mount to coast is super cushy, I only have a few miles on the new pair. Norda 001 felt like it would last forever, but had no give. I ended up returning it after hip and groin issues.

lol, I did get mine for around 70 euros so that wasn't bad but they are on sale for the double right now

Norda 001 is a great transition shoe. Price is high, but there are people still running in their pairs with 1000+ miles. I’ve had my pair for about a month now and I have probably logged almost 100 miles in mine, they are great. Tread is aggressive enough for technical trails but cushioned enough to be a nice ride on pavement. I have medium-wide feet and I find the toebox in these roomy enough for me.

I’m about 40 miles in on a pair of original 001’s that were marked down since the rollout of the 001A. I like them more as I go. I had Achilles surgery a few months back, and it causes zero problems on my scar. I have to tie them tighter than other shoes I’ve owned for good lockdown, but not uncomfortably tight. No regrets so far.

I second this! One tip though I would consider staying away from the super squishy shock absorbing shoes like a Norda 001 or Speed goat 5. With a back pack the higher stack height might make you more prone to rolling ankles. I’ve done some long 100km plus fast packs in a few pairs of trail runners and do recommend it, you’ll just want to keep your pack weight down. Hiking is much more fun with a light pack anyway!!

rocking norda 001’s still, 700 miles in. almost bald lugs and lookin preddy bad but feel great somehow norda 002 for sub 30k races, so fast and so sexi salmon pulsar trail pro for hot days, love em mostly merrell agility peak - put a few miles in these, they feel great if a tad tall

This shoe seemed great for me at first but I ended up with a ton of adductor pain and tightness. This resulted in misalignment in my hips. I wanted to love the shoe, and tried everything to make it work. The day I stopped running in it, this pain and tightness went away. Do you have any experience with other nordas? I’m curious as to why the 001 might have caused this for me.

I run a lot that end up in wet grass and gravel. I really like my norda 001 that has the mega grip. The lugs on it are great for loose dirt and gravel.

Hella expensive, hella worth it

Will easily last 1000km too! and wider foot friendly!

I have the 001. The midsole is on the firmer side which I actually really like and prefer.

I really like the 001's. Put just over 700 miles on one pair before recently retiring them to walk around shoes (they could have gone longer still). I'm 6' 175lbs, so a bit smaller than you but still larger human than the average ultrarunner. I'm wearing the 005 model for the Zion 100mile this weekend. I've also been enjoying them. Only notes in both, the heals don't work for everyone, I had to KT tape at first on the 001, but it got better.

My 3rd pair of 001s gave one of my heels an issue while breaking them in but after was good. My first two pairs never an issue but I walk in them for 75-100km before I run them to loosen all the stiffer parts up!

If budget isn’t a concern check out the Norda 001s. I couldn’t believe the price tag could be justified but my wife got me a pair for my birthday and they are absolutely remarkable. Wear them for any trail race longer than a half now and most of my long training days as well.

Was going to say Norda too. Great shoes but I use the 001s and just got the new 001A too now

Norda 001, by far the most comfy and durable shoes I have

I love the Hoka Tecton 2s for racing. They were a natural fit after predominantly training in wide Speedgoat 5s. Now splitting my training trail miles between worn out SG5s, newish SG6s (which I don’t like and will likely retire from running and use exclusively for hiking), and Norda 001s (currently wearing in). I’ll be happily using the Tectons again for my next race. Realistically the marginal benefits of super shoes will only be realised if they fit well and work for your gait / stride pattern. So trying on a bunch is the best way to go about it.

I tried these and they felt so awkward and just didn’t work for the kind of trails I run on. Norda has since been the replacement and nothing but gold from the 001

Rocking a new pair of Norda 001’s and a Nathan water belt thing. Want a Raide belt though.

just got in the 001 to try. unimpressed with out of the box feel and am definitely sending back. the half size up recommended makes the shoe too long and baggy. i have an average sized foot volume-wise and i’m swimming in the shoe. the material feels like a starchier, thicker version of matryx. wish i could grab a half size down and actually run in them but definitely not close to worth the price point to not be able to return them by using them outside. feel pretty damn heavy too.