# need fit information for Lake MX165 shoes



## subopt (Oct 4, 2005)

I'm in the market for a new pair of shoes. I need about size 48-50,
and have narrowed it down to either the Lake MX165 (a little under
$100), or the Sidi Dominator 5 Narrow Lorica (for about $225). Since
Lake makes their shoe in both Medium and Wide widths, i was wondering
if anyone has impressions about just how narrow their Medium actually
is. I have a fairly narrow foot, so i'm sure that the Sidi narrows
would most likely fit me better than the Lake mediums. But would they
fit me $125 better?

Any input from Lake owners, with narrow feet, would be really helpful.

thanks in advance,
E


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

subopt said:


> I'm in the market for a new pair of shoes. I need about size 48-50,
> and have narrowed it down to either the Lake MX165 (a little under
> $100), or the Sidi Dominator 5 Narrow Lorica (for about $225). Since
> Lake makes their shoe in both Medium and Wide widths, i was wondering
> ...


My Lake 165's fit kind of narrow as compared to Shimano shoes, if that's any frame of reference.


----------



## Finch Platte (Nov 14, 2003)

*Where are you finding them...*



subopt said:


> I'm in the market for a new pair of shoes. I need about size 48-50,
> and have narrowed it down to either the Lake MX165 (a little under
> $100), or the Sidi Dominator 5 Narrow Lorica (for about $225). Since
> Lake makes their shoe in both Medium and Wide widths, i was wondering
> ...


...for under $100?

I'm eyeing them, too. I need to know if they're stiff, though. The reviews here don't mention that.

Don't need another Sport shoe. 

fp


----------



## Ultra Magnus (Jan 13, 2004)

I have a set in size 50. I don't know if my feet are wide, medium, or narrow. I just bought the normal width. the fit is ok, I think they're stiff. A lot stiffer than the lake mx101's I came off of, but I've never used I high end shoe like a Sidi so I can't compare. I had an issue with the tounge, it's too long and dug into the front of my ankle so I had to trim it to be flush wiht the end of the last velcro strap. One thing, they are wicked heavy. I think mine are around 1300grams for the pair, where higher end shoes, as I understand are in the 800g range. Oh yeah, one more thing, I had to trim the sole around the cleat quite a bit (spd). Engagement and dissengagement werre much more difficult than with the relatively smooth soled mx101's.


----------



## steep_h2o (Sep 24, 2005)

Apologies in advance for hijacking the thread but it's on the same subject, just a different shoe, so I didn't see a need to add another thread. If that's not how things are done on these forums let me know, I don't mean to offend anybody. Some forums I post on like similar questions to be grouped in one thread when possible.

Anyway, I'm looking at the Shimano SH-M121 shoes but my feet are fairly wide just behind the toe area so I'm wondering if anybody has experience with these shoes. If they're not unusually narrow like some models they should work for me, my feet are wide but they're not up there in the canoe paddle range.


----------



## strick_22 (Apr 20, 2006)

bmadau said:


> I have a set in size 50. I don't know if my feet are wide, medium, or narrow. I just bought the normal width. the fit is ok, I think they're stiff. A lot stiffer than the lake mx101's I came off of, but I've never used I high end shoe like a Sidi so I can't compare. I had an issue with the tounge, it's too long and dug into the front of my ankle so I had to trim it to be flush wiht the end of the last velcro strap. One thing, they are wicked heavy. I think mine are around 1300grams for the pair, where higher end shoes, as I understand are in the 800g range. Oh yeah, one more thing, I had to trim the sole around the cleat quite a bit (spd). Engagement and dissengagement werre much more difficult than with the relatively smooth soled mx101's.


I was gonna get these in a 50 for my first bike shoes, but not sure about the sizing. I wear a size 15 in running shoes and the chart says I should get a 50. Just curious what your regular shoe size was since you said the fit was OK.


----------



## steep_h2o (Sep 24, 2005)

If you haven't already decided, I'll let you know how they fit for me in a few days. I decided to go with those. I live in a remote area with no LBS (or even semi-local LBS) so I have to order pretty much everything I want/need. If they're comfy for me then they're not designed for narrow feet, because mine are not. I read a few reviews that said they are wider than the Shimano shoes... and then somebody posted in this thread that the Shimano's are wider. I guess it's all subjective.


----------



## strick_22 (Apr 20, 2006)

steep_h2o said:


> If you haven't already decided, I'll let you know how they fit for me in a few days. I decided to go with those. I live in a remote area with no LBS (or even semi-local LBS) so I have to order pretty much everything I want/need. If they're comfy for me then they're not designed for narrow feet, because mine are not. I read a few reviews that said they are wider than the Shimano shoes... and then somebody posted in this thread that the Shimano's are wider. I guess it's all subjective.


I know the MX165 comes in a wide size. You pretty much have to go directly to their site, though, to get the wide size...and pay full price. But if you don't need the wide size, I've seen them for around $70 bucks out there on various sites.


----------



## steep_h2o (Sep 24, 2005)

Yeah, I saw that on their site but I already ordered the regular width through an online dealer. I don't buy wide width for my regular shoes. They're usually tight just behind the toes for a few days and then I'm fine. I'm hoping that will be the case with these as well.


----------



## Ultra Magnus (Jan 13, 2004)

Yeah, my normal shoe size is also a 15. With both the mx101's and the mx165's, size 50 fits me well. What are the odds there's more than one person on MTBR looknig for a size 50 mx165?

BM


----------



## strick_22 (Apr 20, 2006)

*15 2e*

Well Lake is one of the only brands with wide sizes. Sidi has mega for wide sizes, but since these will be my first set of bike shoes I felt I wouldn't really appreciate the high end stuff (also bike cost / shoe cost ratio would be too high). Anyway appreciate the response. I'll order a pair and pass along how well the MX165 wide in a 50 feel to anyone else that wears a 15 2E. Thanks again.


----------



## strick_22 (Apr 20, 2006)

*MX165 Wide size 50*

I wear a size 15 2E running shoe in New Balance. Got my Lake MX165 Wide size 50's in and they fit great and are comfortable. Saw somewhere where someone talked about how heavy they were. Well if you wear a 15 2E, your shoes weigh more than your buddy's size 9 anyway. Leads me to believe they'll be more sturdy, which is needed if your putting 225+ pounds on some shoes. We'll see if they hold up. Definitely needed the wide. Can't image how I'd get the velcro straps closed on the normal width. So, there you have it from a Clydsdale :thumbsup:


----------



## Ultra Magnus (Jan 13, 2004)

What are you doing with the shoelaces? I ended canning them. For the longest while, like a year, I used them, but wondered if they were encessary, but then I only rode a couple/three times a week. Now I'm commuting, and having to put them on and off twice a day, some days, and it's was becoming and time consumer. I don't notice any difference w/o them, other than now my shoes go on and off in a 1/4 the time. I don't even need to loosed the bottom velcro.

BM


----------



## steep_h2o (Sep 24, 2005)

My regular-width MX165's came in today. I don't wear a 50, I wear a 44, so this may be irrelevant but my feet are wide in proportion and the shoes feel pretty comfy to me walking around, haven't had a ride in them yet. They're a little snug just behind the toes but nothing painful or irritating and I think they'll be perfect once they break in a little. Now the comedy show begins, my first time in clipless.


----------



## Ultra Magnus (Jan 13, 2004)

Do yourself a favor and spare your dignity, don't ride in public places, at least not at first!


I'm speaking form experience.

BM


----------



## steep_h2o (Sep 24, 2005)

bmadau said:


> Do yourself a favor and spare your dignity, don't ride in public places, at least not at first!
> 
> I'm speaking form experience.
> 
> BM


Yeah, I hear ya. I assume I'll provide a little comedy relief for a while. That's ok, I'm not easily embarrassed. I already came to the same conclusion as you about the laces, I yanked 'em right away. The shoes snug up fine without them. I can always put them back in if I decide the velcro isn't enough once I get a ride or two in.


----------



## strick_22 (Apr 20, 2006)

*mx165 laces*

Ditto on yanking the laces, guys. Appreciated everyone's feedback here to help me choose what seem to be so far a good pair of shoes.


----------



## skmail (Jun 18, 2006)

subopt said:


> I'm in the market for a new pair of shoes. I need about size 48-50,
> and have narrowed it down to either the Lake MX165 (a little under
> $100), or the Sidi Dominator 5 Narrow Lorica (for about $225). Since
> Lake makes their shoe in both Medium and Wide widths, i was wondering
> ...


I have the MX101 in 50 wide. I wear a 15 street shoe normally and definitely never wear wide shoes normally. These were comfortable enough for every day wear. These are more casual, beginner shoes: not very stiff, and basic support, but a good shoe.

I bought the MX165 hoping to upgrade to a more serious shoe. 100% stiff sole (again, never had others to compare, but zero flex on these vs. the mx101s. I took a chance and did NOT buy the wide. Fit is okay, but tight at the toes which I think could be resolved by the wide. Lake's website said they had the 50 wide, but after placing the order, they said out of stock. It was my search for another place to buy that found this forum...


----------



## shapirob (Nov 13, 2005)

*Just polling about pedal/cleat combo's with the MX165's...*

as my Lake MX165's are great for fitting my f'd-up feet. All the other shoes I try dont seem to accomodate orthotics and are not flat enough for a healthy foot position. Furthermore, they are great to hike in. Nevertheless, the vibram soles do not seem like they are truly made for spd cleats. I have a pair of shimano 540's (? - whichever model is the cheaper version of the 959) and I have had a terrible time getting the cleats to release safely. I have cut a bit of the sole away to the point of lsightly damaging them.

Has anybody had more success or recommend another release system with this shoe .... my understanding is that a sole with a lot of lugs is not very good with crank bro's eggbeaters or candys. Futhermore, the release is general sounds safest with the Shimano system. Any possiblity the 959 would work better????

thanks

ben


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

shapirob said:


> as my Lake MX165's are great for fitting my f'd-up feet. All the other shoes I try dont seem to accomodate orthotics and are not flat enough for a healthy foot position. Furthermore, they are great to hike in. Nevertheless, the vibram soles do not seem like they are truly made for spd cleats. I have a pair of shimano 540's (? - whichever model is the cheaper version of the 959) and I have had a terrible time getting the cleats to release safely. I have cut a bit of the sole away to the point of lsightly damaging them.
> 
> Has anybody had more success or recommend another release system with this shoe .... my understanding is that a sole with a lot of lugs is not very good with crank bro's eggbeaters or candys. Futhermore, the release is general sounds safest with the Shimano system. Any possiblity the 959 would work better????
> 
> ...


I have Lake MX 165 shoes, use SPD's, and have no integration issues. Are you certain the lugs are what's hindering release, and not just high friction between the cleat and the pedal?

FWIW the 959's work better due to the flourine coating, at least for a bit, but I still spritz some teflon spray lube on the pedals.


----------



## shapirob (Nov 13, 2005)

Interesting .... it definitely feels like the shoe lugs get in the way, even getting the cleats into the pedal. I have a pair of older Shimano MTB boots and have no such problems. Also ... i just noticed that bmadau above, reported a similar problem. How do you get around it? What spd do you use? I was even thinking of upgrading to the MX305, but was a bit cautions due to the sole/spd problem.

b


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

shapirob said:


> Interesting .... it definitely feels like the shoe lugs get in the way, even getting the cleats into the pedal. I have a pair of older Shimano MTB boots and have no such problems. Also ... i just noticed that bmadau above, reported a similar problem. How do you get around it? What spd do you use? I was even thinking of upgrading to the MX305, but was a bit cautions due to the sole/spd problem.
> 
> b


Did you verify that the lugs are getting in the way? Clip in then take your shoe off and look at it.


----------



## shapirob (Nov 13, 2005)

I'm pretty sure. I dont have them in the house tonight - someone's making orthotics to fit them. However, the way they squeeze in feels pretty "rubbery" so to speak. It got better when I tirmmed some lugs.


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

My MX165's work without issue with my Time pedals. Although this is an old thread, the MX165's are stiff, and also heavier than other XC shoes. The reason for this is they have the Vibram soles. They are essentailly a merger of XC racing shoes and hiking boots. If you have no need or interest in hike-a-bikes, then there seems little reason to get the MX165's. My Sidis are more comfortable and less heavy. However, I decided I was in greater danger on the hike-a-bikes than on the bike and thus got the Lakes.


----------



## xc_xtc (Oct 8, 2005)

To dig up the dead...why take the laces out? Why not just tie them to what's comfortable and leave them like that. I find the velcro straps and neoprene-like tongue lets me take of the shoes/put them on without relacing ever yet I get more support and feel leaving them on.

Fit: I normally wear a 43UK yet the 42.5 (8.5-9) fit me perfect. (If anyone wants I'm posting a pair of 43's I have on ebay but would remove them and sell through here if anyone wants them. $90 includes priority shipping w/delivery confirmation and extra mud studs. Pics upon request..)

These are a bit heavy but I love these shoes. I'm usually off my bike several times a ride on rock/steep sections and these shoes hold up great. Comfortable too. The thing that's a pain is taking the time to properly clean them after a very wet/muddy ride. Once that's done I recondition the leather. If you maintain them I forsee them lasing a 2-5 seasons depending how much and how hard you ride. Mine have probably between 300-500 miles on them easy..including 50+ miles of winter riding with overboots in the teens.

Overall I rate them 4 flaming chilies at for the average mtb enthusiast. I normally ride 15-20 mile trips and enjoy riding dirty (wet conditions) the most. Their custy service is good too.


----------



## JohnQPublic (Feb 27, 2008)

How comfy are the MX165's when walking? Do the Vibram soles make them feel like hiking boot-type comfort? No local shops in my area have them so I can't try before I buy.
Some bike shoes are super stiff and not meant for walking...are these shoes a bit more flexible?
BTW, I will be using these shoes w/ CB Mallets (are there any issues when using this pedal/shoe combo?)

TIA,
John


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

JohnQPublic said:


> How comfy are the MX165's when walking? Do the Vibram soles make them feel like hiking boot-type comfort? No local shops in my area have them so I can't try before I buy.
> Some bike shoes are super stiff and not meant for walking...are these shoes a bit more flexible?
> BTW, I will be using these shoes w/ CB Mallets (are there any issues when using this pedal/shoe combo?)
> 
> ...


The Vibram soles make the Lakes feel much better walking than other plasticky soled bike shoes. Lakes are still stiff but have some flex. I wouldn't call them hiking boot-like but they're good for a bike shoe. They are significantly heavier than other bike shoes because of all that rubber though. The extra weight is worth it to me if I have to walk.


----------



## JohnQPublic (Feb 27, 2008)

Thanks for the quick reply.
Are the Lakes comfy enough to wear as casual shoes too (when not in use as a bike shoe)? Or, are they only good for biking?


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

JohnQPublic said:


> Thanks for the quick reply.
> Are the Lakes comfy enough to wear as casual shoes too (when not in use as a bike shoe)? Or, are they only good for biking?


They're fine to wear for short periods, say heading to a restaurant post-ride, but they're too stiff to be comfortable as all-day shoes. You _could_ do it but I wouldn't choose to.


----------



## JohnQPublic (Feb 27, 2008)

Thanks for the good info:thumbsup:


----------

