# Shimano Shoes: m240 and/or/vs xc60



## bellullabob (Jan 8, 2004)

Trying to find any reviews of either shoe to no avail. I know all the info listed by shops on the website, ie, custom heat moldeable for the 240 but not for 60, but the 60 looks like it is almost a 100grms lighter? Any personal experience w/ either shoe would be greatly appreciated. Thanks you.


----------



## Tzvia (Sep 7, 2008)

Well I don't have 240s (they look like really nice shoes) but the older 230s. So far they have held up well with one exception and yes I like the fact they were heat molded to my feet at the LBS and fit like they were custom made. The stupid strips of darker material that look like they would be scuff resistant sections are not and actually peel off and I've had to glue them back on (cosmetics, {{sigh}}). I hope the 240s aren't made like that...

Shimano shoes fit me better than anything else I've tried and I am willing to superglue the dark strips back on because they are so comfortable. I've had other Shimano shoes in the past that were not heat moldable and while they fit well, my 230s blow them away in the comfort department. I've washed them several times and they have held up really well over the last 1.5 years and I expect to get at least another year out of them. Then I will get another pair of heat moldable Shimanos and get them molded.


----------



## doismellbacon (Sep 20, 2007)

I've been searching for some new shoes after literally 20 years in Sidi's, which have a nice form-fitting shape for my high arch/narrow heel/ wide stubby forefoot, with the exception of the front of the shoe being a bit narrow....so not perfect, but close, and the best fit I'd ever found in-stock in a shop where I could actually try something on. However, I was tired of spending the big bucks only to rip the toe box material (and my little toe practically off) on rocks, and the fabric and padding inside the heel cup shreds way too quickly.... and the soles are too XC racerish for my trails and riding style these days.
Soooooo, I shopped high and low at my LBS's for a good fitting, high quality shoe with near-race shoe weight and stiffness, but more meaty tread and piggie protection, and was disappointed with most of the offerings from Shimano, Specialized, Mavic. One notable exception was the XC60. The overall fit was pretty darn good for me, and I was tempted but there was a seam & stitching on the medial side of the shoe that lined up right on my first metatarsal that seemed like it might be trouble after a couple hours.... I'm really wide there so I think it's probably not something that most people would have a problem with. Every other Shimano shoe I've ever tried over the years (other than that very first SPD shoe back in '89 or whenever that was) was too narrow in the front and too loose in the heal, but the XC60 was much better in this regard. My main riding buddy has been swearing by his M240's...says the toebox is nice and wide, and since they look really similar in overall design to the XC60's and are also moldable, I took a chance and ordered some online for $165. Since nobody locally stocked them I broke my own rule and bought shoes online rather than at the LBS. I've just put a couple rides on them but they're really good so far. I'd say the overall fit between the 240 and xc60 is pretty similar, although I wasn't able to try them both on back to back so some subtle differences may have been lost. And I didn't notice the bothersome seam on the 240. No luck yet on finding a shop to mold them, but I think they'll be OK as is, and with a molded insert and upper they will be fantastic. If I were you, and I could try on the xc60's and was really happy with the fit, I would probably just go with those and save some $. If however the xc60's were close but just not quite right, like they were for me, then the 240 may be better, and will give you the option of molding them.
On a related note, the fit of the shoe to the pedal (XT M780's) is fantastic....no slop and really nice stiff platform to crank on.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

My feet sound like your shape. I've narrowed the new shoe search down to the XC60 and the 240. Found both online since no one in town has any to try for around $165 to $180.

I'd go for the XC60 if 100 grams was the weight difference!
Does a shop have to mold the 240 or is that a DIY at home?

addendum: just read Test: 'Heat-Moldable' Bike Shoes | Gear Review | Gear Junkie and there's no shop in town that would do this especially for shoes purchased online.


----------



## doismellbacon (Sep 20, 2007)

westin said:


> My feet sound like your shape. I've narrowed the new shoe search down to the XC60 and the 240. Found both online since no one in town has any to try for around $165 to $180.
> 
> I'd go for the XC60 if 100 grams was the weight difference!
> Does a shop have to mold the 240 or is that a DIY at home?
> ...


Yeah, I've done some research and it is probably a shop job for most people. I used to do a lot of insole molding with a superfeet setup that uses a vaccuum bag like Shimano does, so I've been considering giving mine a shot at home, but I haven't had the time to play around with the vaccuum hose setup. Shimano also recommends using a toe guard, which I assume is to keep the toe box from collapsing under the vaccuum pressure... I did some checking to try and find those toe guards somewhere and couldn't. Bottom line... I'm happy enough with the fit of the shoe that I'll probably never get around to messing with any of that.
They're really good shoes!


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

I was reading a few not even doing the molding on the 240 due to a great fit.
Does the shoe weigh considerably more than the other options due to the heat molding sole? I can't even find a pair in town to inspect.

Going to local Performance Bike to try on wide range of Shimano shoes that are not xc60 or m240 hoping to see about width and if a true 44 before buying online: only low end Shimano shoes in town.

Pair of 240 in size 41 is 763 grams without cleats according to some weight weenie post I just googled.

It's been a few months since your first post in this thread. Given your shoes are great out of the box, if you had to do over again and price being equal would you go for the xc60 or 240? Price is within $15 for both. I'm going on weight at this point if both fit equally.



doismellbacon said:


> Yeah, I've done some research and it is probably a shop job for most people. I used to do a lot of insole molding with a superfeet setup that uses a vaccuum bag like Shimano does, so I've been considering giving mine a shot at home, but I haven't had the time to play around with the vaccuum hose setup. Shimano also recommends using a toe guard, which I assume is to keep the toe box from collapsing under the vaccuum pressure... I did some checking to try and find those toe guards somewhere and couldn't. Bottom line... I'm happy enough with the fit of the shoe that I'll probably never get around to messing with any of that.
> They're really good shoes!


----------



## doismellbacon (Sep 20, 2007)

westin said:


> I was reading a few not even doing the molding on the 240 due to a great fit.
> Does the shoe weigh considerably more than the other options due to the heat molding sole? I can't even find a pair in town to inspect.
> 
> Going to local Performance Bike to try on wide range of Shimano shoes that are not xc60 or m240 hoping to see about width and if a true 44 before buying online: only low end Shimano shoes in town.
> ...


I haven't paid any attention at all to weight, but it doesn't seem heavy. The sole is carbon on the 240... very stiff, and I presume light too. There's nothing moldable about the sole, just the uppers. And Shimano's insole is the typical thin foam sheet that doesn't really do much...they do provide a few stick-on foam pads that you can use to add a little more arch support, but I just scrapped all that and put my superfeet in. Good insoles (preferably custom molded) make the biggest difference of all, IMO, regardless of the shoe. I was blown away by the improvement custom superfeet made back in '93 when I worked in a shop and we did lots of custom fitting, insole molding, etc. I've used them ever since and will never stop!

I would most definitely do the 240's again, even with a larger price diff.... at $15 I think it's a no brainer. They fit me better out of the box, are moldable, and I guess just the notion of getting a "higher end" shoe for about the same money makes it seem like a bargain. So, I assume the 240's are lighter? or the XC60?.... like I said, I didn't really look at weight. If the price difference was big enough to make a XC60 with custom molded insoles the same as the 240's, then I might have some thinking to do... but I already had the insoles and wanted the option of molding. I got the white w/ black trim 240's, because that was what was available at the killer price...never owned white shoes, but I have to admit, the little bit of bling has kinda grown on me.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

Thank you! I am a Superfeet user so it sounds like a win-win situation for me.



doismellbacon said:


> I haven't paid any attention at all to weight, but it doesn't seem heavy. The sole is carbon on the 240... very stiff, and I presume light too. There's nothing moldable about the sole, just the uppers. And Shimano's insole is the typical thin foam sheet that doesn't really do much...they do provide a few stick-on foam pads that you can use to add a little more arch support, but I just scrapped all that and put my superfeet in. Good insoles (preferably custom molded) make the biggest difference of all, IMO, regardless of the shoe. I was blown away by the improvement custom superfeet made back in '93 when I worked in a shop and we did lots of custom fitting, insole molding, etc. I've used them ever since and will never stop!
> 
> I would most definitely do the 240's again, even with a larger price diff.... at $15 I think it's a no brainer. They fit me better out of the box, are moldable, and I guess just the notion of getting a "higher end" shoe for about the same money makes it seem like a bargain. So, I assume the 240's are lighter? or the XC60?.... like I said, I didn't really look at weight. If the price difference was big enough to make a XC60 with custom molded insoles the same as the 240's, then I might have some thinking to do... but I already had the insoles and wanted the option of molding. I got the white w/ black trim 240's, because that was what was available at the killer price...never owned white shoes, but I have to admit, the little bit of bling has kinda grown on me.


----------



## doismellbacon (Sep 20, 2007)

Hey Westin.... didn't you used to ride a Mojo? Seems like I remember seeing your name pop up a lot either in Ibis or 650b forum in the past???? Just curious.

Yeah, if the XC60's fit you pretty well, the 240's will likely be better.... no regrets here.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

Yep, first carbon Mojo year and now a 650b front Giant Anthem Advanced SL. Picked up a Scott Scale 29er HT frame this week and build it up xtr/xt and carbon wheels.

Ordered the 240's this afternoon!



doismellbacon said:


> Hey Westin.... didn't you used to ride a Mojo? Seems like I remember seeing your name pop up a lot either in Ibis or 650b forum in the past???? Just curious.
> 
> Yeah, if the XC60's fit you pretty well, the 240's will likely be better.... no regrets here.


----------



## Learux (Jun 4, 2012)

Just ordered a pair of xc-60's. What about ventilation, which one is the superior shoe in that department.


----------

