# Lightweight Shoes?



## chuckie33 (Oct 2, 2008)

What does everyone use? I've got an 8 year old pair of Spec. Comps I've more than gotten my money out of. However, they are wearing out and feel its time for a new pair. Since I'm an aspiring weight weenie, I figure I could get a pair of weight weenie shoes. I use SPD pedals by the way. What are qualities that you look for? Qualities or things that you avoid? I know nothing about shoes other than I like my Specialized ones I have now. They are just falling apart. I think they are on the heavy side too.


----------



## bholwell (Oct 17, 2007)

Rocket 7's http://secure3.ntwebb.com/rocket7-com/shoes.htm

Sidi Dominator 5's are light enough for me, though.


----------



## amillmtb (Jun 24, 2005)

bholwell said:


> Rocket 7's http://secure3.ntwebb.com/rocket7-com/shoes.htm
> 
> Sidi Dominator 5's are light enough for me, though.


Only a little bit more affordable is Specialized S-Works Shoe


----------



## flyag1 (Jun 9, 2007)

U know, peeps are absolutely crazy to pay $100 much less $300 for a pair of Mtn bike shoes... no mater what the weight! 

What do you pay for work shoes that may or may not get you a promotion? 

But hey, MTBR is like burger king where you can have it your way on the e box..


----------



## DavidR1 (Jul 7, 2008)

flyag1 said:


> U know, peeps are absolutely crazy to pay $100 much less $300 for a pair of Mtn bike shoes... no mater what the weight!
> 
> What do you pay for work shoes that may or may not get you a promotion?
> 
> But hey, MTBR is like burger king where you can have it your way on the e box..


Thanks troll


----------



## flyag1 (Jun 9, 2007)

DavidR1 said:


> Thanks troll


David I don't think I'm classified as a troll... been around here for a while.

I just don't see why anyone would spend huge sums of $ on shoes when one's not willing to spend the money on ww bars, stems, chain, bolts, frames, wheels, spokes, chainrings, seat post, and everything else that will equal a complete bike that's less than 16#s. Sure there are a few... but very few.

Count the bikes here on the forum that are less than 20 lbs... count the peeps with shoes that weight less than 399g's. I suspect they are equal in percentage?

Not lets talk about shoes that are lite weigh and affordable to the masses.

And yes David, I need shoes and I want some lite weight shoes but like most here on the forums I am on a budget.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Mavic Fury are super high end racing shoes that almost everyone loves. They come in black or crazy bright yellow.


----------



## flyag1 (Jun 9, 2007)

DavidR1 said:


> Thanks troll


Davie, below is a quote from you:

"I don't even notice what bikes other riders are on. I'm glad to see more people getting involved. This will eventually lead to more support for our trails which I'm afraid will come under more and more scrutiny."


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

I second the Mavic Fury shoes. Light, stiff and yes they can be expensive but having happy feet is worth more money than paying the same amount on many other things we think is normal. I have never had shoes as comfortable as the Mavics (maybe even including non-bike shoes) which is a big plus on long rides/races.


----------



## culturesponge (Aug 15, 2007)

limba said:


> Mavic Fury are super high end racing shoes that almost everyone loves. They come in black or crazy bright yellow.


#3 on the Furies, had a good look at the 2010 S-Works they look like metrosexual bwoy balerina bowling shoes in comparison (urgh)

......edit to add pic of 2010 Mavic Furies.........


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

I ride Sidi Dragon 2 shoes. Sure, they're expensive, but a lot more comfortable than my old Shimano SH-M182's.

I paid $301 including shipping for them. If I had known there was such a difference between these and $100 shoes, I would have bought them sooner.


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

bholwell said:


> Rocket 7's http://secure3.ntwebb.com/rocket7-com/shoes.htm


Snazzy. But it says you can only use them with egg-beater pedals..

As ffar as spending $100, $300 or even more on cycling shoes - nobody seems to complain that much about $500+ ski boots. Comfortable, light shoes are so worth it...


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

flyag1 said:


> What do you pay for work shoes that may or may not get you a promotion?


Do you work at a gay disco? Are they hiring? I'm tired of my heterosexual mountain town lifestyle.

Back on topic: I searched this a lot and the only lugged MTB shoes that are significantly lighter than my $60 SixSixOnes are the 2010 S-Works. Are they available yet? Anyone have them? I'm soooo ready for a pair of carbon fiber, sleek, metro-sexual slippers that may or may not get me a job at a gay disco.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

Lelandjt said:


> Do you work at a gay disco? Are they hiring? I'm tired of my heterosexual mountain town lifestyle.
> 
> Back on topic: I searched this a lot and the only lugged MTB shoes that are significantly lighter than my $60 SixSixOnes are the 2010 S-Works. Are they available yet? Anyone have them? I'm soooo ready for a pair of carbon fiber, sleek, metro-sexual slippers that may or may not get me a job at a gay disco.


I could work with the Furies...


----------



## FiCaçador (Jan 25, 2010)

I love my Bontrager RL Mountain's. Light, confortable, practical, good looking and affordable.


----------



## J.Mc. (Aug 24, 2007)

Anyone have any experience with the Bontrager RXL's?


----------



## bigred (Mar 1, 2005)

surprised no one has said anything else for the Sidis. Nice construction, durable, decent weight. But pick the shoes that fit best, above all.


----------



## b00001 (Dec 28, 2005)

I just ordered some Lake MX235c-09. Their site claims 365g. I received them last night and the first thing I did was to check the weight. 491g each!!!!!! Uhhhhhh, a little off! 26% difference should be grounds for false advertising.

Anyway, the shoe itself feels good. Higher arch than my sidi's, little more room in every direction than the sidi's and I really like the feel of the super stiff carbon sole. I think they are about a half size too large and with the weight nowhere near what it should be, I am sending them back. I thought I had found the golden ticket-carbon sole, solid construction and great price at $120. Oh well. Back to the drawing board.

Inexpensive (relatively), carbon sole, light and solid construction............Any such thing??? 

Mavic Fury and Sidi Dragons between $300-$400 just too much $$$.


----------



## bholwell (Oct 17, 2007)

What about the Mavic Razor's- $125 and a decent weight.

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/m...&utm_medium=Google+Base&utm_campaign=Datafeed


----------



## J.Mc. (Aug 24, 2007)

bholwell said:


> What about the Mavic Razor's- $125 and a decent weight.
> 
> http://www.competitivecyclist.com/m...&utm_medium=Google+Base&utm_campaign=Datafeed


I just placed an order for a pair of Mavic '09 Chasm's. They look alot like the Fury's that everyone seems to like. FYI Blue Sky Cycles has last years model on sale for $129. That's a pretty sweet price for a full carbon sole


----------



## Ansible (Jan 30, 2004)

My specialized sports are 375 with cleat, size 42. Egg beater cleat, bolts, and shoe shield together are around 25 grams, so that's 350 for the plain shoe. Which is weird because the quoted weight is 395 on some website (spec website is down right now). 

The downside to these shoes is that there is no ratchet buckle and the toe guard isn't that tough. You can see where the rubbery cloth has gotten torn, I've had these about 2 years.

Upside is they are comfortable and I mostly don't even think about them when I'm riding.


----------



## georgyj (Dec 17, 2008)

http://www.mavic.de/mtb/products/pulse.320429.9.aspx

Looks good to me.


----------



## System (Mar 27, 2007)

Bont MTB-One, 300g with a buckle or 350g for the MTB-Two with all velcro.
http://www.bont.com/cycling/index.html


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

b00001 said:


> 26% difference should be grounds for false advertising.


2 things to consider when looking at shoes weights: First, expect more variance than other parts due to how a shoe is made compared to a handlebar. Second, find out what size the quoted weight is for as weight goes up considerably with size.
My size 45 SixSixOne Expert shoes weigh 360g each which is REALLY light for a cheap shoe. They don't have the stiffest soles though.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

bigred said:


> surprised no one has said anything else for the Sidis. Nice construction, durable, decent weight. But pick the shoes that fit best, above all.


I have been very deceived by Sidis, I expected more perhaps because of the brand's reputation but I have a pair of Dragon 2 and my feet don't like them that much (very personal thing), plus they are quite heavy, the soles melt in no time (yeah they are replacable but spare lugs cost as much as some complete shoes) and the uppers are not very durable either. And make sure you tighten the SRS bolts or loctite them, I lost some after a few rides...


----------



## yeahdog31 (Jul 13, 2009)

*Toe Cleats?*



FiCaçador said:


> I love my Bontrager RL Mountain's. Light, confortable, practical, good looking and affordable.


I just picked up a pair of last year's Bontrager RL at the local Trek store for $35!!! They had a rack of gear for 75% off and I couldn't believe it when they had my size! Granted, they are the brown/red/tan version, but the color scheme is growing on me. Especially at that price...
Sorry to sound like a noob here, but what is the deal with the 'screw-in' football-cleat thingies at the toe? Should I definitely get some?


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

If you need to run up muddy hills, yes. If you walk on rocks, no


----------



## b00001 (Dec 28, 2005)

J.Mc. said:


> I just placed an order for a pair of Mavic '09 Chasm's. They look alot like the Fury's that everyone seems to like. FYI Blue Sky Cycles has last years model on sale for $129. That's a pretty sweet price for a full carbon sole


Thanks for the find!!!!!! I just ordered. I hope they size like Sidi's. I wear 44 in Sidi, ordered the 10 in Mavic.


----------



## J.Mc. (Aug 24, 2007)

b00001 said:


> Thanks for the find!!!!!! I just ordered. I hope they size like Sidi's. I wear 44 in Sidi, ordered the 10 in Mavic.


:thumbsup: Glad I could help! I can't believe more people aren't jumping on this deal. I just hope that the 11.5 I ordered fits...


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

System said:


> Bont MTB-One, 300g with a buckle or 350g for the MTB-Two with all velcro.
> http://www.bont.com/cycling/index.html


Do you have any experience with them? In some other forums someone mentioned that the sole guards do not really last long.

Would be something different.


----------



## veloreality (May 10, 2009)

bholwell said:


> What about the Mavic Razor's- $125 and a decent weight.
> 
> http://www.competitivecyclist.com/m...&utm_medium=Google+Base&utm_campaign=Datafeed


+1 for these. ive been riding them for a couple months now and loving them. so far durable, light and comfy.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

The only complaint I've heard about any of the Mavic shoes (besides the bright yellow color) is finding replacement parts. If you break the straps/buckles you might be screwed trying to find a replacement.


----------



## Vortechcoupe (Nov 7, 2006)

I just got a pair of 2010 s-works shoes. The weight was pretty much right on compared with the claimed weight for whatever size it list on the site. mine are size 45. They are just a tad wider, bigger toe box then sidi size 45.5 i'd wear. God bit lighter then dragons. The tread is all replaceable on the s-works. The screws are on the inside so they won't get banged up from rocks etc..

Another nice part of the s-works shoe is the rubber "stomp pad" in the middle of the sole, makes the running, jumping and the bike quick pedal easier.

last note, they look even better in person then on spec's website


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

Just tried the s-works today, too. I was lucky, saved a lot of money ;-) For me they run slightly too narrow. The BG Pro are fine with my feet. Unfortunately they are quite heavy for that price tag.

For all you internet shoe shoppers: currently I ride some size 44 Northwave (road and mtb models). With Specialized size 44 seems to fits nice. Foot length is 273 mm, slightly wider than an average foot. With a narrower foot I may be able to take a size 43.5.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

I wear 44 with Specialized, Sidi and Mavics. The regular Sidis felt more cramped, maybe I would have prefered their wider Mega models. The Mavic feel a bit bigger, wider than the Specialized.... I would still advise you try them on before buying though.


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

44 SIDI is already too smallish for me. 44.5-45 has it to be for me (though more due to my foot width) 

... often there is no alternative to getting certain models only online. And returning them is no problem here (no restocking fee or so). Just a matter of hassle and no instant-gratification-experience ;-)


----------



## nitropowered (Aug 30, 2007)

I love my Mavic Furys. they are light, stiff yet flexes enough that its not impossible to walk in (i mean run), and they scream YELLOW.

I think shoes are one place you just have to spend the money on. If you feet are not happy, you cannot ride well.

I will be buying another pair of Furys this year


----------



## Logantri (Mar 31, 2004)

J.Mc. said:


> Anyone have any experience with the Bontrager RXL's?


Yes, favorite ever. Owned Shimano moldables, Nike carbons's, several other shimanos, Axo's, answer's, diadora's, etc.


----------



## KevinK (Jul 19, 2005)

I have a pair of Sidi Dominator 5, and Sidi Dominator 6 Carbon shoes, They both fit great, however, the Dom 6 has a heel retention system, that really keeps your feet secure. I think, reading at singletrack.competitor.com site, they reviewed the Mavic Fury shoes, and mentioned, they run a bit narrow. I have wider than normal feet, but not wide feet, as my Sidi shoes and not wide but, normal version. That would be my only concern ordering w/o trying them on first. 
Good reviews from Bikeradar: http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/clothing/shoes/product/fury-xc-shoes-09-34725

More reviews:
http://crossbikereview.com/clothes/reviews/Mavic_FuryXC_shoe.html

http://singletrack.competitor.com/2...wrenched-and-ridden-mavic-fury-mtb-shoes_4213

I'll try and weigh the Dom 6 Carbon shoes tonight.

Has anyone w/ wide feet tried on the Mavic Fury's?


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Vortechcoupe said:


> I just got a pair of 2010 s-works shoes. The weight was pretty much right on compared with the claimed weight for whatever size it list on the site.


Your size 45s are 305g per shoe? The midsole stomp pad is a big selling point over other carbon soled shoes.


----------



## Vortechcoupe (Nov 7, 2006)

sorry, i meant was they were on par with claimed weight, plus add more for my bigger size. I weighed them at 346 and 350 grams.

I lost ~220 grams total over my old shoes, these feel like i'm not even wearing them.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Damn, only 10g lighter than my $70 SixSixOnes The stiffer sole would be nice in races but I like the control feel of my current, slightly flexy soles.

I'm surprised no one can make a significantly lighter shoe.

P.S. We're figuring 25g per shoe for cleat hardware, right?


----------



## Vortechcoupe (Nov 7, 2006)

Lelandjt said:


> P.S. We're figuring 25g per shoe for cleat hardware, right?


No, the weights i gave are for just the bare shoes, out of the box. No cleats.


----------



## chuckie33 (Oct 2, 2008)

Lelandjt said:


> Damn, only 10g lighter than my $70 SixSixOnes The stiffer sole would be nice in races but I like the control feel of my current, slightly flexy soles.
> 
> I'm surprised no one can make a significantly lighter shoe.
> 
> P.S. We're figuring 25g per shoe for cleat hardware, right?


I weighed the stock Shimano SPD cleats and hardware at 25g a piece. Crank Bros. stock cleats and hardware at 20g a piece. Also weighed my shoes, 412 and 416, no cleats, probably with a few grams of mud on there.

I'm surprised by how many responses this thread has gotten. Lots of great options recommended. I'll be pulling the trigger soon but haven't decided yet. I'd like to try on a lot of these shoes mentioned before blindly ordering over the net.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Vortechcoupe said:


> No, the weights i gave are for just the bare shoes, out of the box. No cleats.


Yeah I know, but I had to weigh mine with cleats so the weight I gave was after subtracting 25g.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

I'm gonna go with the Lake MX330-08. Light (340g claimed, will report on real weight), carbon sole, clean upper, and most importantly a good rubber design around the cleat and midfoot to work well with Shimano DX SPDs. $200.















If you don't mind a buckle and 30g you can spend $120 on the MX235-C 09.


----------



## Tfrost (Aug 31, 2007)

Any of the brands and/or models mentioned here come in wide widths?


----------



## amillmtb (Jun 24, 2005)

Tfrost said:


> Any of the brands and/or models mentioned here come in wide widths?


Specialized S-Works, every size up to 49 EE.


----------



## Baltazar (Jan 30, 2004)

Tfrost said:


> Any of the brands and/or models mentioned here come in wide widths?


shimanos EE, or half sizes are wider.


----------



## morrisgarages (Jan 25, 2009)

Logantri said:


> Yes, favorite ever. Owned Shimano moldables, Nike carbons's, several other shimanos, Axo's, answer's, diadora's, etc.


I'm looking at the Bontrager RXL too. I'm just concerned with the exposed carbon sole and minimal thread. How's their durability? Looks like you can rip off those rubber thread in a nasty rock slip. Anyone else has any experience with the Bontrager RXL?


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

That's why I went with the Lakes.


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

amillmtb said:


> Specialized S-Works, every size up to 49 EE.


you're sure? Their website states otherwise, e.g. only Pro models are available in EE (and those are not really light, unfortunately, I own a pair)


----------



## Tfrost (Aug 31, 2007)

Lelandjt said:


> That's why I went with the Lakes.


Ever get the real weight?


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

I got the Lake's and am stoked with the soles and Boa upper, not so much with the weight: 430g per shoe, size 45. That's a total of 1/3 of a pound more to carry around than my 661 Experts. I'm hoping I'll prefer the stiffer carbon sole and I know I'll like the rubber covered midsole area for unclipped traction but to reiterate:
*661 Experts are the lightest cheap shoe @ 365g, size 45 and $50-60. Not a grippy sole.*
Sounds like 2010 Specialized S-Works are the only shoe lighter @ 350g, size 45 and $350.


----------



## oldassracer (Mar 26, 2009)

great thread
let's post some actual weights of shoes with sizes
that is probably as important as tire rotational weight


----------



## joe90mccall (May 31, 2004)

I just got a pair of 2010 Bontrager RXL shoes. Weight is 425 per shoe without cleat, bit disappointed! Very nice show though, nice stiff sole.

http://bontrager.com/model/07814


----------



## gflex (Feb 17, 2010)

Picked up some Mavic Chasms online for $130. Carbon sole, super light. Haven't weighed them though. For the price, they are tough to beat.


----------



## oldassracer (Mar 26, 2009)

found some chasms on ebay for $80...


----------



## gflex (Feb 17, 2010)

oldassracer said:


> found some chasms on ebay for $80...


How do you like em?


----------



## mightymouse (Sep 15, 2009)

gflex said:


> Picked up some Mavic Chasms online for $130. Carbon sole, super light. Haven't weighed them though. For the price, they are tough to beat.


let's get quantitative and put them on a scale!

Also, where are the 661 experts $50-60?


----------



## flash01 (Apr 4, 2010)

I'm also a big fan of the Mavic Fury. I've been using the S-Works MTB shoes for two years and all i can say is my feet hurts pretty bad after a long ride (2-3hours). I hink the mavic is a little bit heavier but you cannot go wrong with the Fury.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

mightymouse said:


> Where are the 661 experts $50-60?


Here they are for $30! http://store.comcycle-usa.com/ProductInfo.aspx?id=3816629
Use google shopping. Plenty more for sub $70.


----------



## tg (Feb 1, 2006)

*D2 Custom*

Eagle Colorado :thumbsup:


----------



## mightymouse (Sep 15, 2009)

Lelandjt said:


> Here they are for $30! http://store.comcycle-usa.com/ProductInfo.aspx?id=3816629
> Use google shopping. Plenty more for sub $70.


Thanks, I'm still looking for a size 45 but I'll keep searching. $30's a great price, just not in my size. Anyone have a real weight of these 661's?


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

That 365g per shoe came from my digi scale. Size 45.
I like the fit. They aren't super stiff by carbon race shoe standards, which is good for feel and control but not great for XC racing. They have minimal rubber on the sole and bare plastic in the middle of the sole which sucks for walking or riding unclipped.

I really like the soles on my new Lakes. So much grip and the cleats don't hit the ground when walking.


----------



## culturesponge (Aug 15, 2007)

*2010 mavic fury*

new 2010 Mavic Fury's replacing worn out & increasingly flexy (but well ventilated) Adidas Hammers

the Fury's fit like a glove just like my fave Adidas Rekord trainers - supreme:thumbsup:

(UK size 8) left foot was 347g out of the box & 363g with CB premium cleats + sole protector

total weight of the pair with cleats ect was 730g

£175 or $270 from CRC (no tax or postal charges, postage to SoCal took 10 days total)

pics:
1 : on scales with cleats + sole shields + alloy cleat bolts ect
2 : CB premium cleats ect on the left shoe
3 : Mavic Fury sole protectors 
4 : Mavic Fury stud hole screws + cleat bolt thread adapters
5 : Mavic Fury studs

.................edit to add extra snaps...............


----------



## KevinK (Jul 19, 2005)

My Sidi Dominator 6 Carbon w/ Brass Eggbeater Cleats, shield, and screws weigh: 418g
Size is 43.5


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Size 37?


----------



## KevinK (Jul 19, 2005)

Lelandjt said:


> Size 37?


43.5


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

That's pretty light then.


----------



## rshalit (Oct 27, 2006)

*Rocket 7 Rocket Seven shoes*

help! Rocket 7 is out of business it looks like! I need mine repaired - for one thing the threads are stripped where screw for cleat goes into special plate and there doesn't seem to be a way inside.. and I don't know where to get that part anyway.

These are the best, lightest shoes - my feet are two different sizes so custom fit comes out to be a good deal - and these shoes have lasted for years.

any ideas who can repair them?

thanks!


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

new for 2011: Scott MTB Premium

*290 g !!!*


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Am I the only one that prefers velcro? The new Bontrager *road* shoes use three velcro straps and they're supposed to weigh 190g. I'd like to see that in a mtn.bike shoe. I hate buckles and ratchets. I'd rather have three velcro straps.

Scroll down to see the XXX shoe

http://www.roadbikeaction.com/Tech-...-Trek-World,-Part-One-Bontrager-Goes-Big.html


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

sfer1 said:


> I ride Sidi Dragon 2 shoes. Sure, they're expensive, but a lot more comfortable than my old Shimano SH-M182's.
> 
> I paid $301 including shipping for them. If I had known there was such a difference between these and $100 shoes, I would have bought them sooner.


 Im following you but it will cost less to me , check it Sidi


----------



## tamjam (Jan 23, 2004)

Can anyone compare the fit of the Mavic Fury to SIDI? I wear a 43 SIDI and a 9.5 street shoe. I've read the Fury has a longer toe box and that you should buy down a size, which would put me in a 9 (what Mavic calls a 42 2/3). I don't have a local Mavic dealer to try first-hand (aside from Performance, which has very low stock, if any, in these shoes).


----------



## rshalit (Oct 27, 2006)

*Rocket7*

Rocket7 no longer in business. Both of my shoes together weigh 495 g ! Yes I paid a fortune, but I have 2 different size feet and they custom made these - full carbon - I've had them 4 years and the plate that holds the cleat has stripped on one side and unfortunately it's not very accessible - hoping I can find a fix.



bholwell said:


> Rocket 7's http://secure3.ntwebb.com/rocket7-com/shoes.htm
> 
> Sidi Dominator 5's are light enough for me, though.


----------



## flyag1 (Jun 9, 2007)

rshalit said:


> Rocket7 no longer in business. Both of my shoes together weigh 495 g ! Yes I paid a fortune, .


Priced themselves out of the market:nono:


----------



## barrelquest (Apr 2, 2011)

Lelandjt said:


> Do you work at a gay disco? Are they hiring? I'm tired of my heterosexual mountain town lifestyle.
> 
> THAT IS SOME FUNNY SH*T RIGHT THERE. :thumbsup:
> 
> ...


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

If price, lightweight, and a sole with a little flex (more comfortable walking) are priorities I recommend the 661 Experts*.

If a stiffer sole (more powerful pedaling) with full rubber (better grip when riding unclipped or walking on rocks) are priorities I'm really happy with my Lakes.

*Maybe glue rubber on the bare areas of the 661's sole for the best of both worlds.


----------



## barrelquest (Apr 2, 2011)

I'm liking the idea of the Lakes...the lower priced ones, . the 170's and even the 85's, due to stiff sole & grippy rubber. wish their website would list some actual weights. 

I wonder if the lakes with the extra rubber will work with say crank brothers pedals that contain platform clip combo, like the Acid or the mallet? I mean would clipping in be possible with all that tread under there ?


----------



## barrelquest (Apr 2, 2011)

okay never mind the Lakes mx85 and 165 weigh 901 grams PER SHOE. (2 lbs)


----------



## Eville140 (Nov 26, 2010)

I went with my LBS for shoes, and the choices below $200 where slim. Ended up getting Bontrager Race Mountains. Under $100, not heavy as anchors (size 9 630g for the pair), and they are super comfy and stiff.
http://bontrager.com/model/09152


----------



## barrelquest (Apr 2, 2011)

Funny you mention that, because i was just looking at them. The older model race mountains look kinda ugly but the new models are cool. Light and it appears the soles may be halfway grippy. upgrade to the RL's or even RXL if I can find something on sale somewhere.:thumbsup:


----------



## smdb01us (Mar 22, 2011)

I have been riding with Mavic Fury (black) for a year now. Great solid shoes with very good support and somewhat good traction when out of the saddle... A bit $$$ but all good things are...


----------



## Onie (Sep 15, 2005)

Check out my black Fury - https://www.facebook.com/#!/media/set/?set=a.248267341880267.64798.120573387982997&type=1 as my 10//2 shoe replacement...

They do fit me well but not as great as my old Dragons! :thumbsup: The latter are the shiznit of MTB shoes for me! But mind you they do run bigger than my Sidis.

addendum: I have yet to find a working scale. I'll keep you posted once i get to do so... :thumbsup:


----------



## mightymouse (Sep 15, 2009)

have you weighed them?


----------



## Simplemind (Jul 17, 2006)

tamjam said:


> Can anyone compare the fit of the Mavic Fury to SIDI? I wear a 43 SIDI and a 9.5 street shoe. I've read the Fury has a longer toe box and that you should buy down a size, which would put me in a 9 (what Mavic calls a 42 2/3). I don't have a local Mavic dealer to try first-hand (aside from Performance, which has very low stock, if any, in these shoes).


Did you ever get an answer? I'm curious as well. My Dominators just don't have the traction on rock that I would prefer.


----------

