Road Shoes w/ Wide Toe Box

PoorInRichfield

My gunboat feet are size US 14 / EU 48 in D width and finding a pair of road shoes that don't squash my toes has been nearly impossible. Almost all road shoes these days have "pointy toes" and are quite narrow. The kicker is that I am not looking for "high volume" shoes that some companies offer because I don't have "fat feet" and big ankles, I just want my toes to not be mashed in my shoes. (See image below for what I consider "pointy" vs. "wide".)

The only brand that I've found so far that appear to have a wide toe box by design is Bont. However, I purchased a pair of Bont Blitz shoes and found that the arch was too high and sharp and my feet weren't excited about the "bathtub" sole construction. The other issue with Bont's is that if they don't fit, return shipping is very expensive (at least it is here in the USA.)

I currently own a pair of Lake MX237 shoes (normal width, not the wide model) and they have have a decent shape and are relatively comfortable, but still have that narrow toe like most shoes do (not to mention they weigh a lot and don't breath well).

Am I looking for the shoe version of a unicorn? Are Bonts my only hope?

Matthewfalle

DHB at Wiggle are well wide, well made and a good price.

wongataa

PoorInRichfield wrote:

I currently own a pair of Lake MX237 shoes (normal width, not the wide model) and they have have a decent shape and are relatively comfortable, but still have that narrow toe like most shoes do (not to mention they weigh a lot and don't breath well).

Have you tried wide fit Lake shoes?

Ben6899

Lake (not familiar with models, but well known for accommodating wide feet).

I have wide feet and have been fine with Bont Vaypour and Giro Empire.

ddraver

+1 for dhb, the lace up one's are great

Coming from someone that flummoxed one of the more recognised ski boot fitters in the Alps recently...

ovi

I stick with North Wave for my uk size 12 wide feet for both mtb and road

PoorInRichfield

Ben6899 wrote:

I have wide feet and have been fine with Bont Vaypour and Giro Empire.

It doesn't surprise me that the Bont Vaypours are wider in the toe, but the Giro Empires do surprise me. I've owned 3 different models of Giro shoes and they were all very narrow and had a pointy toe box. In looking at pictures of the Empires, I don't see how the Empire's would be any different?

I just ordered a pair of Specialized Torch 2.0 wide shoes since the toe box looks slightly rounder (less pointy) than other shoes (except for Bonts). Unfortunately, Specialized size chart gives no indication as to what width their wide shoe is, so hopefully I didn't just order a "high volume" shoe.

According to this "aerial view" of the Torch 2.0, the toe box looks a bit more "natural shape" (rounder) than most shoes I've owned...

Ben6899

Try the Empires. I can only tell you my experience. The latest Specialized shoes are like torture devices for me.

PoorInRichfield

Ben6899 wrote:

Try the Empires. I can only tell you my experience. The latest Specialized shoes are like torture devices for me.

LOL! I found a place that pays return shipping for the Specialized Torches, so I figure it's worth trying them on. If the Torches don't work, the Empires might be my next experiment.

Solis

I have a wide toe box but low volume (foot height) if that makes sense, plus a narrow ankle, finding shoes to fit is/was a nightmare, Lakes were the nearest, having tried most makes but recently purchased a pair of Specialized Torch 3.0, used them on an endurance event recently and they were, for me, a revelation fit wise, so hopefully you have made a good choice. I tried the Torch 2.0 and it was the same fit as the 3.0

navrig2

Solis wrote:

I have a wide toe box but low volume (foot height) if that makes sense, plus a narrow ankle, finding shoes to fit is/was a nightmare, Lakes were the nearest, having tried most makes but recently purchased a pair of Specialized Torch 3.0, used them on an endurance event recently and they were, for me, a revelation fit wise, so hopefully you have made a good choice. I tried the Torch 2.0 and it was the same fit as the 3.0

Same for me. I prefer Specialized shoes (now wearing Torch 3) but couldn't get their winter boots at a discount and wasn't willing to pay full price. So I tried Mavic - how can they be so far out with sizing!? They were tiny.

Then I got a pair of Northwave winter boots. They are good for length and heel support but the toe box is quite roomy. I managed to sort this by fitting a pair of my running shoe orthotics. They are a bit thicker than the NW insoles so lift my feet a bit. Still more space than the Spesh shoes but still a good fit.

I'd try NW i I were you.

PoorInRichfield

Solis wrote:

I have a wide toe box but low volume (foot height) if that makes sense, plus a narrow ankle, finding shoes to fit is/was a nightmare, Lakes were the nearest, having tried most makes but recently purchased a pair of Specialized Torch 3.0, used them on an endurance event recently and they were, for me, a revelation fit wise, so hopefully you have made a good choice. I tried the Torch 2.0 and it was the same fit as the 3.0

Interesting. I was debating between the Torch 2.0 and 3.0, but only the 2.0 come in a wide width. I can't find any info on what Specialized constitutes as "wide", so I'm not even sure I actually need a wide shoe. Having a D-width foot, my feet aren't really all that wide for their size. The big difference between the 2.0 and the 3.0 seems to be an extra BOA dial and slightly stiffer sole, both of which I think I can live w/o for $50.

I wish manufacturers would give more information on how to properly pick the right size shoe on their web sites. With shoes costing $400+ and local bike shops stocking less and less, couldn't companies at least document what width the shoes are designed for?

green_mark

Ben6899 wrote:

Lake (not familiar with models, but well known for accommodating wide feet).

I have wide feet and have been fine with Bont Vaypour and Giro Empire.

Can concur for both Vaypours and Empires. Or at least only partly.

My left foot finds my Vaypour extremely comfortable but the Empire pinches the outside of little toe.
My right foot is the reverse: Empire comfortable, Vaypour pinches.

pippi_langsamer-2

Specialized S-Works are particularly roomy...

joey54321

I'd love a pair of Empires as I think they look awesome, however, they are way too narrow for my feet. I find Lake the best, and Bont, if you get on with them, are pretty wide.

alanyu

Oh, almost similar with me!!!
My feet is Egyptian foot shape, a little mixed with Roman shape, 250mm length and 90mm wide.

Unfortunately, only Bont has this kind of toebox, at least my fitter told me that, which is the best fitting for Roman foot shape and some kinds of Egyptian foot shape. I don't know why 95% brands choose that 'pointy' toebox, which is most suitable for Greek foot shape. (Three are three main foot shape: Egyptian, Roman and Greek, amost each are 1/3, and it can be detialed catalog then)

What's more disappointing, only a few people really know how to choose the best fitting shoes. I also didn't know that before discussing with my fitter: toebox shape first, size second (including length, width, height...).

I used the wrong shoes before Bont: NW flash, which is 1 size larger to make my toes and forefoot feel good.

Talking about Bont, the arch part of normal size Bont is also too high for me.
I'm now using Bont Helix but with Asian fit, which has a lower arch part. After thermo-mold, it fits well to me.

I tried all Riot+, Helix, Blitz and Vaypor before paying the bill. Riot+ is too wide while Blitz is a little more pointy compared to others. Helix and Vaypor is similar, but Helix fits me better.

I also suggest you try first.

PoorInRichfield

Interesting info, alanyu!

Based on this diagram, I guess my toes best align with the "Orient" shape, although there's nothing "Oriental" about me
Assuming this picture is remotely accurate, you can kind of see that the Greek foot shape would lend itself to a shoe that's pointier in the middle than at the big toe.

PoorInRichfield

A somewhat funny look at how most shoe companies (cycling and otherwise) seem to think our feet are shaped...



The not-so-funny part is that people are ruining their feet just to wear "cool looking shoes" (myself included). Finding shoes that are actually properly shaped for your feet is quit difficult and expensive :x

PoorInRichfield

The Specialized Torch 2.0 Wide shoes arrived today. If these are the "wide" shoes, I hate to see what the regular width shoes are like!

Actually, the fit seems very comparable to my Lake MX237 shoes, with the exception that the Lakes feel more like soft slippers and the Spec's feel a bit more harsh (likely due to the leather Lake uses.) My toes have a little wiggle room in the Specs, although my pinky toe (little toe) is quite squashed.

As you can see in the comparison photo, both the Lakes and the Specialized shoes have a somewhat pointy toe box compared to Bonts...



For the money, the Torch 2.0 seems like a "good value", at least compared to what other brands are offering at the same price point. I like the carbon sole with the huge heal pad. The fit & finish is top-notch. I just noticed that there are no drain holes in the soles, however, so riding in the rain is going to be squishy. :shock:

It'll probably be a while before I actually get to wear the shoes as it was snowing here two days ago and is still quite cold.

alanyu

Oops....
That's the problem you see.

Most of brands define their 'wide edition' as wide at middle range of the foot while the toebox is still pointy, resulting in somehow the area around forefoot to pinky toe is still narrow compared to our Egytian/Roman/Orient... shape (As the figure you posted).

One method I know is that cut a hole on the shoes at the pinky toe (or somewhere else you feel squashed) as some pros. do, since they can not change their sponsor.

Methodical

Northwave did it for me.

PoorInRichfield

Methodical wrote:

Northwave did it for me.

Which model of shoes? Every brand has variations within each line of shoe, so it's likely that not all of their shoes cater to wide feet.

stueys

I’ve the same challenge. Lake or Bont wide seem the closest fit. I’m seriously contemplating full custom as (hopefully) the perfect answer

bendertherobot

https://roubaixcycling.cc/2019/04/20/ra ... ore-shoes/

Rapha? Toe box a bit more than the Giro ones.

SlinkyJ

Just been through a selection process after getting new shoes last year and having issues with my big toe so urgent replacement needed. I'm quite wide with a narrow heal, and I was replacing some DMT's, but originally had bont A2's. I have custom innersoles from my A2's which are also used.

Bont riot + - they are a good shape and mega stiff but the boa closure wasn't the best
Lake CX 237 - probably too wide and looked a bit odd. Massive heal lift on my right foot
Rapha classic - nice fit and roomy without looking it. Not as stiff as the bont but stiff enough

I have kept the rapha's, just dialing in the cleat position. I have had to bring them in as I was getting pressure from the opening on the inner part of my ankle but pretty sorted now.

Just spent a couple days going around Dartmoor in them, can also report the new sole design his up really well when walking. Build is also good, no issues recommending them.

de_sisti

Sidi has a wide-fitting range.

PoorInRichfield

SlinkyJ wrote:

Rapha classic - nice fit and roomy without looking it. Not as stiff as the bont but stiff enough

Looks like Rapha is a non-starter for me... they only show up to a size 47 on their web site and my ginormous feet are 48's