Customer Reviews Merrell Trail Glove 6

Too narrow. Quality has decreased. Style is poor. Very disappointed.

Not too comfortable, already split treads open with regular use.

Size 11 for the Trail Glove 6 is a half to a full size smaller than for my current Merrell Trail Glove 5 Sneaker. Any idea why you would deviate your sizing??? Not a good idea.

I don't really care for the shape of the shoe. It's very bulky and box like. Other than that it's an okay shoe, but I wouldn't buy that style again.

Runs very different sizing than Moab. Too large and no refunds. I'm stuck

Shoe look great on your feet. However they are way too tight and hurt my feet. I have owned dozens of pairs of Merrells and these are the first ones that have disappointed. I do not need a wider width either. They are only tight at the top of the foot. Everywhere else fits fine. I have worn them several times but they are not loosening.

I returned them. The arch was too high for my foot.

I have been wearing barefoot/minimalist style shoes for 10 years now (primarily New Balance and Merrell with some other brands here and there). This is my 4th pair of Merrell barefoot shoes and I am disappointed in the design. There is a band midfoot that makes it more difficult to slide the foot into and hugs the foot too tightly - like wearing small socks. I put them on and felt like I was wearing boots - there is a very noticeable heel and lift to the shoes and a thick barrier to the ground - hard stiff sole. I thought maybe I just needed to get them worn-in, no, 2-weeks in now and I dislike them more and more. If you are a fan of the vapor-glove shoes by Merrell or other brands that really have the barefoot feel, I suggest you stay away from these shoes. I saw the enhanced grip and thought I would give these a try - I wish I hadn't worn them for two weeks now and could trade them for a new pair of the vapor gloves.

Not great. Too bad. I've been wearing the Trail Glove for years but this one didn't do it for me. I read the other reviews and figured it couldn't be that bad so I went for it anyway but they were right. The design is hard to put on because of how low they mounted the laces. I do like the arch support I've always appreciated about Merrell.

I have worn these shoes for a few days when i first got them, a few weeks ago, just around on walks. Then wore them on 2 short hikes, nothing crazy. Already, the seam around the toe is coming off. It's small now, but noticeable. I guess this falls under "normal wear." Newer merrells seem to have a lower quality.

The arch support ruins these shoes for me. Makes my pliable feet tired. No more 6th generation but I will buy the fifth. Wish I could still get the earlier shoes that I have worn out.

The treading on the bottom is peeling off after only about 8 hikes. Very disappointing for the price. The shoes are great otherwise.

Come on, Merrell. Read the reviews. Trail Glove 6 is just not a good shoe - stiff and uncomfortable. Trail Glove 5 was better and Trail Glove 4 was much, much better. I stocked up on the Trail Glove 4s because I expected there would come a day when they would be hard to find. Please bring back the Trail Glove 4.

I ordered a 10 in the vapor glove 5 since it said they run a touch small. They fit on point (one thumb extra space with thin socks). I ordered a 9.5 in these and even after putting on thicker wool fall socks, are Roomier up front than the size 10 vapor 5s... 1.5 thumb? The base also feels really wonky in one side of the shoe, causing the ball of my foot to feel like there's a knob under it. The arch is also in a weird spot, really far forward. I might try to exchange and see if I should go down to a 9 or if the 9.5 is fine, but I got a bad pair. I'll update the review if the replacement is better. Ugly branding.

The Trail Glove 4 was one of my favorite shoes of all time. I started with barefoot shoes about 15 years ago and have worn different brands over the years. Version 4 had the perfect combination of grip and comfort with just the right amount of protection for MN winters and trail running. Despite the negative reviews of its barefoot qualities, I decided to give it a try and was not impressed. I guess if someone had never had a true minimalist shoe and built up the tolerance for it these would be good basic sneakers. I found the sole too thick and stiff, the arch too high and firm, and the fit way too narrow and tight. The wide toe box for proper flexion and grip of the toes is nowhere to be seen. Merrell now offers nothing in the minimalist vein and I am very happy with new shoes from a different brand that checks all the boxes.

I loved the Trail Glove 3 and 4, though I had durability issues with the 4. I've barely worn the 6's (due to constructed fit) and they already have lost a seam. The fit is the main issue. They are supposed to be barefoot shoes and feel like nothing is there, but they feel like a straight jacket. I have narrow feet and these are too tight for me. I always see "wide" options for shoes and wish there was a narrow option. Not for these shoes though. Each version gets worse and worse and Merrell doesn't seem to care about the reviews. I thought people were harsh on some of the older models, but these are no longer barefoot shoes. Merrell used to be a 5 star brand for me. Now they are a 3. Only thing that separates them from average junk is their environmental efforts.

Toe box is too narrow! Arch support is a bit too high. Fix both of those this would be the best minimalist-ish disc golf shoes ever.

Weird fitting shoe. Donating... somewhere. I do not recommend a wide in these unless you are looking for a width that just does not exist elsewhere. I wear a 4E in most shoes, but this is a little too wide. I have since ordered other Merrell shoes I DO like, but I knew not to order a wide at that point. I still wouldn't care for these in a normal width. They just fit oddly.

Please return the design of the Trail Glove 3s! These are just not good.

I like the tread for extremely rocky trails but these are narrow and rub blisters on my small toes. The durability is pretty good and seems sturdy but I still prefer my 5s over these. I put +500 miles on my 5s. The trail glove 5 was better and the 4 was even better when it comes to minimalist feel. I would not buy these again. I could probably go with wide but I don't use wide with any other shoes and don't have problems.

I bought a pair of these , live the style, look and feel to the touch but the problem is the sizing is not good. I purchased a 91/2 and fitted to tight so I ordered a 10 and still too narrow for my feet. Sadly I'll have to return this shoes

I just received these & haven't run in them yet, so I can't offer a run review just yet. However, the initial fitting is a little concerning. First, they are EXTREMELY narrow. I don't have a particularly wide foot, but these fit SUPER tight. I really wish there was a "wide" option for the Trail Glove 6, but there isn't. Second, there is noticeable arch support; for a supposedly minimalist shoe, that is concerning. I'll have to see how it feels on a run; but just slipping the shoe on & walking around, there is very noticeable arch support. Not really what I expected in a "minimalist" shoe. I may change this rating (up or down) after running, we'll see.

Like everyone said, it bears no resemblance to the earlier (better) Trail Glove versions: Large amount of unwanted, rigid support in the arch and a comically thick sole that interferes with natural and efficient movement. To cap it all off, the sole has, after 4 days, begun to unglue and separate. Goodbye, Merrell. It was a great 7 years.

I absolutely loved the look of this shoe, however by the third run the sole began to peal off. I bought some shoe glue and repair it (not something a customer should need to do so soon after purchase ... or maybe ever). Then by only 100-125 miles into the shoe the bottom sole began to wear through. I was really disappointed because this was my first try of zero rise shoes and really did like the experience. On a recommendation of a friend I got some xero shoes and they are holding up much better.