I only just received these and will update in a few weeks or months if my suspicions concerning the durability are confirmed.
I bought some merrell minimalist shoes last year and have been totally converted from traditional running shoes as a result.  But the merrells are getting a bit ratty so I wanted to try a slightly cheaper minimalist shoe and liked the flashy look of these orange ones.
I don't think Saucony gets it.
Most minimalist shoes (apart from the "fingered" styles) have a very broad toe box so that the forefoot has room to expand under the shock of toe-running.  Many, but not all, have a very tight-fitting mid-sole to compensate and not allow chafing.  These shoes are just small, all over.  I have very narrow feet and these shoes are nearly strangling them as I type.  They size at least one size too short and smaller in width. They feel like small moccasins  or maybe like slipper-style climbing shoes.  That said I haven't run in them long enough to develop blisters, so I will remain open to the possibility that saucony has figured something counter-intuitive out about minimalist shoes.
The second issue, and more mind-boggling, is that most of the tread is made of EVA rubber! Ya know: that squishy, very easily abraded material often placed between the tread of a shoe and the upper to provide light-weight cushioning?  That, rather than a durable rubber like the vibram in a lot minimalist shoes make up most of the striking area.  They put two carbon rubber (called xt-900[...] ) patches on the front toe and part of the ball of the foot, as well as carbon rubber covering the heel.  NOW SAUCONY, you put the durable materials on your barefoot shoe on the HEEL?? Are you confused?? Are you not familiar with barefoot running style?  If the tread on this shoe last for more than two weeks of wear, I will be absolutely shocked.
And if this turns out to be a good shoe, I will come back and praise Saucony as ergonomics geniuses.