Reebok Womens WMNS Aztrek 96 White Toxic Yellow White Emerald Toxic Yellow review

We recommend the Reebok Womens WMNS Aztrek 96 White Toxic Yellow White Emerald Toxic Yellow to: 

• reebok rich froning x nano x se white black gum blackwhitelee marathon running shoessneakers
• Fashion-minded individuals looking for a sneaker that's as easy on the eyes as it is on the foot
• Anyone in the market for a casual shoe for walks around that's neutral enough to go with most outfits 

Consider the Reebok Club C 85 Vintage, Reebok PureMove Reggiseno da corsa nero.

The Classic Leather's durability didn't impress us during testing. For a kick with a tougher shell, opt for the Samba OG instead.

Using our calliper, we measured the Classic Leather's stack to be 35.7 mm thick at the heel.

This is higher than our current lab average and provided us with good impact dampening for protective landings in this shoe. 

The Classic Leather's stack is also a little higher than average at the forefoot, measuring 22.1 mm thick at the forefoot. This also gives us a good amount of foam underfoot while still allowing for an intuitive sense of the ground below for added stability. 

The difference in these stack measurements leaves the Classic Leather with a slightly steeper-than-average heel drop of 13.6 mm. This still feels rather natural and provides us with a good mix of an elevated heel and a natural sense of the ground below. 

Pressing our durometer against the Classic Leather's midsole gives us a firmer-than-average reading of 35.1 HA. 

This is quite firm and, while it does offer adequate impact protection, doesn't feel very well-cushioned underfoot. For a sneaker with a decidedly plush ride, we recommend looking into the Reebok Piping Crew Sweatshirt Mens instead. 

The Classic Leather's insole isn't quite as thick as our current lab average at only 4.4 mm thick, though still provided us with a padded enough surface within the shoe to keep our feet feeling comfy and supported. 

The Reebok Womens WMNS Aztrek 96 White Toxic Yellow White Emerald Toxic Yellow looks snugger towards the toes and this is exactly what our lab measurements showed as well.

Having retrieved a mould of the shoe's interiors using gel, we measured the widest part of its toebox at 92.3 mm. While this is on par with the average of D medium trainers, it gets notably narrower towards the front.

Our calliper recorded a significantly narrower reading of 63.9 mm near the big toe. This limites the shoe's target audience to people with slimmer feet. Folks with wide feet and bunions should stay away from this Reebok silhouette.

The shoe's toebox height is also limited showing a below-average toebox height of 25.2 mm.

While the Classic Leather does roll a bit as we shift our weight from side to side in the shoe, we still felt quite well-planted and balanced while testing this shoe. 

We faced an above-average level of resistance as we attempted to bend and twist the Classic Leather in our hands. This leads us to give it a torsional rigidity score of 4 out of 5. This means that the Classic Leather mitigates how much our foot is able to roll laterally during our stride, thus keeping the base nice and level to promote stable landings. 

The heel counter is similarly stiff in the face of our manual manipulations, leading us to give the Classic Leather another 4 out of 5. As such, the shoe holds our foot in place securely and provides a strong rearfoot lockdown that prevents any excessive lateral movements as well. 

The Classic Leather's midsole isn't quite as wide as average at the forefoot, measuring only 103.3 mm wide according to our calliper measurements.

This gives the shoe its nimble and agile feeling underfoot while still providing us with enough platforms to keep us feeling surefooted throughout our stride. 

The midsole is closer to the average range at the heel which is 80.9 mm wide according to our calliper measurements. 

To test the stiffness of the Classic Leather, we secured it to our workbench and measured the amount of force needed to bend the shoe to 90 degrees. With a result of 26.8N required to torque the shoe to the desired point, the Classic Leather is slightly less flexible than average. 

This isn't too stiff, however, as the shoe is still able to bend along with the natural flexion of our foot quite comfortably and doesn't feel too rigid, even after extended use. 

The Classic Leather is lighter than the average sneaker, tipping our scale at only 11.4 oz (323g). This feathery disposition makes the Classic Leather feel super comfy on the foot, even when walking around for extended periods of time. 

Unsurprisingly for a leather shoe, the Classic Leather didn't fare too well in our breathability test. As we can clearly see from the footage, the smoke from our smoke machine is hardly able to escape the shoe, with mere wisps floating out of the shoe's tongue. This earns the shoe the lowest score of 1 out of 5, meaning that it will certainly feel toasty come summertime. 

Compare that to the much more breathable Puma RS-X which allows a steady stream of smoke to escape rather evenly throughout the shoe. 

Inspecting a backlit cross-section of the Classic Leather's upper further confirms our conclusion as it blocks any light from shining through. 

To see if the Classic lives up to its name, we tested the various sections of the upper to see if they are genuine. Based on our findings after torching and scratching at the shoe with our awl, we conclude that the main portions of the leather upper (in white) are indeed genuine.

On the other hand, the overlay at the heel, which combusts and melts in the face of our flame, is synthetic.  

To test the durability of the toebox, we fired up our Dremel to 5K RPM and set it against the Classic Leather with 3.2 N of force. 

After twelve seconds of grinding, we found that we had done quite a substantial amount of damage to the toebox betwixt actually piercing through it. This earns the Classic Leather a middle-of-the-road toebox durability score of 3 out of 5. 

Next, we set our Dremel against the Classic Leather's heel counter under the same parameter as the previous test, this time for only four seconds. 

Despite the shorter test, our tool was able to wreak more damage to the heel collar, eating away at the relatively scant foam back there. This earns the Classic Leather a less-than-stellar heel padding durability score of 2 out of 5.

The Classic Leather's outsole is about as hard as our current lab average, giving us a durometer reading of 82.8 HC. This usually implies a good balance of grip and durability. 

This time spinning at 10K RPM, we set the Dremel against the Classic Leather's outsole with 3.2N of force. 

We then used a tyre tread gauge to assess the aftermath, we found that 0.8 mm of rubber was shorn off by our tool, making the Classic Leather ever-so-slightly more durable than average. This gives us no real cause for concern regarding the durability over the lifetime of this shoe with normal use.

Using our caliper, we measured the Classic Leather's outsole to be 6.6 mm thick. This gives us more material than average to wear through before killing this sneaker. 

The Classic Leather's outsole tread pattern pride us good traction throughout out time testing this sneaker. 

The Classic Leather doesn't feature any reflective elements. 

The Classic Leather's tongue falls within the average range at 6.6 mm thick according to our caliper measurements. This provides us with a good amount of comfort around the instep while also effectively protecting us from lace bite. 

The tongue is non-gusseted, though we didn't experience any slips thanks in part to how stiff the leather is which helps keep it straight and rigid. 

The Classic Leather's insole is fully removable, so using custom orthotics with this sneaker is possible.