New Balance 991 v1 review

We recommend the New Balance 991 v1 as an excellent option for:

• Sneakerheads looking for a super comfy kick with a "dad-shoe" vibe to add to their collection. 
• Those in warmer climates who need a breathable sneaker to keep their feet fresh
• Active users who prioritize good traction to confidently tackle certain fitness activities
• Retro geeks looking for a classic kick that's been revamped while maintaining its iconic silhouette 

At over 15 oz, the 991 v1 is undeniably hefty. We recommend looking into the New Balance 530 or the New Balance 327 as lighter alternatives that hover around the 10 - 11 oz mark. 

The 991 v1 boasts an incredibly plush interior, though the same can't be said of its ABZORB midsole foam which feels quite firm underfoot. For those who prefer a comfy shoe with a softer ride, we recommend the cushy New Balance 9060 instead. 

With a price tag of $220, the 991 v1 is a wallet-buster of a sneaker. For more budget-friendly alternatives, we recommend checking out the New Balance 574 or the New Balance 550.

As demonstrated by our smoke test, the 991 v1 is an extremely well-ventilated shoe that earns a perfect 5 out of 5 for breathability. This not only means that our feet feel nice and breezy on warm muggy days, but that the shoe doesn't trap in sweat so it shouldn't develop that dreaded musty odor over time. 

For a shoe with so many leather overlays, the 991 v1's stellar performance in our previous test comes as a bit of a surprise. However, shining a light through a cross-section of the upper reveals the mesh at the toebox to be extremely dainty and almost translucent, giving us a good idea of where most of the heat escapes. 

This is further confirmed by our microscope image of the toebox mesh which reveals a multi-layered network of braids with lots of large perforations that promote excellent airflow; creating a virtual chimney in this part of the shoe. 

To test whether all the 991 v1's overlays are made of genuine leather, we torched the various elements and scratched at the burnt remains with our awl starting with the main portion of alleged pigskin leather. 

As we can see, the material gets singed and those burnt portions come flaking off the shoe as we agitate it with our tool. This tells us that the leather is, in fact, real pigskin. The same can't be said for the colored piece at the heel which caught fire and melted after making contact with the flame. Clearly synthetic. 

The white overlay on the side suffered a similar fate and essentially conflagurated out of existence.

Fine mesh toeboxes don't tend to fare too well against our callous Dremel and the 991 v1's is no exception. Spinning at 5K RPM, our tool's abrasive element made quick work of the unreinforced mesh and shredded clean through it by the end of the four-second test.

This earns the toebox a durability score of 1 out of 5, though the shoe does have a leather overlay that should protect it from most bumps and scrapes. We still don't recommend traipsing through bushy areas as one unlucky snag can easily put the 991 v1 out of commission. 

Next, we set our Dremel against the 991 v1's well-padded heel counter for another four seconds of grinding and were very impressed with the result. 

Our tool barely left a scuff on the lining material which remained almost perfectly intact after the test. This incredible performance leads us to give the 991 v1 a heel padding durability score of 5 out of 5 which means that the plush padding back there will be well-protected and uncompromised throughout this shoe's lifetime. 

Pressing our durometer against the outsole yields an average reading of 86 HC. We've found that this level of hardness usually indicates a good mix of grip and durability. 

We set the Dremel, now spinning at 10K RPM, against the outsole rubber for its final face-off with the 991 v1. 

After twenty-two seconds, we used a tire tread gauge to measure the indentation left behind and found that 0.9 mm of rubber had been worn away from the outsole. This performance puts the 991 v1 on par with the average sneaker which loses a similar amount of material. As such, we predict that this should last the expected 400 to 500 miles of use before major signs of wear appear on the outsole. 

We measured the outsole with our caliper and found it to be 5.8 mm thick which is also right around the current lab average. 

Tipping our scale at 15.3 oz (434g), the 991 v1 is quite heavy compared to the average sneaker. While they didn't feel overly burdensome as we tested them over the course of a normal day, the combined weight of almost 2 lbs underfoot makes this chunky kick a less-than-ideal choice for those who spend long hours on their feet. 

For those in the market for a more lightweight alternative that still boasts that "dad-shoe" look, we recommend checking out the New Balance 530 instead which weighs in at only 10.9 oz (308g). 

The 991 v1 is a well-cushioned shoe that boasts a heel stack of 34.6 mm according to our caliper measurements. This is a little thicker than our current lab average and gives us plenty of midsole foam underfoot to dampen the impact of our landings while walking in this shoe. 

The shoe's forefoot stack falls more in line with our current lab average at 20 mm thick. This is a good amount of protective foam to have at the forefoot while still allowing for some sense of the ground below.  

The difference in our stack measurements leaves us with a rather steep offset of 14.6 mm. This mix of an elevated heel with a grounded forefoot is quite common as it promotes smooth transitions from heel to toe, so should feel quite natural for most. 

For those who prefer a shoe with a less pronounced drop, we recommend the New Balance 237 instead. Alternatively, for those curious about a truly parallel-to-the-ground experience, we suggest looking into zero-drop specialists; Altra.

Pressing our durometer against the 991 v1's ABZORB midsole yields a rather firm reading of 27.4 HA. So while the shoe's interior feels incredibly plush and cloudlike, the same can't be said of the shoe's cushioning. 

However, it does do a good job of protecting our feet from impact and feels comfortable enough for normal day-to-day use. 

What's more, by not compressing very much under our weight, the 991 v1 doesn't have the wobbliness of shoes with a more plush midsole underfoot which adds to its stable ride. 

At 5.1 mm thick based on our caliper measurements, the insole is as thick as average and provides us with a nice and cushy footbed within the shoe as well as good arch support.  

With its firm midsole foam and low profile at the forefoot, the 991 v1 feels quite well planted and stable as we shift our weight from side to side in the shoe. This is also thanks to the well-structured upper that provides a secure foothold that kept us feeling nice and locked in within the shoe. 

We found it very difficult to bend and twist the 991 v1 in our hands, leading us to give it a maximum torsional rigidity score of 5 out of 5 on our subjective scale. This is, no doubt, a result of the dense midsole and the stiff upper and means that the shoe resists any natural contortions of our foot during our stride. In this way, the 991 v1 maintains a very level base that promotes surefooted and stable landings while we test the shoe. 

The 991 v1's heel counter is quite well-structured and rigid, earning a stiffness score of 4 out of 5 in our manual assessment. As such, we found that the shoe does a good job of keeping our rearfoot locked in place without putting too much pressure on our tendons while still allowing for some natural lateral movements. A good mix of comfort and stability. 

At 107.9 mm wide at the forefoot according to our caliper measurements, the 991 v1's midsole is slightly narrower than our current lab average. This is more than enough of a base underfoot that we didn't face any stability issues while testing this sneaker. 

Back at the heel, the 991 v1's midsole falls more in line with our current lab average at 83.1 mm wide. 

Thanks to the dense ABZORB midsole, the 991 v1 is quite a bit stiffer than the average sneaker, requiring 30.6N of force to it 90 degrees in our flex test. 

As such, the shoe resists the bending of our foot during our stride. While this translates to a less natural feeling underfoot, it does add to the shoe's stable ride. Furthermore, this stiffness is beneficial for those with foot conditions, like plantar fasciitis, as it prevents excessive foot flexion. 

The 991 v1's outsole tread pattern provides us with adequate traction as we test the shoe over various surfaces. Even smooth and slick surfaces didn't pose much of an issue though, with its porous mesh and leather upper, we don't recommend this shoe for rainy days. 

Using our caliper, we found the 991 v1's toebox to fall in line with our current lab average at 99.3 mm wide at its widest point. This should be roomy enough for most people to enjoy a comfy fit apart from those with very broad feet. 

Moving to the area around the big toe, the 991 v1's toebox is very slightly narrower than average at 74.2 mm wide. 

While this won't pose an issue for most people, those with wide feet of a certain shape might want to consider sizing up or going for a shoe that doesn't taper as drastically like the NB 57/40.

The 991 v1's tongue isn't gusseted. Despite this, however, the chunkiness of the tongue and its central lace loop help to mitigate any side-to-side slippage as we test the shoe. 

Using our caliper, we measured the 991 v1's tongue at a beefy 10.7 mm thick. This is more padded than our current lab average and means that we enjoyed a soft and pillowy lockdown across the instep while testing with absolutely no hint of lace bite. 

The luxurious padding isn't reserved for the shoe's tongue. The 991 v1 is generously padded throughout, with a nice and chunky heel to boot that further contributes to the shoe's gentle yet secure lockdown. 

The insole isn't glued in so removing and replacing it with an aftermarket alternative or a custom orthotic is possible if needed. 

With one little reflective element at the base of the laces, "better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it", seems to have been the ethos behind the decision to include this seemingly ineffective feature.