Reebok Club C 85 Vintage review

The Reebok Club C 85 Vintage is a low-top sneaker with a traditional lace-up closure and classic design based on the iconic Reebok Club C 85 that we recommend to:

• Fans of retro kicks that work well with a variety of casual shorts and pants.
• Those in the market for lightweight trainers with a tennis shoe silhouette 
• Anyone who wants a flaunt-worthy Reebok pair that costs less than most.

If you're someone who walks and stands pretty much all day, trade the Club C 85 Vintage for New Balance 480 which is perfect for prolonged use.

The C 85 Vintage develops unsightly creases in its upper over time. We recommend the Adidas Samba as a suede alternative that will remain crisp and crease-free longer. 

The C 85 Vintage is a low-profile shoe with a heel stack that's only 23.2 mm thick. This is much lower than our current lab average which gives us a lot of ground feel during our tests in the field while still providing some level of impact dampening. 

However, the C 85 Vintage isn't cushioned enough to support very long walks as the repeated impacts will eventually strain our heels. For a retro kick with more protective foam at the heel that keeps our feet fresh all day, check out the New Balance 550 instead. 

The stack is just a low at the forefoot, measuring only 14.7 m according to our caliper. This offers a very basic level of impact dampening but keeps us feeling very grounded and stable on our feet. 

The offset in the C 85 Vintage's stack measurements isn't quite as steep as the average at 8.5 mm. This offers a more natural and parallel-to-the-ground ride while still providing the smooth transitions of an elevated heel. 

When it comes to trainers, the drop height is more of a matter of preference than anything. There isn't any particular advantage to different heel drops unless it's with regard to running. 

We pressed our durometer against the C 85 Vintage's midsole foam and got a very firm reading of 37.3 HA.

This is much harder than our current lab average and further explains why this shoe isn't well-suited for long walks. The New Balance 9060 offers a much softer ride for those who move around a lot over the course of the day. 

The insole is 5.1 mm thick which is just shy of our current lab average. This provides adequate arch support and a nicely padded surface that complements the shoe's midsole cushioning. 

Using our calliper to measure the C 85 Vintage's toebox at its widest point reveals it to be on par with our current lab average at 97.5 mm thick. This should be roomy enough to comfortably accommodate most foot shapes except for those that are very broad. 

The New Balance 530 is a roomier option for those in need of more internal real estate. 

The C 85 Vintage tapers to 69.8 mm wide in the area around the big toe according to our caliper measurements. This is quite a bit narrower than average and doesn't give us much room to splay out in this shoe. 

With its aforementioned low stack, the C 85 Vintage is extremely grounded and stable. There wasn't even a hint of rolling as we shifted our weight from side to side in the shoe. As such, we didn't experience any issues with balance while testing this shoe. 

The C 85 Vintage put up a mild amount of resistance as we bent and twisted it our hands, leading us to give it a middle-of-the-road torsional rigidity score of 3 out of 5. This gives the shoe that supportive underfoot sensation as it mitigates any excessive lateral movements in our gait while still feeling pretty comfortable and natural. 

The heel counter is also moderately stiff, earning another 3 out of 5 in our subjective evaluations. This in conjunction with the shape of the heel cup allows the C 85 Vintage to securely hold our foot in place without putting too much pressure on our heels or tendons. 

Using our calliper, we measured the C 85 Vintage's midsole to be 105.2 mm wide at the forefoot which is a little narrower than our current lab average. 

With the shoe being so balanced, this doesn't affect its stability but rather contributes to the shoe's nimble and lightweight feel. 

This narrow motif continues at the heel which is only 77.3 mm wide according to our caliper measurements. 

Further adding to the shoe's natural and agile ride is just how flexible it is. With only 17.3N of force required to bend the shoe 90 degrees in our stiffness test, the C 85 Vintage is significantly more pliable than the average sneaker. 

This means that the C 85 Vintage is able to bend along with our foot with relative ease, making it feel extremely comfortable during testing. On the other hand, however, this bendiness is the culprit when it comes to all those creases that form on the leather upper, reminding us of the relentless marching of time. 

Which brings us to the weigh-in. Tipping our scale at only 12 oz (339g), the C 85 Vintage is significantly lighter than the average sneaker. 

To test the breathability of the C 85 Vintage, we pumped the shoe full of smoke for ten seconds. As we can clearly see, the perforated section below the laces only lets out little wisps while most of the smoke escapes in a thin stream but steady through the C 85 Vintage's tongue. This performance earns the shoe a 2 out of 5 for breathability which isn't out of the ordinary for a leather sneaker. 

The Puma RS-X, on the other hand, is a much airier alternative that is better suited to warm weather. 

As expected, the only part of the C 85 Vintage that allows any light to shine through when inspecting a backlit cross-section of the shoe is its porous tongue. 

Even under the microscope, we can see that the C 85 Vintage's upper is made of solid leather with some perforations that seem to be more form than function. 

We torched the C 85 Vintage like a creme brulee in order to test the quality of its leather upper. Rather than melting away from the flame, the upper merely gets scorched. So far so good. After scratching at the burnt bit with our awl to see how easily it gets damaged, we determined that the C 85 vintage's upper is made of genuine leather. 

Firing up the Dremel to 5K RPM, we went hell for leather on the C 85 Vintage's toebox to test its durability. 

After grinding away for a gruelling twelve seconds, the Dremel barely did any real damage to the C 85 Vintage. The toebox was merely left with an unsightly scuff that earns it a very respectable durability score of 4 out of 5. 

The heel padding didn't hold up nearly as well against our Dremel. The abrasive element made quick work of the cosy lining and quickly ripped into the soft padding within the four-second test. 

The result is a crater that's almost deep enough to accommodate the first segment of our index finger. This leads us to give the C 85 Vintage a sub-par heel padding durability score of 1 out of 5. As such, we expect to see some wear and tear at the heel collar after a few hundred miles of use, especially if used frequently without socks. 

Pressing our durometer against the C 85 Vintage's outsole yields a marginally harder-than-average reading of 86.2 HC. This usually denotes a good mix of grip and durability. 

For its final appearance, we cranked up the Dremel to 10K RPM and set it against the C 85 Vintage's outsole with 3.2N of force. The tool immediately kicks up a flurry of rubber dust that continues throughout the twenty-two-second test. 

Using a tyre tread gauge, we found that we had shorn off 0.8 mm of material from the C 85 Vintage's outsole. This is slightly less than the average sneaker loses in this test, making the C 85 Vintage marginally more durable. We therefore expect this kick to last at least 400 miles before any major signs of wear and tear on the outsole. 

The C 85 Vintage's outsole isn't quite as robust as the average sneaker's at only 4 mm thick according to our caliper measurements. However, this gives us no cause for concern regarding the shoe's longevity as our Dremel ground off less than a quarter of the total rubber when simulating extreme wear and tear. By skimping on rubber, Reebok manages to keep unnecessary weight off the shoe. 

The criss-cross apple sauce tread formation on the C 85 Vintage's outsole provided us with great traction over a variety of surfaces while testing. Only wet grass and slick cobblestones proved to be a little too slippery for this sneaker. 

The C 85 Vintage doesn't feature any reflective elements for added nighttime visibility. 

On that note, we measured the C 85 Vintage's chunky tongue to be a whopping 10.1 mm thick. This is much more padded than our current lab average and provides a luxurious level of comfort across the instep without any hint of lace bite not matter how tight we tie them. 

The tongue is non-gusseted, though we didn't experience any issue with it slipping during testing thanks to how robust and wide it is which helped keep it in place. 

The insole isn't glued in so it can easily be replaced with custom orthotics if extra arch support is required.