Our verdict

If you did Crossfit in 2012, this re-release of the Reebok Nano 2.0 might prompt a nostalgic tear in your eyes. We discovered that this remake is nearly identical to the OG, bringing back the shoe's admirable versatility for the gym. Lightweight and minimal, the shoe kept us agile all the way. There is a good reason why the brand chooses to reintroduce THIS shoe 10 years after its initial release.

Pros

  • Pleasantly lightweight
  • Low-profile and minimal
  • Grounded platform
  • Highly breathable
  • Very flexible
  • Solid grip
  • Spacious toebox

Cons

  • Lacks cushioning for jumps and runs
  • Upper is not durable
  • Tongue slips

Audience verdict

89
Great!

Who should buy

If you aren't a fan of the OG Nano 2.0 already, we believe that this throwback Reebok trainer will make you fall in love with it if:

  • you need a pair of highly versatile cross-trainers
  • you prefer very low-profile shoes (both stack and drop)
  • you want Crossfit shoes that are lighter than average

Reebok Nano 2.0 review

Who should NOT buy

This shoe is great for a little bit of everything but it is not geared toward any specific training regimen. So, if you do lots of heavy lifting, we recommend getting the dedicated Reebok Legacy Lifter instead. Or a Nike Metcon 8, if you prefer a low-drop trainer.

The Nano 2.0 also falls short of cushioning for high-impact workouts with lots of jumping and running. The Reebok Nano X3 is more suitable for that.

Reebok Nano 2.0 lab test

Breathability

The Reebok Nano 2.0 is exceptionally airy.

We used a machine that pumps smoke to test the shoe's ventilation capacity. As you can see from the video below, the smoke flies right through the material in a matter of seconds. On a 1-5 scale, where 5 is the most breathable, we rated the shoe's breathability as 5.

The shoe's got that old-fashioned type of mesh with huge ventilation pores. From the light test below, it is clear to see how it gets to be so breathable.

We also used a microscope to have a look at these gigantic pores up close. Even though you don't even need a microscope to see them.

Reebok Nano 2.0 microscope

Test results
Nano 2.0 5
Average 3.3
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
1
Breathability
5

Durability

Toebox durability

To our great disappointment, that same airy mesh fails miserably in the durability department. A touch of Dremel destroyed the fabric in just a couple of seconds, bringing the toebox durability rating to the lowest possible (1 out of 5).

At least there is a Duragrip layer around the toes that offers some protection.

In the comparison photo below, we can see how far the Nano has gone in its durability over the years.

Reebok Nano 2.0 vs Reebok Nano X2 toebox durability comparison

We applied the Dremel with the exact same force (3.2N) and speed (10K RPM) for 12 seconds to both shoes.

Test results
Nano 2.0 1
Average 2.2
Compared to 17 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
1
Toebox durability
5

Heel padding durability

The back portion of the collar also failed to demonstrate its wear resistance.

After a mere 4 seconds, the heel padding got torn completely. Yet again, the shoe gets the lowest durability score of 1.

Test results
Nano 2.0 1
Average 2.3
Compared to 15 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel padding durability
5

Outsole hardness

The outsole appears to be more promising than the upper but it does not surpass the average of our lab-tested trainers.

Its rubber is of average hardness, showing 82.4 HA on our durometer.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Outsole hardness
Test results
Nano 2.0 82.4 HC
Average 84.6 HC
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
71.3 HC
Outsole hardness
94.5 HC

Outsole durability

It only takes 22 seconds of our Dremel test to reveal how durable the shoe's outsole is.

To assess the damage caused by the tool, we use a tread gauge. It measures the depth of the dent created. In the Reebok Nano 2.0, it is 1.3 mm deep. This is a tiny bit deeper than the average.

Reebok Nano 2.0 outsole durability test

Test results
Nano 2.0 1.3 mm
Average 1.0 mm
Compared to 13 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Outsole wear
2.0 mm

Outsole thickness

The good news is that the rubber is pretty thick on the Nano 2.0. Our caliper shows 5.1 mm, which is about a millimeter thicker than average.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Outsole thickness

Having extra rubber helps to compensate for the lack of hardness as it will take longer to wear it out.

Test results
Nano 2.0 5.1 mm
Average 3.8 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
2.1 mm
Outsole thickness
5.1 mm

Weight

Working out in the Nano 2.0 is such a delight! Being used to the fact that high-end cross-trainers nowadays weigh around 12-12.5 oz, the 10.1-ounce Nano 2.0 feels like a break for the feet.

Weighing the shoe is a men's US size 9, we found that it is a whole ounce lighter than cross-training shoes on average.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Weight
Test results
Nano 2.0 10.09 oz (286g)
Average 10.79 oz (306g)
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
6.38 oz (181g)
Weight
13.83 oz (392g)

Cushioning

Heel stack

The Reebok Nano 2.0 is one of the most grounded trainers in our catalog. It is only a little taller than minimalist shoes.

Using a caliper, we measured the shoe's heel stack at 18.1 mm, which is a whole 6.5 mm thinner than the average!

Reebok Nano 2.0 Heel stack

If you are willing to skip cushioning in favor of that direct contact with the ground, the Nano 2.0 is an excellent option.

Reebok Nano 2.0 logo

Test results
Nano 2.0 18.1 mm
Average 24.0 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
12.5 mm
Heel stack
36.2 mm

Forefoot stack

It is no surprise that the shoe gets even lower in the forefoot. With a caliper measurement of 15.3 mm, it is 3 mm lower than the average.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Forefoot stack

This is perfect for fast-paced movements and whenever you need to be precise with your footwork.

Test results
Nano 2.0 15.3 mm
Average 18.1 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
10.6 mm
Forefoot stack
27.7 mm

Drop

As a result of its low stack height, the heel-to-toe drop of the shoe is also pretty low.

Contrary to the officially claimed 4 mm, we actually found it to be 2.8 mm! This is weird because we normally find the drop to be higher than stated.

But this is still good news for those who seek a more natural foot placement inside a shoe. It is a very different experience from the well-cushioned Nano X3, with a drop of 7.6 mm and a stack height of 27 mm/19.4 mm.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Drop
Test results
Nano 2.0 2.8 mm
Average 5.9 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Drop
13.4 mm

Midsole softness

Note: a low durometer measurement equals a soft material, whereas a high measurement means it's firm.

In addition to being a very low-profile shoe, the Nano 2.0 also has a pretty firm platform.

Our durometer returned 31 HA which is 15% firmer than training shoes on average.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Midsole softness

This definitely helped us feel more planted in the trainer. No squish whatsoever!

Test results
Nano 2.0 31.0 HA
Average 27.9 HA
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
17.4 HA
Midsole softness (soft to firm)
47.0 HA

Insole thickness

The Nano 2.0 uses a pretty standard insole. We measured its thickness at 3.1 mm, which is a little thinner than the average.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Insole thickness
Test results
Nano 2.0 3.1 mm
Average 3.7 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Insole thickness
5.7 mm

Stability

Lateral stability test

From what we've seen in the cushioning section, it is pretty evident how the Reebok Nano 2.0 gets to be so stable. A firm platform that puts your feet very close to the ground simply couldn't be any other way.

Torsional rigidity

Even the fact that the Nano 2.0 is incredibly flexible doesn't detract from its stability. We rated its torsional rigidity as the most flexible (1 out of 5) but we can still recommend it to people with pronation issues because of its firm and minimal sole.

Test results
Nano 2.0 1
Average 2.7
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
1
Torsional rigidity
5

Heel counter stiffness

The heel counter is not very stiff either. On a 1 to 5 scale, where 5 is the stiffest, we rated it as 2.

The collar wraps around the ankle softly, allowing it to control the movement and not the other way around.

Test results
Nano 2.0 2
Average 2.8
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel counter stiffness
5

Midsole width in the forefoot

The Reebok Nano 2.0 has a nice and wide forefoot. Measuring the widest part of the sole, our caliper returned 110 mm. This is pretty standard for a cross-training shoe.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Midsole width in the forefoot
Test results
Nano 2.0 110.0 mm
Average 109.5 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
101.0 mm
Midsole width in the forefoot
117.3 mm

Midsole width in the heel

It was surprising to find that the shoe's heel is only 79.8 mm in its widest part. It is significantly narrower than the average 87 mm!

It does help to keep the shoe light and maneuverable though.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Midsole width in the heel
Test results
Nano 2.0 79.8 mm
Average 86.9 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
76.5 mm
Midsole width in the heel
97.4 mm

Flexibility

Stiffness

The Reebok Nano 2.0 is a very pliable trainer.

Reebok Nano 2.0 plank

We saw that in a manual test earlier and confirmed it in a lab test with a force gauge.

It only takes 11.3N of force to bend the shoe to a 90-degree angle as opposed to the average 22.5N (as of the moment of writing).

Test results
Nano 2.0 16.5N
Average 19.4N
We use an average of four tests. The video shows one of those tests.
Compared to 27 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
6.8N
Stiffness
37.9N

Grip / Traction

Some may find the shoe's traction pattern a little funny and dated, but it does its job wonderfully. We experienced a very reliable grip on the floor, on the machines, and even on the rope.

Reebok Nano 2.0 grip

Size and fit

Toebox width at the widest part

Wide footers are sure to love all the toebox space provided by the Reebok Nano 2.0.

In the widest part, the forefoot has a fairly average width of 100.8 mm, but when it comes to the toes...

Reebok Nano 2.0 Toebox width at the widest part
Test results
Nano 2.0 100.8 mm
Average 99.9 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
90.4 mm
Toebox width at the widest part
108.0 mm

Toebox width at the big toe

...it looks like a shoe from Altra!

Reebok Nano 2.0 laces

Measuring the width at the big-toe mark, we get a whopping 87.5 mm! This is mind-blowingly wide, even for a cross-training shoe.

But for our average-width feet, this was not a problem and we enjoyed the extra space. Narrow-footed folks, on the other hand, should probably get half-a-size smaller or consider a more traditionally-fitting shoe.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Toebox width at the big toe
Test results
Nano 2.0 87.5 mm
Average 77.5 mm
Compared to 21 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
65.0 mm
Toebox width at the big toe
87.5 mm

Tongue: gusset type

Apparently, a gusseted tongue wasn't a thing back in 2012 as the Nano 2.0 features a standard, non-attached one.

We must admit that there is a little bit of tongue sliding in this shoe.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Tongue: gusset type
Test results
Nano 2.0 None

Comfort

Tongue padding

The Reebok Nano 2.0 has a well-padded interior that doesn't go over the board.

Based on our caliper measurement, the tongue is 5.4 mm thick.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Tongue padding
Test results
Nano 2.0 5.4 mm
Average 5.5 mm
Compared to 28 crossfit training shoes
Number of shoes
1.0 mm
Tongue padding
10.4 mm

Heel tab

There is no heel tab in the Nano 2.0.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Heel tab
Test results
Nano 2.0 None

Removable insole

Even though it might seem at first that the insole is attached in the Nano 2.0, it is actually removable.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Removable insole
Test results
Nano 2.0 Yes

Misc

Reflective elements

A cute little bonus - the dots on the heel cup light up in the dark.

Reebok Nano 2.0 Reflective elements
Test results
Nano 2.0 Yes