Vans Slip-On review

We think that the Vans Slip-On will make an excellent addition to anyone’s shoe rotation, especially: 

• Those in the market for a minimalist, all-rounder of a shoe that’s suitable for street strolls or skateboarding sessions
• Sneaker fans looking for a timeless design that can be paired with almost any attire
• Anyone looking for a shoe that’s easy to slip into that’s comfy enough for a quick trip to the shops, walking the dog, or even all-day use
• Rebels with punk rock pumping through their veins looking for a shoe that fits the skater aesthetic

With its narrow toebox, the Slip-On isn’t the best choice for those with broad feet. Instead, check out the New Balance 574 as a roomier alternative. 

The Slip-On’s breathability leaves much to be desired, so going sockless in such a poorly ventilated shoe is a surefire recipe for sweaty/stinky feet. The New Balance 327 is a much more well-ventilated option that will keep the feet fresh even on hot summer days.

We measured the Slip-On’s stack at only 18.7 mm, making it significantly shorter than our current lab average.

Having such a low profile gives us a very natural and intuitive sense of the ground below and makes walking around in this shoe feel like going barefoot while still having enough material underfoot for adequate impact dampening. 

Moving up to the forefoot, the Slip-On’s stack is only 12 mm thick, much shorter than our current lab average.

This further contributes to the shoe’s minimalist motif by keeping us low to the ground. 

The difference in our stack measurements leaves the Slip-On with a lower-than-average drop height of 6.7 mm.

This mild offset is quite versatile as it bridges the gap between those who prefer having an elevated heel and those who prefer a more parallel-to-the-ground experience. 

The Slip-On’s insole is thicker than average at 8.6 mm according to our caliper measurements. This gives us an incredibly soft platform within the shoe that serves to soften our landings in lieu of a foam midsole. 

Vans trainers are notorious for having a snug and even narrow fit. However, we didn't experience any of that in the Vans Slip-On! As evidence, we used a custom gel to pour a mould of the kick's internal toebox space.

Once the gel solidified, we measured its dimensions with a digital calliper. Turns out, that the widest part of the mould (between the big toe and the pinkie) is a few solid milimeters wider than average at 96.5 mm! That's a pretty generous toe room for a medium-width foot.

However, we can see how the shoe's limited instep volume can make people with wider feet struggle with putting it on.

There is no aggressive tapering in the Vans Slip-On either! As you can see, the sneaker has a rounded shape so the snugness can't be blamed on the pointy toe.

Our calliper showed a standard width of 69.9 mm in the big toe area of the mould.

So what is the problem? Looks like it's the shoe's low instep volume which also reflects in its lower-than-average toebox height of 26.0 mm.

Add the unforgiving canvas upper to the equation and you get the snug-fitting Vans Slip-On.

With such a low-profile shoe, it’s no wonder that the Slip-On feels so incredibly well-planted as we shift our weight from side to side. 

The Slip-On put up almost no resistance as we bent and twisted it in our hands, earning the shoe a torsional rigidity score of 1 out of 5. As such, the shoe feels extremely comfy as it puts up no resistance to the natural movements of our foot during our stride. 

The Slip-On's heel counter is also extremely pliable, earning another 1 out of 5 in our manual assessment. This gives us an extremely unrestricted feeling at the heel as the shoe loosely holds our foot in place, making it feel quite easy on our tendons. On the other hand, this means that a swift kick can easily launch the shoe off and send it sailing through the air as it doesn't provide the most secure lockdown. 

According to our caliper measurements, the Slip-On’s midsole is 103.1 mm wide at the forefoot. This isn't quite as wide as our current lab average but didn’t negatively affect how stable we felt in the shoe. 

Back at the heel, we found the Slip-On's midsole to be significantly narrower than average at only 71.8 mm thick. This, again, didn't present us with any problems while going about our day-to-day activities, and will only be an issue for those used to shoes with a more robust platform like the New Balance 574. 

The Slip-On is more flexible than the average sneaker, requiring only 10.7N of force to bend it to 90 degrees when secured to our workbench.

This level of flexibility contributes greatly to the comfy and forgiving nature of this shoe which pleasingly adapts to the natural movement of our foot during our stride. 

Tipping the scale at 14.1 oz (400g), the Slip-On weighs about as much as the average sneaker. 

Not even a wisp of smoke was able to escape the shoe’s well-fortified canvas upper throughout our twenty-second smoke test, earning it a sub-standard breathability score of 1 out of 5. This lack of ventilation does mean that going sockless is likely to result in stinky feet/shoes. 

For comparison, check out how much smoke the much more breathable Puma RS-X lets out in this same test. 

As we can see from looking at a cross-section of the Slip-On over a backlight, very little light is able to penetrate the dense canvas upper. 

Inspecting the shoe’s upper under our microscope, it’s clear to see that the canvas is woven with the tight precision of a machine-made carpet. With almost no space between the interlocked strands, the mystery of the upper’s lacklustre airflow can be put to rest.

On the other hand (or foot) it would be safe to assume that this insular nature makes the shoe a good option for winter wear, given they’re used in tandem with a warm pair of cosy socks.

We torched the lining of the heel collar to see if it's made of genuine leather. Things look good at first as it doesn't melt under the flame, though the way it chips away as we scratch it with our awl makes it clear that it's actually synthetic. 

First up to face the Dremel in our battery of durability tests is the toebox. With the abrasive element rotating at 5K RPM, we applied the tool to the shoe with 3.2N of force which immediately sent shreds of canvas flying around. 

However, upon assessing the aftermath of the four-second test, we found that we hadn’t inflicted as much damage as we had anticipated. The tool didn’t even pierce through the toebox at all, leaving it a little worse for wear but overall fairly intact. This leads us to give the Slip-On a respectable toebox durability score of 3 out of 5. That teaches us to question the hardiness of a skateboarding shoe.

Next, we turned our attention to the heel counter and put our Dremel to work again. 

Four seconds of abrasive force was all the tool needed to mince through the leatherette lining and begin eating at the soft padding within. However, with much of the scant padding remaining relatively unscathed, we give the Slip-On a heel padding durability score of 3 out of 5.

Pressing our durometer against the Slip-On’s outsole gives us a reading of 83.3 HC. This is right on par with our current lab average which usually denotes a healthy mix of grip and durability, 

Last to face the chopping block and contend with our Dremel is the Slip-On’s outsole. This time spinning at 10K RPM, the tool’s grinding element eased its way through the outsole rubber like a hot knife through butter. 

Once the twenty-second test was up, we used a tyre tread gauge to assess the damage and found that we had lopped off 1.65 mm of material. This is more than the average sneaker loses in this same test, making the Slip-On’s outsole less durable than expected. As such, we expect this shoe to start showing signs of wear and tear within 400 miles of normal use. This will be exacerbated by abrasive activities like skateboarding which will likely negatively impact the shoe’s longevity.

Using our claiper, we measured the Slip-On’s outsole to be 5.5 mm thick which is right on par with our current lab average. 

The Slip-On’s geometric tread pattern on the outsole provided us with great traction over a variety of surfaces. Only wet surfaces gave us some cause for concern while testing the shoe. 

The Slip-On doesn't feature any reflective elements. 

Since the Slip-On doesn’t feature a tongue per se, we measured the part of the upper above the instep and found it to be 1 mm thick according to our caliper. This is much less material around the instep than found in most shoes which certainly has a negative effect on the shoe’s foothold. 

The Slip-On has a sock-like fit facilitated by the two elastic strips on either end of the instep. These stretch out easily which allows us to slide the shoe on with ease and tense back up to provide a somewhat secure lockdown.

While this holds the foot in place enough for day-to-day goings on, it doesn’t do well with more intense activities like running where the shoe feels like it’s going to go flying off with every stride. 

The glued insole means that the Slip-On isn't receptive to custom orthotics.