Ok, first I may burst a few bubbles here but this is a $60 shoe so please don't expect the quality of leather or the arch support you would get in shoe costing over $100. All running shoes have cut cost one way or another and you are forced to upgrade to get the style, comfort and quality you desire. Yes maybe they have changed them so they can keep them in the price rang for their target market.  I mean a good arch support if you buy something like Green Feet costs you about $40 on its own. Cheap shoes are difficult to find with expensive shoe features like for example ECCO shoes. I have both the Reebok shoes and ECCO. ECCO is a casual street/golf shoe and is far superior in terms of leather quality and comfort but at a price. They may last twice as long and be ultimately a better buy but they do not have the look I need for work. The look of the Reebok shoes allow me to wear them to work with dress slacks, kakis or jeans. That is why I bought then. Now as for the sizing I read that people are saying they are too small, too narrow and some just cant figure out what it is. For me the shoe fits true to size however there is a catch to that statement. The shoe has a thicker flat insole that leaves less height room in the toe box. I believe this is why people are complaining about sizing. If you take out the original insole you should see that the shoe is pretty true to size. I added back in a cheap Dr Scholl insole that I had laying around the house. It has a gel heel, some arch support and a very thin tongue in the front. The thin tongue is the key!!! I get a pretty comfortable classic looking shoe with additional height space and width in the toe box and this works very well for me personally. The extra room in the toe box will make the shoe feel wider and more true to length. The gel heel and arch support of the cheap Dr. Scholl insole makes the shoe better than the original. Hope this helps.