Can Cameron Brink's New Balance shoes handle home workouts?
Cameron Brink's two New Balance models — the 740 and the P400 Low — get a hands-on home-workout test: stability for dumbbell work, cushioning and traction for HIIT and jump rope, plus measured noise and floor-scuff results from a real apartment. Neither is a true trainer, but one of them can still earn a spot by your floor.
- Test space profile
- Small apartment living room; sealed wood and vinyl surfaces; workouts on a mat.
- Floor damage risk
- low
- No-drill compatible
- ✓
- Test date
- Methodology reference
- Small-Space Testing methodology
The real question with New Balance Cameron Brink sneakers for home workouts is not whether they look like they belong in a gym bag. They do. The question is whether they behave when the “gym” is a living room: dumbbells beside a sofa, jump rope on a mat, vinyl or wood underfoot, and somebody downstairs hearing every landing.
FitAtHome tested the two purchasable Brink-linked New Balance models—the 740 lifestyle runner and the P400 Low basketball shoe—under its apartment workout protocol on Aug. 3, 2026. The short version: neither is a true training shoe. The 740 is fine for light cardio and bodyweight work, then gets too flexible and underbuilt for dumbbell sets. The P400 Low is the better shoe for HIIT, jump rope, and lateral drills, but its tall, cushioned platform is not what I want under load.

How the apartment test was run
The test was built around what renters actually do, not what a product page implies. Both shoes were used for low-impact cardio, bodyweight circuits, dumbbell strength sets, HIIT transitions, jump-rope intervals, and lateral drills. The floor checks used sealed wood and vinyl surfaces, with a paper-towel wipe and flashlight inspection after the messier movements.
| Test area | What was checked |
|---|---|
| Light cardio and bodyweight | Foot feel during marches, step-backs, squats, lunges, planks, and quick transitions |
| Dumbbell strength | Heel stability, midfoot twisting, split-squat control, and whether the shoe encouraged wobble under load |
| HIIT | Landing feel, grip during direction changes, and how much the platform bounced or rolled |
| Jump rope | Impact feel, outsole sound, forefoot rhythm, and floor contact behavior |
| Lateral drills | Grip, edge confidence, and whether the upper/outsole combination controlled side-to-side movement |
| Apartment impact | Relative decibel-meter spikes, visible scuffs, rubber transfer, and wipe-clean results on wood and vinyl |
The decibel meter was used in the same position across movements to compare relative noise. Because the test notes available for this article do not include final publishable dB figures, noise is reported below as a relative apartment result: which shoe was quieter, which movement spiked harder, and which pairing I would or would not keep by the mat.
For FitAtHome’s broader floor and sound process, this article follows the site’s Small-Space Testing methodology: repeat the movement, check the floor immediately, wipe it, then inspect again instead of assuming “non-marking” because a shoe looks clean.
The 740: comfortable for easy movement, wrong for loaded work

The 740 was the easier shoe to like during the first few minutes. For marching, step-backs, low-impact cardio, bodyweight squats, and casual warmup work, it felt light, flexible, and un-fussy. That matters in a small room. A shoe that bends easily can make floor work and quick bodyweight transitions feel less clunky.
That same flexibility became the problem once the workout asked for a planted foot. In split squats and dumbbell work, the shoe did not give the “locked to the floor” feeling I want before adding load. The heel felt too forgiving, the midfoot too willing to twist, and the whole shoe behaved more like a casual retro runner than a training base.
RunRepeat’s lab data explains that result cleanly. Its April 2025 cut-in-half review of the general-release New Balance U740V2—not a Cameron Brink colorway-specific test—measured the shoe at 11.3 oz / 319 g, a 10.2 mm drop, a 31.7 mm heel stack, a firm 53.5 AC durometer ABZORB midsole, an extremely low 8.7 N bend force, 3/5 torsional rigidity, and a 2/5 heel counter stiffness score.[1]
The number that matters most for home training is the bend force. A very flexible shoe can feel friendly during bodyweight movement, but it gives away structure during dumbbell work. The 740’s low torsional rigidity and soft heel counter also line up with the wobble you feel when one foot is forward, one foot is back, and the set depends on the shoe staying quiet under your heel.
| Movement | 740 apartment result |
|---|---|
| Light cardio | Good. Easy to move in, quiet enough for low-impact work, and not overbuilt. |
| Bodyweight circuits | Good for squats, step-backs, planks, and simple transitions. Less convincing once movement gets faster. |
| Dumbbell strength | Not recommended. Too much flex and not enough rearfoot structure for stable split squats, lunges, or loaded hinge work. |
| HIIT | Usable only if the session stays low-impact. It does not feel secure enough for aggressive direction changes. |
| Jump rope | Acceptable for very short, casual rope work, but not the shoe I would choose for repeated impact or rhythm sessions. |
| Lateral drills | Weakest category. The shoe bends and twists before it gives the reassuring edge control you want. |
| Floor/scuff check | No persistent visible floor damage in this test after the paper-towel wipe and flashlight inspection, but the shoe’s shifting under lateral work made it less trustworthy than it looked. |
If your home workouts are mostly low-impact YouTube warmups, mobility flows, bodyweight circuits, and light sweat sessions before a shower, the 740 can do that. If “home workout” means goblet squats, Romanian deadlifts, loaded reverse lunges, or anything where your foot should feel bolted down, this is the wrong tool.
The P400 Low: better grip and impact protection, too much shoe for stable lifting

The P400 Low changed the test immediately. It felt more serious under fast movement: more grip, more cushion, more platform, more impact help. For HIIT and jump rope, that is mostly a good thing. The shoe gave cleaner landings than the 740 and felt more composed when moving side to side.
The construction evidence supports the apartment result, with an important caveat. WearTesters reviewed the P400 platform with full-length Fresh Foam X inside a firmer carrier, an internal midfoot shank plate, an internal heel counter, and a one-piece herringbone rubber outsole that performed very well on indoor traction.[2] New Balance’s senior product manager confirmed in ClutchPoints that the P400 Low shares the same midsole and outsole tooling as the P400.[3]
That makes the P400 Low a much easier shoe to trust for impact work than the 740. The herringbone outsole helped during lateral shuffles and quick stops. The cushioning softened jump-rope contacts and HIIT landings. The shank and heel counter gave the shoe more structure than a lifestyle runner can offer.
Then the dumbbells came out, and the same platform became less appealing. The P400 Low sits higher and feels bouncier than a dedicated strength shoe. For loaded split squats and planted dumbbell work, that extra cushioning put more material between foot and floor than I want. It did not feel sloppy in the way the 740 could; it felt elevated.
| Movement | P400 Low apartment result |
|---|---|
| Light cardio | Good, though bulkier than necessary if the session is easy. |
| Bodyweight circuits | Good for athletic circuits, especially if they include hops, skaters, or faster transitions. |
| Dumbbell strength | Not ideal. More structured than the 740, but too tall and cushioned for a stable strength base. |
| HIIT | Best category. Cushioning and traction helped with landings and direction changes. |
| Jump rope | Good from an impact and grip standpoint, but louder than low-impact work and not something I would do late at night above a neighbor. |
| Lateral drills | Good. The herringbone traction and added structure made it the better Brink model for side-to-side work. |
| Floor/scuff check | No persistent visible floor damage in this test after wiping and flashlight inspection. The grippier outsole felt safer on vinyl than the 740 during lateral work. |
As of Aug. 3, 2026, the independent evidence is still stronger for the shared P400 tooling than for P400 Low-specific fit and comfort. That matters because a low-cut basketball version can feel different around the collar, heel, and forefoot even when the midsole and outsole are familiar. I would treat the P400 Low as a strong impact-work candidate, not as a fully proven do-everything trainer.
The renter tie-breaker: noise and floor trust
A shoe can be technically usable and still be annoying in an apartment. The 740 was the quieter option for low-impact work because it is lighter and less forceful on contact. The P400 Low produced more noticeable impact during jump rope and HIIT, which is expected from a more cushioned basketball shoe being used for repeated landings.
That does not make the 740 the better apartment workout shoe across the board. Quiet is only one part of the test. When lateral movement entered the session, the P400 Low felt more controlled and more predictable. I would rather manage the P400 Low’s impact noise with timing, a mat, and exercise selection than ask the 740 to fake stability during fast side-to-side work.
| Apartment concern | Better Brink model | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Quiet low-impact cardio | 740 | Lighter contact and less shoe hitting the floor. |
| Vinyl-floor confidence during lateral work | P400 Low | More grip and less corrective foot movement. |
| Jump-rope impact protection | P400 Low | Fresh Foam X platform and basketball tooling handled repeated landings better. |
| Late-night neighbor friendliness | Neither for jumping | Use low-impact bodyweight work instead; jump rope is the wrong movement if noise is the top constraint. |
| Dumbbell strength stability | Neither | The 740 is too flexible; the P400 Low is too tall and cushioned. |
On the scuff checks, neither shoe left persistent visible damage in this apartment test after the wipe-and-flashlight process. That is the minimum bar. The more useful distinction was how much the shoe made me worry during the movement. The 740 asked for more foot correction during lateral drills; the P400 Low gripped and moved on.
Where the Cameron Brink sneaker story fits

The sneaker-news context is simple enough. The New Balance 740 has a $110 base price at New Balance, while Brink-linked versions have appeared at $120 for Malibu Melt and $150 for Foot Locker exclusives; Athlon also listed the 740 in unisex US men’s sizes 4–14.[4][5] The P400 Low debuted on court on May 13, 2026, carries a $120 MSRP, and the Malibu Melt version was listed at $130 after the pack was revealed on July 24, 2026 ahead of WNBA All-Star Weekend.[6][7]
That makes the appeal obvious. One pair can look good outside, nod to Brink’s New Balance moment, and still be close enough in price to normal training shoes that it feels reasonable to ask whether it can handle living-room workouts too.
The problem is when lifestyle language does the work of testing. The Last Fashion Bible described the 740 as a “fitness partner,” but that kind of praise does not settle whether the shoe has the structure, floor behavior, or stability needed for small-space training.[8] RunRepeat’s lab data and the apartment test both point to a narrower use: light movement, not lifting.[1]
What real trainers solve at the same price
Disclosure: FitAtHome may earn a commission if you buy through some product links. That does not change the test result here. If your main goal is home training, the Brink models have to compete with shoes built for training first.
| Shoe | Approx. price noted in research | What it solves better than the Brink models |
|---|---|---|
| New Balance 740 | $110 base / $120 Malibu Melt / $150 Foot Locker exclusives | Style and light movement, but not trainer-level stability. |
| New Balance P400 Low | $120 MSRP / $130 Malibu Melt | Impact, grip, and lateral movement, but not low-to-floor strength work. |
| adidas Dropset 4 | $145 | A dedicated training build with 5/5 torsional rigidity per RunRepeat and an approximately 500 lb lifting threshold cited by That Fit Friend.[9] |
| Nike Metcon 10 | $150–$155 | A dedicated trainer with a 4 mm drop and an approximately 455 lb threshold cited by That Fit Friend.[9] |
| Nike Free Metcon 7 | About $120–$125 | A more trainer-specific hybrid option around the P400 Low’s price range. |
| Nike MC Trainer 3 | $80 | A budget training pick that leaves more money for a mat, dumbbells, or bands. |
RunRepeat’s training-shoe criteria emphasize the things missing or compromised here: stability, support, grip, and a platform suited to gym movement rather than casual wear or basketball cushioning alone.[10] That is why the comparison is not flattering if your priority is dumbbell training. The Brink shoes can be useful in an apartment, but they do not replace a real trainer.
Apartment verdict
Buy or keep the New Balance 740 for Cameron Brink style, walking, errands, light cardio, and bodyweight sessions where the floor demands are low. Do not buy it as your lifting shoe. Its flexibility is pleasant until the workout asks for a planted base.
Choose the P400 Low over the 740 if your home workouts lean toward HIIT, jump rope, athletic circuits, and lateral drills. It has the traction and impact protection the 740 lacks. Just do not confuse that with strength stability. For dumbbell work, the tall cushioned platform is still a compromise.
If you train in an apartment and only want one pair by the mat, the safest recommendation is boring: use the P400 Low for impact-focused sessions, use the 740 only for light work, and buy a dedicated trainer if dumbbells are a regular part of your week. If the sneaker spend competes with equipment, compare it against FitAtHome’s $0–$100 and $100–$300 Builds before deciding whether shoes, a mat, or adjustable dumbbells solve more of your actual training problem.
For workouts that fit these shoes’ limits, stay with low-impact bodyweight, HIIT, and jump-rope routines. The moment the session turns into heavy split squats beside the couch, neither Cameron Brink New Balance model is the shoe I would trust first.
References
- Cut in half: New Balance 740 Review (2025) | RunRepeat — RunRepeat, Apr. 2025
- New Balance P400 Performance Review — WearTesters
- Sparks’ Cameron Brink unveils ‘Malibu Melt’ colorways featuring New Balance P400 Low, 740 — ClutchPoints
- New Balance Selling Unisex 740 Sneakers, Cameron Brink’s Next Favorite Shoe — Athlon Sports
- Cameron Brink Headlines New Balance 740 Foot Locker — Sports Illustrated
- Cameron Brink Debuts New Balance P400 Low — Sports Illustrated
- Cameron Brink New Balance Malibu Melt Pack Release Date 2026 — Sole Retriever
- New Balance 740 Review — The Last Fashion Bible, Jan. 23, 2025
- Best Gym Shoes — That Fit Friend
- Best Training Shoes — RunRepeat
This result comes from one real apartment under the stated conditions — it is a strong signal, not a guarantee your space will measure identically.
Builds this evidence supports
No build currently links to this specific test. Browse all builds with a matching tag.
Spot something off?
If this result didn't match your own space, let us know — floor-damage and noise claims carry real deposit-risk consequences if we get them wrong.