do u think its worth buying ? because i have the low chicago 1s which also released this yr but im trying to get these in a form of representing my era
bro need your advice J2 chicago low ( $ 121) new or J2White/ Dark Concord-Black-Wolf Grey slightly used looks new ( $60 ) This is true to size right ? Never had a J2 before
I didn't do an on feet of the Jordan 2 low so I am not sure if they are true to size. I can't wear lows to be honest because it doesn't look right, so I would go with the Dark Concord.
2016 shaping is atrocious and why is that line of thread overlapping the red pipe accents. that wasnt even on the mid 2000s retroes much less should it be on a so called remaster of the OG
+Dirtyd23 Yea i love 2's. IMO the toe box of the OG isnt all that sleek either. they were apparently molded differently for those '94-95 retros. You bring up a great issue though. Why dont they ever get the 4s, 5s and 6s correct? The shape of the 11 has been relatively off for years now also. Maybe I'm missing details but it doesnt seem like contouring the toe would be that hard to me. I cant wait for the Space Jam 11 and I hope and pray they'll bring back the fire red 3 and Seattle 1. Its all about the 7 for life it means to me what the 2 means to you!!! #4thgrade
+Dirtyd23 +Dirtyd23 Man you're my long lost sneaker brother. Everything you expressed is almost word for word all the things ive said and noticed over the years. First, yes, the 3s are horribly done idk how i left those out and yes sir the 03 was near perfect besides the jumpman air heel tabs. After those everything went wrong. the only Classic # Jordans they honestly get right are 10 and 7s. They assault the 4s worst of all though and then the 3 and 5. the toe box and tongue were trash on that white cement 4 this year. I didnt like the way they were done (of course its not the best colorway to begin with). I'll finish my reply tomorrow its more points i want to make lol
A OG LOW MODEL THAT MJ ACTUALLY PLAYED IN...FINALLY.I GOT TO HAVE THEM.BUT CAN'T DO THE WHITE LACES.THE BLACK LACES IS A MUST.
+Bin Wahli agree 100% they need the black laces...
Hell yeah.
Yeah, I love these. Michael played like an animal wearing these in '87-'88. Very under-rated shoe in my opinion. Black Laces!!!!
So underrated, love these..have to swap the laces.
+Thomas Sams got to swap the laces! How are you liking them?
wish they would bring the og retro box love that haha
+Jesus Linear I do too, now that would be awesome!
The 94 looks great look better than the 16
100% agree!
these shoes are slept on af
I agree. I think they are super nice.
Wonder if we'll get the High top version again in that coloway?
+The Prophet of Rage Hope so, we need them to get the remastered treatment.
+SneakerFiles.com oh no doubt man.
More pointed on the toe box(sleeker) on the 1994 than the 2016.
My bad i compared and that reinforces thread is on the original from 86 87.
All good yea the 86-87 is truly the best of all.
do u think its worth buying ? because i have the low chicago 1s which also released this yr but im trying to get these in a form of representing my era
+Kris Rivera I love this pair so to me, it is worth it.
+SneakerFiles.com thx for always replying to my comments ...every single one i comment u take time out ur day to giv me your views thank you 😄
+Kris Rivera No problem at all, we value everyones comments and try our best to help.
bro need your advice J2 chicago low ( $ 121) new or J2White/ Dark Concord-Black-Wolf Grey slightly used looks new ( $60 ) This is true to size right ? Never had a J2 before
I didn't do an on feet of the Jordan 2 low so I am not sure if they are true to size. I can't wear lows to be honest because it doesn't look right, so I would go with the Dark Concord.
How would you say they fit? Same as highs?
+Eric Johnson To be honest with you, I haven't tried them on yet
Cool, just wondering since some lows tend to slip in the heel if the material is too soft
+Eric Johnson We might do an on feet video, if we do we can let you know.
can you compare flu games 1997 og's to 2016s retro ?
+Lamont McDaniels yes, we will have a comparison on those as well.
+SneakerFiles.com thanks can't wait how there similar
I can't wait to see also. Very curious
you can get the radio Raheem jordans for about 75 dollars, almost the same shoe just in black.
I'm getting those
2016 shaping is atrocious and why is that line of thread overlapping the red pipe accents. that wasnt even on the mid 2000s retroes much less should it be on a so called remaster of the OG
+Dirtyd23 i feel you. but i bought them since my comment and love them. i was tripping hard
+Dirtyd23 Yea i love 2's. IMO the toe box of the OG isnt all that sleek either. they were apparently molded differently for those '94-95 retros. You bring up a great issue though. Why dont they ever get the 4s, 5s and 6s correct? The shape of the 11 has been relatively off for years now also. Maybe I'm missing details but it doesnt seem like contouring the toe would be that hard to me. I cant wait for the Space Jam 11 and I hope and pray they'll bring back the fire red 3 and Seattle 1. Its all about the 7 for life it means to me what the 2 means to you!!! #4thgrade
+NewWorldRob Seattle 10*
+Dirtyd23 +Dirtyd23 Man you're my long lost sneaker brother. Everything you expressed is almost word for word all the things ive said and noticed over the years. First, yes, the 3s are horribly done idk how i left those out and yes sir the 03 was near perfect besides the jumpman air heel tabs. After those everything went wrong. the only Classic # Jordans they honestly get right are 10 and 7s. They assault the 4s worst of all though and then the 3 and 5. the toe box and tongue were trash on that white cement 4 this year. I didnt like the way they were done (of course its not the best colorway to begin with). I'll finish my reply tomorrow its more points i want to make lol
Low key advertising bodybuilding.com
+Luke Allison LOL I know..they should give me a discount...but I need to find a place to make SneakerFiles.com ones
+SneakerFiles.com wrist-band.com
+Luke Allison thanks for the heads up. We are going to look into them.
Tbh I want to like them but they look too much like s bowling shoe...
+Jake Salzman ye thaught that 2 ^^
Not the first time I have heard it and totally understand.
That shoe for 1987 was waaaaay ahead of it's time in terms of look&technology.
+The Prophet of Rage agree!