10 Year Performance Comparison: Air Jordan 29 vs Air Jordan 39

[blitzbro1]

I’m not sure where to put this, but since I got both the Air Jordan 29 and the Air Jordan 39 I decided to create a new thread to show a 10 year performance gap between the 2. I would compare them based on traction, cushioning, materials, fit, lockdown and support to see what changed over the past 10 years and which one is the better the shoe between the two.

 

[blitzbro1]

Traction
This is my first performance testing between both shoes after playing in them for several hours on one indoor court with linoleum flooring:

Because both shoes have translucent rubber, they both have incredible sticky grip. I do not recommend to play both of these outdoors and they’re both prone to attracting dust so wiping after every dead ball is a must. Moreover, both rubber compounds are subjected to fraying after several wears but I only have worn them a few times.

The Air Jordan 29 features a unique multi-directional pattern that was supposed to be an evolution from the Air Jordan 28’s traction.

The traction on the 29 is still really grippy. For a shoe that’s 10 years old, the traction is easily one of the best features on the 29’s.

The pair I got is a used one but the rubber is still pliable with the exception of the solid rubber jumpman on the toe. It’s been slick due to age but since I don’t do toe drags it hasn’t been an issue.

On the other hand, the Air Jordan 39 has herringbone traction that is layered on top of one another and this pattern has been on recent flagship shoes since the Air Jordan 34.

The 39’s outsole acts both as a cage for the cushioning with its cupsole design and traction setup. This also has really great traction as well.

I noticed that the 39’s don’t squeak as much. However squeaky sounding traction doesn’t mean the traction is bad.

 

[taka]

This is great, keep up the good work

 

[blitzbro1]

Cushioning
Even though both shoes are hella bouncy thanks to the tech in both midsoles, this is where the 29 and the 39 have different methods based on how people played in both 2014 and 2024 respectively.

Now these two shoes have that balance between court feel and cushioning but it’s more like 60% cushioning and 40% court feel on both shoes.

Sidenote: I did use the move gameday insoles on both shoes to have an equal comparison on one test during two pickup games.

​

The 29’s cushioning comes equipped with: flightspeed plate, forefoot unlocked zoom air, and a phylon foam on the heel. The cushioning on things are still really great especially with the step-in comfort.

The unlocked zoom air on the forefoot doesn’t protrude outward like the 28’s and 31’s which makes them unstable. Nor does it protrude inward like the 32’s and 33’s which will make the step-in comfort uncomfortable along with having to break them in over time (unless you’re a big man)

Now the problem with the unlocked zoom on this shoe is the possibility of the zoom air popping which has been a problem with the 28’s. However I did not experience that problem when I was testing the 29’s.

Moreover, the heel to toe transition of the 29’s as well as the impact protection feels like I’m playing on a trampoline. That flightspeed and unlocked zoom air combo really does give an energy return.

​

The 39’s cushioning features zoom x foam and a full-length, bottom-loaded zoom air. This feel so nice with the 39’s step-in comfort

From a try on, the 39’s is just as bouncy if not a bit bouncier than the 29’s cushioning thanks to the full-length zoom air. And usually, bottom-loaded zoom air couldn’t be felt (i.e the Air Jordan 2010 and Air Jordan Alpha 1) but with this setup; it works.

This reminds me of playing in the Air Jordan 31 but the 39’s are actually more stable than the 31’s.

The zoom x foam is a really great foam to play in but over time, zoom x foam does tend to get mushy (which I will allude to in the support category). However the good thing about zoom x on this is the fact that it doesn’t bottom out unlike foams from the past like lunarlite or boost.

 

[blitzbro1]

Support and Lockdown
Much like the cushioning, the 29 and the 39 have two different methods as far as ankle support is concerned.

But there’s only one shoe between these two that has better torsional support.

On the 29, the shoe utilizes the flightspeed plate for torsional support, an asymmetrical achilles pillow for that sock-like bootie construction in the ankle collar, coupled with an internal tpu heel counter for ankle support.

The 29’s came in both a high cut and a low cut. Back then and even now I would love to have this option for the flagship shoe and they stopped doing this for the 39.

But for this performance comparison, I played in the original high cut version. The ankle stablity and mobility is just made better with its sock-like minimalistic approach. It really feels like playing in a low cut without being a low. Especially in comparison with most basketball shoes in the market right now.

The torsional support on the 29’s is bar none the best one between these two shoes. The flightspeed technology offers insane lateral stability and shock absorption which based on my analysis on the cushioning category does a tremendous job on preventing fatigue.

Meanwhile, the 39’s has a leather heel overlay, a thicker tpu heel counter, a suction cup-like bootie construction, and medial/lateral tpu strips that runs along the midfoot of the shoe.

The 39 comes in only as a 5/8 or 3/4 cut which is the lowest I could prefer wearing in basketball since a: I never liked playing in low cuts and b: I had bad experiences with rolling my ankle in low tops than I did in mid or high tops

However the 39’s did surprise me in terms of ankle support. Much like the 29’s, the 39’s balanced ankle mobility and stability.

The same praises for the 29’s cannot be said with the 39’s torsional support. I’m not gonna sugarcoat this but since the 39 has no midfoot plate to provide torsional support, shock absorption, lateral stability, fatigue reduction, and energy return; the zoom x/full-length zoom air setup felt so mushy to me which made me feel spent after playing in them.

 

[blitzbro1]

This is great, keep up the good work

I appreciate it but I still have to go over the materials and fit.

 

[vinnuendo]

This is dope thanks for sharing. I started feeling thinking performance shoes were plateauing around the jordan 31 times. Personally, full length zoom will always be a hit so some of my all time fav hoop shoes are jordan 19, 31, and 36. But it seems there are notable differences in these 10 years apart. I could definitely play in the 31 or the 36 for the rest of my life; it seems like ever since we hit the mid 2010s, hoops performance has been reinventing the wheel. In a good way but nothing new or groundbreaking IMO

 

[staffsgtdignam]

Seems like the 29s are overall the better shoe.

Aesthetically, the 39s are better but I remember I thought the 29s were one of the best performance shoes I ever played in back in 2015-2016. On a side note, the 29 lows were one of the best smelling new sneakers I’ve ever purchased lol Not sure what that smell was but it was amazing.

 

[blitzbro1]

Materials and Fit

Both shoes offer a tts fit and both materials break-in very quick right out the box.

The 29 was used as a test group for the 39’s upper which is one of the inspirations for me to create this performance comparison.

The Air Jordan 29 uses flyweave (formally known as performance woven upper) and flightweb for the lacing and lockdown. They’re the only materials on the upper.

So no glue (minus the glue for the plastic midsoles pieces on the flightspeed), no fuse, no tpu yarns, no leather, and no synthetic leather to hold the structural integrity of the uppers. This is a pure woven material that looks and feels phenomenal on foot.

Although the durability on the flyweave can be an issue, i.e. tears and holes found from other people playing in them over time, they still are way durable in comparison to other woven and knitted materials in recent years.

The Air Jordan 39’s have ballistic mesh, embroidered data driven stitching, paint inspired overlay on the mesh, and premium leather found on the toe, tongue and heel of the uppers which are coupled with perforated lining in the tongue.

I believe that this upper combines what oldheads and newheads both enjoy similar to the Air Jordan 11, Air Jordan 2011, Air Jordan 31, Air Jordan 35 and Air Jordan 38 which uses both leathers and textiles to create a versatile upper.

From my experiences with the 39’s, I happy to say I really enjoy this upper as it moves similar to 29’s upper and I often believe that this shoe is like a beefier little brother to the Air Jordan 29.

 

[blitzbro1]

Overall and Minor Tweaks
Both the Air Jordan 29 and the Air Jordan 39 were evenly matched with materials, cushioning, traction, fit, and ankle support.

But between the 2, the Air Jordan 29 is the better shoe than the Air Jordan 39!

The edges that the 29’s have over the 39’s are the torsional support and energy return thanks to the flightspeed plate.

Had the 39’s provided a shank plate (even a gum stick size tpu plate) these would have been a tie and an overall spiritual successor to the 29.

Some of the tweaks that I would have made on the 29’s be to really dial in the woven process on the flyweave to make it more breathable and utilize 3D printing to recreate and enhance the upper as well as adding a full-length zoom strobel to make the shoe more bouncier. Just thinking about having full-length zoom strobel stacked on top of the 29’s forefoot unlocked zoom air is like the Air Jordan 36’s cushioning dial up to 11

The tweaks for the 39’s would be to obviously have a shank plate in the midfoot, add the nike torch tech in the tongue, replace the ballistic mesh with an open celled knit or weave, and change the cut of the shoe to be an undercut midtop instead of a 3/4 cut.

 

[blitzbro1]

This is dope thanks for sharing. I started feeling thinking performance shoes were plateauing around the jordan 31 times. Personally, full length zoom will always be a hit so some of my all time fav hoop shoes are jordan 19, 31, and 36. But it seems there are notable differences in these 10 years apart. I could definitely play in the 31 or the 36 for the rest of my life; it seems like ever since we hit the mid 2010s, hoops performance has been reinventing the wheel. In a good way but nothing new or groundbreaking IMO

Seems like the 29s are overall the better shoe.

Aesthetically, the 39s are better but I remember I thought the 29s were one of the best performance shoes I ever played in back in 2915-2016. On a side note, the 29 lows were one of the best smelling new sneakers I’ve ever purchased lol Not sure what that smell was but it was amazing.

Thank you so much for reading this thread. I will continue to test both these shoes on a hardwood court soon and hopefully I will do another performance comparison including the Air Jordan 34’s.

I’m still looking for an Air Jordan 34 size 9.5 with a translucent outsole to have a much more accurate comparison between the 29’s, 34’s and 39’s for a 5 to 10 year comparison

 

[ejb]

Thank you for this!

 

[blitzbro1]

You’re welcome!

 

[GOAT969798]

Seems like the 29s are overall the better shoe.

Aesthetically, the 39s are better but I remember I thought the 29s were one of the best performance shoes I ever played in back in 2015-2016. On a side note, the 29 lows were one of the best smelling new sneakers I’ve ever purchased lol Not sure what that smell was but it was amazing.

Wanna know what my 29 lows smelled like?

 

[GOAT969798]

A foot destroyer... I played three half court games in them. It took over two years for me to get feeling back in my 4th toe on my left foot

 

[GOAT969798]

Overall and Minor Tweaks
Both the Air Jordan 29 and the Air Jordan 39 were evenly matched with materials, cushioning, traction, fit, and ankle support.

But between the 2, the Air Jordan 29 is the better shoe than the Air Jordan 39!

The edges that the 29’s have over the 39’s are the torsional support and energy return thanks to the flightspeed plate.

Had the 39’s provided a shank plate (even a gum stick size tpu plate) these would have been a tie and an overall spiritual successor to the 29.

Some of the tweaks that I would have made on the 29’s be to really dial in the woven process on the flyweave to make it more breathable and utilize 3D printing to recreate and enhance the upper and add a full-length zoom strobel to make the shoe more bouncier.

The tweaks for the 39’s would be to obviously have a shank plate in the midfoot, add the nike torch tech in the tongue, replace the ballistic mesh with an open celled knit or weave, and change the cut of the shoe to be an undercut midtop instead of a 3/4 cut.

Same size in both shoes? How's length and width feel? 29 regular fit me perfectly.

 

[hitman243]

29 lows made me bleed at the Achilles and pinched the pinky toes. Terrible IMO

 

[blitzbro1]

29 lows made me bleed at the Achilles and pinched the pinky toes. Terrible IMO

I was never a low top guy so I wouldn’t know. I understand that the 29’s aren’t meant for everybody.

 

[blitzbro1]

Same size in both shoes? How's length and width feel? 29 regular fit me perfectly.

Yes. I played in both shoes in size 9.5. I realized that wearing a size 9 fits me a bit narrow sometimes on the toe area with a few shoes and going a half size up helps with the width along the forefoot to me.

Both length and width are about the same with both shoes

 

[blitzbro1]

A foot destroyer... I played three half court games in them. It took over two years for me to get feeling back in my 4th toe on my left foot

Wait which one? Never mind I figured it out