- 5,325
- 3,093
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2008
your og carmines are icier than my cdp pairOriginally Posted by 23collector1985
They are durable. Mine are still standing... of course, I never wear them
Air Jordan 6 Black/Infrared 1991 vs. 2000 vs. 2010 Comparison
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by halfyhalf,
- Start date
- 17,790
- 834
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
I love nicekicks because of their comparisons and articles like this
The originals are just gorgeous. The leather, the 3m, the GLOWING infrared.
The 2000 retro was definitely different, but still beautiful.
The 2010 retro.....eh.....i guess an icy sole makes up for a sloppy representation.
The originals are just gorgeous. The leather, the 3m, the GLOWING infrared.
The 2000 retro was definitely different, but still beautiful.
The 2010 retro.....eh.....i guess an icy sole makes up for a sloppy representation.
- 3,684
- 66
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2009
What do we get out of comparing and complaining about quality then and quality now? Obviously the originals were better. Duh, wouldn't you put out a top notch product the first time around? Makes perfect business sense. Look at the Lebrons. Shoes with yellowed bottoms look like crap anyway. Should have worn them when you still could have. Sea glow them!
- 2,108
- 106
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
2000's & 91's are
- 13,328
- 11,556
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
Nice OG'sOriginally Posted by 23collector1985
They are durable. Mine are still standing... of course, I never wear them
- 1,053
- 11
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2009
wow those OG infrareds and carmines are insane
- 77
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2005
Damn the leather on the OGs...
- 4,579
- 4,168
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
I really wish I didn't beat my 00 pair up the way I did
- 347
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2009
man i love ogs and jays with nike air on the back
- 48,378
- 28,432
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2006
My '91s are so faded (i guess) that they look kind of pink. Leather definately different.
versus 2010 on right...
Great to see post with all 3 in good shape.
versus 2010 on right...
Great to see post with all 3 in good shape.
- 1,518
- 10
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
the OG's DID NOT HAVE 3M!!! LEARN YALL MATERIALS
- 5,325
- 3,093
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2008
well what was that material that shined when the light hit it?Originally Posted by thebeast23
the OG's DID NOT HAVE 3M!!! LEARN YALL MATERIALS
you know? the little small circles behind the perforations?
was it glass?
IM PRETTY SURE THE OGS DID HAVE 3M! LEARN YOUR MATERIALS!
SlamShut
formerly cement greyman
- 5,132
- 6,811
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2005
The original Air Jordan VI did have 3M material.
- 1,518
- 10
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
my bad i thawt u was talkin bout the whole back heel cuz i heard ppl say thatas 3m cuz it shined in the light...i didnt catch that under the perforations...my baaad
- 13,328
- 11,556
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
Originally Posted by thebeast23
the OG's DID NOT HAVE 3M!!! LEARN YALL MATERIALS
- 1,518
- 10
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
Originally Posted by stevesteve72
Originally Posted by thebeast23
the OG's DID NOT HAVE 3M!!! LEARN YALL MATERIALS
sumbody said the whole back heel was 3m while the front was durabuck...tahts wat i was referring to...but i never even noticed the 3m on the inside. that is a nice touch tho
- 9
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2007
Is there a reason that JB continues to use suede on retroes instead of nubuck? They have to know that nubuck looks 100 times better....
- 9
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2007
Is there a reason why JB continues to use suede on each retro? They have to know that nubuck looks 100% better....
- 1,502
- 1,342
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2010
I dont think JB has a clue about whats lookin good anymore, they dont have to, everybody will still beast as long as they see a jumpman
flappy188
Banned
- 988
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2009
Thanks for your patience.
The material on the shoes is Nubuck leather. This is a Full Grain leather that has a really fine, buffed surface. It’s like they took 320 grit sand paper to the top of the leather to give it a nice, soft nap.
If you have any other questions please feel free to email me back.
Have a great day!
Best regards,
Jennifer
Nike.com
flappy188
Banned
- 988
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2009
yuku blunder
flappy188
Banned
- 988
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2009
Thanks for your patience.
The material on the shoes is Nubuck leather. This is a Full Grain leather that has a really fine, buffed surface. It’s like they took 320 grit sand paper to the top of the leather to give it a nice, soft nap.
If you have any other questions please feel free to email me back.
Have a great day!
Best regards,
Jennifer
Nike.com
The material on the shoes is Nubuck leather. This is a Full Grain leather that has a really fine, buffed surface. It’s like they took 320 grit sand paper to the top of the leather to give it a nice, soft nap.
If you have any other questions please feel free to email me back.
Have a great day!
Best regards,
Jennifer
Nike.com
- 3,684
- 66
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2009
- 1,518
- 10
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
Originally Posted by stevesteve72
Originally Posted by thebeast23
the OG's DID NOT HAVE 3M!!! LEARN YALL MATERIALS
this is an example of wat i was tlkin bout my comment was aimed towards cats like dis
why would you put leather?? the OGs were 3M durabuck, which explains the shine...not leather
he said that here
http://niketalk.com/topic/256779?page=3
- 68
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2009
Neither Retro has the 3M underneath the ankle panel, and for that reason the original is STILL THE BEST. Very big difference to leave out of both Retro's imo
2010s are totally gorss. A poor mans Varsity Red VI, hehe...
2010s are totally gorss. A poor mans Varsity Red VI, hehe...