- Aug 3, 2013
- 4,206
- 2,409
The 2 in the middle look more narrow then the outside 2. 
But yea, I'd go w the more pronounced on the left..
But yea, I'd go w the more pronounced on the left..Columbia Air Jordan 4 Retro for 2015 (01/10/15 $190)
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by drewswish,
- Start date
- May 29, 2013
- 195
- 39
good call, I picked up so many retro's recently, 11,s almost all the 6's etc.. but these I wore sunday right away others are still DS.. idk why i just couldnt resist on these
- Dec 29, 2013
- 3,035
- 1,440
Is it me, or do these mofos run HUGE in the toe area?? I put one on and was like dude what is going on?
- Sep 28, 2012
- 183
- 52
View media item 1352772View media item 1352773View media item 1352774View media item 1352775
Here's some pics for you guys comparing the chrome 99s vs the new Columbias. Same size for both shoes 10.5.
Some things to note:
-jumpman on tongue is a lot different but expected. Jordan announced that it would be a cleaner logo and to be honest I like it better. The stitching is great and makes the shoe look a lot more polished. It's a clean version of what we used to laugh at with the butt cracks or fat stomach ect.
-height of the shoes differ. The 99s are taller in all areas including the ankle area, pull tab, and tongue.
-toe box is definitely different in shape. Not only in width but also height from the ground. You notice the 99s have a much more narrow toe. It is also taller in the toe which imo gives the Columbias a nice shape but still is too wide. Keep the height and reduce the width in the toe box and I think it would have been a great compromise. It is noticeable when wearing the new Columbias if you are used to the older version. I don't mind considering I haven't worn the older version for a while now. I am scared they will crumble on me
-padding in the ankle areas are very different as well. The original versions were very padded and kept a soft but more secure fit for the upper of the shoe. Columbias are significantly slimmer and do not have that soft feel that made the 99s amazing to feel on feet.
-jumpman is smaller on the Columbias on the back tab. Also the pull tab above the jumpman is slimmer and shorter than the original. I don't mind it, again because the jumpman is cleaneron the new versions
-wing thickness for the leather are very similar. Couldn't tell much difference here. But when feeling the wings you can really tell the difference in leathers. The older versions right away feel smoother and softer.
-leather quality is way better on the 99s than the 2015s, which is no shock. After watching the videos in the previous pages, and comparing these Columbias with older Jordan's and newer retros, the more I feel we have been taken by Jordan brand. The leather is very similar to some of the recent retros that feature true tumbled leather. The leather smells of strong paint odors vs that new shoe smell we used to love in the early days of leather shoes. Don't get me wrong I am happy for the upgrade on leather. It is noticeably better than some of the 3s and 4s we've seen but it is no where near what it should be for Jordan brand to name this collection "remastered". I really wished Jordan and Nike would take a leap and really dive into making us happy. I know most of nt nowadays don't know what Jordan's used to be before '00-'05 but trust me we are no where near that. It's taking the right step but I don't see it getting back to the way it was. Granted they say their leather makers are not in business anymore but there are a lot of great quality companies producing leather that is more comparable than what we got on these.
-air bubbles seem to be bigger on the new versions but that's just at a glance.
-tongue padding is much better on the 99s.
-there are a few flaws on each shoe. Doesn't matter if it was in 99 or now machines are machines. They do not make everything perfect every time and missed stitching or a mark here and there is nothing I haven't seen in the past years even when we were in the golden era of shoes before '05. My Columbias have one missed stitch and the stitching on the back of the shoe around the jumpman isn't perfect. But looking at the 99s it isn't much better. The quality overall is better on the originals but doesn't mean that the craftsmanship and qc is any better on the pair I received. Overall I think flaws are a given. You are going to get them on any shoe you buy even if you went back in time. So when we talk about glue, stitching and the likes, it's not an argument I listen to when judging if the shoe is good or not. Heck the banned 1s I own have flaws that everyone would be nitpicking but we still consider that shoe one of the better made shoes in the past 10 years. So...who cares
Overall I am happy with my purchase and don't really have any complaints that I didn't see coming. I have been waiting for this shoes since I had to make a choice in 99 so to actually have them in my hands again is more than enough to give a nod to jb for finally putting these back out and feeding the other side of the shoe culture rather than the resellers/hypebeasts.
The remastered collection has a long way to go to get back to the way it was but I like what I am seeing.
Here's some pics for you guys comparing the chrome 99s vs the new Columbias. Same size for both shoes 10.5.
Some things to note:
-jumpman on tongue is a lot different but expected. Jordan announced that it would be a cleaner logo and to be honest I like it better. The stitching is great and makes the shoe look a lot more polished. It's a clean version of what we used to laugh at with the butt cracks or fat stomach ect.
-height of the shoes differ. The 99s are taller in all areas including the ankle area, pull tab, and tongue.
-toe box is definitely different in shape. Not only in width but also height from the ground. You notice the 99s have a much more narrow toe. It is also taller in the toe which imo gives the Columbias a nice shape but still is too wide. Keep the height and reduce the width in the toe box and I think it would have been a great compromise. It is noticeable when wearing the new Columbias if you are used to the older version. I don't mind considering I haven't worn the older version for a while now. I am scared they will crumble on me
-padding in the ankle areas are very different as well. The original versions were very padded and kept a soft but more secure fit for the upper of the shoe. Columbias are significantly slimmer and do not have that soft feel that made the 99s amazing to feel on feet.
-jumpman is smaller on the Columbias on the back tab. Also the pull tab above the jumpman is slimmer and shorter than the original. I don't mind it, again because the jumpman is cleaneron the new versions
-wing thickness for the leather are very similar. Couldn't tell much difference here. But when feeling the wings you can really tell the difference in leathers. The older versions right away feel smoother and softer.
-leather quality is way better on the 99s than the 2015s, which is no shock. After watching the videos in the previous pages, and comparing these Columbias with older Jordan's and newer retros, the more I feel we have been taken by Jordan brand. The leather is very similar to some of the recent retros that feature true tumbled leather. The leather smells of strong paint odors vs that new shoe smell we used to love in the early days of leather shoes. Don't get me wrong I am happy for the upgrade on leather. It is noticeably better than some of the 3s and 4s we've seen but it is no where near what it should be for Jordan brand to name this collection "remastered". I really wished Jordan and Nike would take a leap and really dive into making us happy. I know most of nt nowadays don't know what Jordan's used to be before '00-'05 but trust me we are no where near that. It's taking the right step but I don't see it getting back to the way it was. Granted they say their leather makers are not in business anymore but there are a lot of great quality companies producing leather that is more comparable than what we got on these.
-air bubbles seem to be bigger on the new versions but that's just at a glance.
-tongue padding is much better on the 99s.
-there are a few flaws on each shoe. Doesn't matter if it was in 99 or now machines are machines. They do not make everything perfect every time and missed stitching or a mark here and there is nothing I haven't seen in the past years even when we were in the golden era of shoes before '05. My Columbias have one missed stitch and the stitching on the back of the shoe around the jumpman isn't perfect. But looking at the 99s it isn't much better. The quality overall is better on the originals but doesn't mean that the craftsmanship and qc is any better on the pair I received. Overall I think flaws are a given. You are going to get them on any shoe you buy even if you went back in time. So when we talk about glue, stitching and the likes, it's not an argument I listen to when judging if the shoe is good or not. Heck the banned 1s I own have flaws that everyone would be nitpicking but we still consider that shoe one of the better made shoes in the past 10 years. So...who cares
Overall I am happy with my purchase and don't really have any complaints that I didn't see coming. I have been waiting for this shoes since I had to make a choice in 99 so to actually have them in my hands again is more than enough to give a nod to jb for finally putting these back out and feeding the other side of the shoe culture rather than the resellers/hypebeasts.
The remastered collection has a long way to go to get back to the way it was but I like what I am seeing.
Last edited:
- Jun 10, 2013
- 1,241
- 414
so i got my pair in from FNL today & i feel a lot of different ways about this shoe now that i have it in hand.
I love this colorway and have been wanting a retro for years. So that's why i copped. In hand this is a very clean shoe. I will def wear it happily.
But honestly the quality isn't anywhere near as good as people are making it out to be. My pair has a couple very minor paint chips on the midsole and a scratch in the jumpman on the back of the right shoe. Just like many others have said, leather reminds me of mid 2000's retros. Honestly the leather isn't that great. It's better than most recent retros, but still nothing too special. The Spizike 6s last year had much better quality leather than these do imo.
In my opinion, quality alone is not worth $190 retail. This is what JB should've been giving us for $170 or even $160.
"Remastering" truly is just a ploy by JB to drive up prices for no good reason.
I love this colorway and have been wanting a retro for years. So that's why i copped. In hand this is a very clean shoe. I will def wear it happily.
But honestly the quality isn't anywhere near as good as people are making it out to be. My pair has a couple very minor paint chips on the midsole and a scratch in the jumpman on the back of the right shoe. Just like many others have said, leather reminds me of mid 2000's retros. Honestly the leather isn't that great. It's better than most recent retros, but still nothing too special. The Spizike 6s last year had much better quality leather than these do imo.
In my opinion, quality alone is not worth $190 retail. This is what JB should've been giving us for $170 or even $160.
"Remastering" truly is just a ploy by JB to drive up prices for no good reason.
- Oct 19, 2013
- 5,790
- 1,684
Waiting for the crying in 6 month from the masses.
- Dec 24, 2013
- 19,057
- 9,031
nah I doubt it
- Jan 16, 2013
- 2,917
- 788
yes, i know, you have the bad luck to have deviceone selling stuff in your city..one more reason to stay away from jordans hahaha. i have moved on from mass jordan-buying long time ago, very specific purchases only, i wanted to see if something changed with the release of the remastered, columbia release reminded me that i did good moving on to other brands
Same in Greece. There are quite a few shops that have all kinds of sizes. I -obviously- love the IVs, but with all due respect to those that like them, personally I could care less about the Columbias. I've said it before and I'll say it again: What this world needs is: the 99 White/Cements, "BREDS" and the -never retroed- White/Reds with the legendary NIKE AIR logo. End of story.
With that said, what's really interesting is to see how their paint will hold up after a few times of wearing them. Those of you who bought them and already started wearing them please let us know.
bravelude
Banned
- Dec 29, 2013
- 7,573
- 1,115
jesus christ lol. they are just shoes, no need to be that critical of them. just wear them..
- Jun 7, 2014
- 156
- 19
Restock going on nikeAU tomorrow ill making a scoop haha
- Aug 17, 2006
- 1,688
- 75
These still available anywhere in the Bay Area?
- Oct 1, 2014
- 321
- 112
Is that just 4s or other stuff too?
- Apr 20, 2012
- 3,598
- 782
Call your local spots.. You might get lucky of people returning pairs.
If not, check your local CL listing... Prices are not that crazy, $210-230 if you know how to bargain.
Last edited:
- Jul 24, 2004
- 835
- 62
really like these a lot however the laces are HORRENDOUS.
- Apr 20, 2012
- 3,598
- 782
- Jun 7, 2014
- 156
- 19
Just the 4s
solefed
formerly exo1127
- Feb 13, 2013
- 3,069
- 3,841
This.
- Oct 1, 2014
- 321
- 112
Thanks. Well good luck
- Jul 23, 2004
- 7,751
- 7,954
My pair came in. Happy with the quality.
- Aug 13, 2013
- 1,836
- 1,293
- Mar 25, 2014
- 1,066
- 766
Like a bunch of people already said, I feel there's a little more room in the toebox than I would like. Not sure if going down .5 would make it too tight tho. Has anyone who sized down .5 from their TTS have any opinions on this
- May 29, 2014
- 740
- 493
I have wide feet so the extra room in the toe box is perfect for me. I'm a sz 13 and in between sizes with 4s because of the narrow toe box on past releases.
