dj proto j
Banned
- 7,244
- 1,593
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
ALL i hear anymore is how the quality of retros now is so much worse than OG's and previous retros. but then yesterday i saw someone show graphic evidence of how the 2010 infrared VI was on par with, if not better quality than the OG (it was clear in the pix of the OG that the excess glue, glue stains, sloppy paint jobs, etc., were all still there back then, in fact it was worse).
i also noticed the outrage against the black/infrared VI not having durabuck. but we've had 2 threads now with dozens of people saying that after 6 months of having the varsity reds with the same nubuck material (that's right, it's nubuck, not suede, jb and nike have confirmed this), they are holding up just fine after 30+ wears in some cases. no creasing, easily cleaned off, no wrinkles, no fading, still jet black instead of charcoal grey looking like durabuck, many reporting they still look DS after many, many wears... meanwhile tho, you got guys acting like that material is the worst evar and completely discredits the whole pack.
so it's got me wondering, how much of this is real vs. how much of this is lil' "sneakerheads" just repeating what they hear others say, loving to have something to complain about, but don't actually know what they're talking about.
i know some releases probably are poorer quality, it definitely happens with nikes. i definitely feel like my air max 95's i bought in the 90's feel better, and less stiff than the recent retros (and i still wear my neon 95's from '99's retro so i have a current reference point to compare with, it's not based off memory, which can be way off).
but i'd love to see some examples of this in jordans. specifically graphically, with close up pix and everything (shapes being off, glue problems, crap paint jobs, etc.)
i also noticed the outrage against the black/infrared VI not having durabuck. but we've had 2 threads now with dozens of people saying that after 6 months of having the varsity reds with the same nubuck material (that's right, it's nubuck, not suede, jb and nike have confirmed this), they are holding up just fine after 30+ wears in some cases. no creasing, easily cleaned off, no wrinkles, no fading, still jet black instead of charcoal grey looking like durabuck, many reporting they still look DS after many, many wears... meanwhile tho, you got guys acting like that material is the worst evar and completely discredits the whole pack.
so it's got me wondering, how much of this is real vs. how much of this is lil' "sneakerheads" just repeating what they hear others say, loving to have something to complain about, but don't actually know what they're talking about.
i know some releases probably are poorer quality, it definitely happens with nikes. i definitely feel like my air max 95's i bought in the 90's feel better, and less stiff than the recent retros (and i still wear my neon 95's from '99's retro so i have a current reference point to compare with, it's not based off memory, which can be way off).
but i'd love to see some examples of this in jordans. specifically graphically, with close up pix and everything (shapes being off, glue problems, crap paint jobs, etc.)