Give/Show examples of the decline of quality in Jordan retros...

[dj proto j]

Originally Posted by Souljaman22

my main problem is paint chipping
i got these pics saved of some teams i have called classic 23s
i undsed them and they chipped, wore em lightly for a couple hours

see, if that happened to me, i'd be raising hell with jordan/nike until they allowed me to send them back for a full refund and hopefully some kinda compensation for my time (gift card or something)... i wouldn't stop until i got what i want (usually you just want the shoe you bought tho, without these problems, so you never really get what you want, no matter what kinda gift cards they give you)...

 

[sparklecity sc]

I think some people on here complain cause they see others do it.But that doesn't mean there complaints aren't true.I started buying Jordans in 94' when I was old enough to ask for them.I really don't remember how the quailty was back then cause i really didn't pay that much attention to stuff like that then.I really don't pay as much attention to my shoes now like half of the people on here do when it come to the little complaints they have with quailty control.but I remember last year when the SJ's released dudes here complaining about injection point specs on the white midsole.little stuff like that shouldn't be a problem.

 

[sparklecity sc]

I think some people on here complain cause they see others do it.But that doesn't mean there complaints aren't true.I started buying Jordans in 94' when I was old enough to ask for them.I really don't remember how the quailty was back then cause i really didn't pay that much attention to stuff like that then.I really don't pay as much attention to my shoes now like half of the people on here do when it come to the little complaints they have with quailty control.but I remember last year when the SJ's released dudes here complaining about injection point specs on the white midsole.little stuff like that shouldn't be a problem.

 

[sparklecity sc]

If I have a issue with a release JB has I don't come on here and rant about it.I simply move on to the next release

 

[sparklecity sc]

If I have a issue with a release JB has I don't come on here and rant about it.I simply move on to the next release

 

[guerrilla warfare]

Paint chipping

Perfect example: Aqua 8's

 

[guerrilla warfare]

Paint chipping

Perfect example: Aqua 8's

 

[rillo561]

Only compliant I have is paint chipping and some squeaking on certain pairs.

 

[rillo561]

Only compliant I have is paint chipping and some squeaking on certain pairs.

 

[dtb00201]

Originally Posted by hotbutter

Originally Posted by 23collector1985

Wow... I haven't been on NT in a while, and I see a lot has changed! I NEVER thought I would see the day when people would be defending newer retros and bashing OG's!!! That is insane to me.

As a 36 year old Jordan collector and someone who has owned and played ball in many OG's since 1985, it's very obvious to me that the quality of the newer retros is nowhere near as good as the OG's or even earlier retros. The fact that the majority of the people on this thread are arguing the opposite tells me that true, knowlegable sneaker collectors no longer visit this site and ignorance has taken over. So, that's it for me... goodbye NT!

exactly why i dont post often anymore. ignorance.  if you really feel 2009 retroXII's > OR >= to OG XII's...>> youre on crack

I'm assuming this is directed at me and as you can see from the last page I actually own the shoes I'm talking about. I'm not some young kid who says they are better and has nothing to back up my claims with, or some old man og head who saw a picture on vmv inc and assumes all the new 12s are trash. As far as quality of materials the originals definitely have better leather just like I said on the last page, but that's the only advantage they have. Minus the tongue and laces, the 2009 12s are pretty on point with the 2003/2004 retros and I personally think the retro mold was a step up from the originals. The originals are big and heavy and the cut is a lot higher which makes it less comfortable when you walk. They are just so big and clunky that it's almost a pain to even wear them compared to the retros. To me both retros are wayyyy more comfortable, and the zoom is more responsive. Also the shoes do not look like bananas, the only time that even happened was when these stupid early release sites post their b grades. You can clearly see from my pictures that the molds for both retros are almost identical. I'm not dissing the originals because I love them for nostalgia purposes, but since I wear my shoes and don't keep them locked away in a closet, I would much prefer to have the retros.

 

[dtb00201]

Originally Posted by hotbutter

Originally Posted by 23collector1985

Wow... I haven't been on NT in a while, and I see a lot has changed! I NEVER thought I would see the day when people would be defending newer retros and bashing OG's!!! That is insane to me.

As a 36 year old Jordan collector and someone who has owned and played ball in many OG's since 1985, it's very obvious to me that the quality of the newer retros is nowhere near as good as the OG's or even earlier retros. The fact that the majority of the people on this thread are arguing the opposite tells me that true, knowlegable sneaker collectors no longer visit this site and ignorance has taken over. So, that's it for me... goodbye NT!

exactly why i dont post often anymore. ignorance.  if you really feel 2009 retroXII's > OR >= to OG XII's...>> youre on crack

I'm assuming this is directed at me and as you can see from the last page I actually own the shoes I'm talking about. I'm not some young kid who says they are better and has nothing to back up my claims with, or some old man og head who saw a picture on vmv inc and assumes all the new 12s are trash. As far as quality of materials the originals definitely have better leather just like I said on the last page, but that's the only advantage they have. Minus the tongue and laces, the 2009 12s are pretty on point with the 2003/2004 retros and I personally think the retro mold was a step up from the originals. The originals are big and heavy and the cut is a lot higher which makes it less comfortable when you walk. They are just so big and clunky that it's almost a pain to even wear them compared to the retros. To me both retros are wayyyy more comfortable, and the zoom is more responsive. Also the shoes do not look like bananas, the only time that even happened was when these stupid early release sites post their b grades. You can clearly see from my pictures that the molds for both retros are almost identical. I'm not dissing the originals because I love them for nostalgia purposes, but since I wear my shoes and don't keep them locked away in a closet, I would much prefer to have the retros.

 

[asianimage]

I agree the IVs were chipping....my military and mars...ugh.

 

[asianimage]

I agree the IVs were chipping....my military and mars...ugh.

 

[magicmike872]

They went away from dying the foam because it would discolor. For example if you walked through a puddle of water it would act like a sponge and suck it up and discolor the faom. Trust me I had them and it is impossible to clean.

 

[magicmike872]

They went away from dying the foam because it would discolor. For example if you walked through a puddle of water it would act like a sponge and suck it up and discolor the faom. Trust me I had them and it is impossible to clean.

 

[dtb00201]

Originally Posted by magicmike872

They went away from dying the foam because it would discolor. For example if you walked through a puddle of water it would act like a sponge and suck it up and discolor the faom. Trust me I had them and it is impossible to clean.

I think I would still take this over the paint chipping off like it does.

 

[dtb00201]

Originally Posted by magicmike872

They went away from dying the foam because it would discolor. For example if you walked through a puddle of water it would act like a sponge and suck it up and discolor the faom. Trust me I had them and it is impossible to clean.

I think I would still take this over the paint chipping off like it does.

 

[datboi81]

my aqua 8's paint is definitely chipping, but not that bad. my main problem is comfort, which the aqua's feel fine and their a size down from what i usually wear. my CDP 4's and 11's(which are in my actually size) are the most uncomfortable shoes i've ever worn. i dont own the og's of either, but comparing them to the quality of shoes i've bought from nowadays(lebron 7s and trainer sc 2010) i'm pretty confident the OG's were more comfortable.

 

[datboi81]

my aqua 8's paint is definitely chipping, but not that bad. my main problem is comfort, which the aqua's feel fine and their a size down from what i usually wear. my CDP 4's and 11's(which are in my actually size) are the most uncomfortable shoes i've ever worn. i dont own the og's of either, but comparing them to the quality of shoes i've bought from nowadays(lebron 7s and trainer sc 2010) i'm pretty confident the OG's were more comfortable.

 

[young christin]

Ill give you a god example: Jordan Flint XIII Retros 2005. They are one of the worst retros i ever purchased quality wise period.

 

[young christin]

Ill give you a god example: Jordan Flint XIII Retros 2005. They are one of the worst retros i ever purchased quality wise period.

 

[greatestgoliath]

Originally Posted by dtb00201

Originally Posted by magicmike872

They went away from dying the foam because it would discolor. For example if you walked through a puddle of water it would act like a sponge and suck it up and discolor the faom. Trust me I had them and it is impossible to clean.

I think I would still take this over the paint chipping off like it does.

Exactly.I mean if they still Dye the Foam through on the Nike Air Flight 89, then why can't they do the same with the 4's, or the Air Revolution Sole that's Used on the 3's and many other Jordans. Nikes that Use either the Air Revolution Sole or similar are Dyed through and You never see those Crack, Dirty Yes Crack No. I'd rather have dirty and hard to clean then crack apart after 2 wears. Case in Point my Mist 4 which after 10+ wears is showing signs, and My Flip 3 which after FIRST wear have cracked so Horribly

they are almost unwearable. Unless they start to Dye these again I will Not buy the Cement 3 and 4 that are dropping next year.

 

[greatestgoliath]

Originally Posted by dtb00201

Originally Posted by magicmike872

They went away from dying the foam because it would discolor. For example if you walked through a puddle of water it would act like a sponge and suck it up and discolor the faom. Trust me I had them and it is impossible to clean.

I think I would still take this over the paint chipping off like it does.

Exactly.I mean if they still Dye the Foam through on the Nike Air Flight 89, then why can't they do the same with the 4's, or the Air Revolution Sole that's Used on the 3's and many other Jordans. Nikes that Use either the Air Revolution Sole or similar are Dyed through and You never see those Crack, Dirty Yes Crack No. I'd rather have dirty and hard to clean then crack apart after 2 wears. Case in Point my Mist 4 which after 10+ wears is showing signs, and My Flip 3 which after FIRST wear have cracked so Horribly

they are almost unwearable. Unless they start to Dye these again I will Not buy the Cement 3 and 4 that are dropping next year.

 

[ponyboy]

Not Great at all!!-ponyboy

 

[ponyboy]

Not Great at all!!-ponyboy