Jordan Brand will be remastering (building better quality shoes) starting in 2015

TheTrapper said:
 
200 RETAIL 

THE NEW GS SIZING STARTS WITH THE REMASTERING JOINTS TOO

GS = SIZE 3.5-9 STARTING IN JAN 2015

9.5 AND UP = NEW MEN SIZES

JB , and some nike sig stuff 
Click to expand...
if this guy says it then there a good deal of creditability behind what he says

he has a proven track record of coming with reliable early information so i would heed what he says.
 
9.5 is my Jordan VI size (these shoes are wide as ****. Hopefully I can fit into a 9 and get decent shaped VIs.

Im gonna do the hypebeast thing where my shoe size is between 7.5 and 12 as long as it's heat.
 
TheTrapper said:
 
200 RETAIL 

THE NEW GS SIZING STARTS WITH THE REMASTERING JOINTS TOO

GS = SIZE 3.5-9 STARTING IN JAN 2015

9.5 AND UP = NEW MEN SIZES

JB , and some nike sig stuff 
Click to expand...
mean.gif


You can't be serious... So if this happens, will the retail price change? Or still 200?
 
Zephyr1983 said:
OK, so this gonna be a long post with some big quotes, apologies in advance

The main difference in the shape of the OG shoes, and how the post-1999 molds ruin the look is reflected in the boxy, curled up toe box
There has also been significant pinching around the mid-foot and heel that is causing the overall shape to go Banana up



In the above picture of the OG, Ive marked how the toe-box is rolled down so it maintains a nice forward angle. In addition, you can see that the side leather forms the correct parallel "wave pattern" with the outsole. Most modern IV's pinch in here. Finally, the heel bump in the back is pronounced because the overall height of the ankle is higher, demonstrated by the larger space between the midsole and the Wing-Tab




In this picture we can see the difference that all the pinching has caused in the middle of the shoe. Even if the the toe box was properly rolled down, the inching would probably create a banana-toe effect anyway. But of course, the toe-box is also enormous and bulges up instead of following the angle of the shoe downward


Overall, I know that some of these differences are insignificant to many people, and in the normal retro threads I try to keep the ranting to a minimum. But I would think that if JB is gonna bother to remaster at all, then they should do it right.

The IV is meant to have a sloped, almost triangular look to it that gives it a sleek, forward looking esthetic like this OG below




I'll also include this nice comparison pic that shows how important the "wave pattern" leather is to maintaining the proper shape. The 99's kind of have boxy toes, and yet, because the mid-foot leather is wide and parallel, there is enough space below the wing tab and the esthetic of the shoe is maintained




Below is my original post on the 2012 BC IV

You can see how little space there was between the wing-tab and the midsole
Click to expand...
 
2396Bullz said:
AMAZING  post! Very informative! Changing the shape of this shoe is one of my biggest problems with JB. The III have been butchered just as bad as far as shape goes. Got another visual comparison post for the III in you? THAT would blow peoples minds. It might even be worse than the IV lol
Click to expand...

Thanks!

Unfortunately I can't really help you with the III
Im more of a IV guy myself so Im not as familiar with how JB has been messing them up too. I will say that its pretty clear JB can't make a proper toe-box anymore because we've seen this problem seep into the recent V and VI as well
 
Last edited:
I'm fine with the new sizing scheme, as long as they keep the original features the big sizes have (e.g. wing tab's eyelets on the 4's are 3 instead of 2)
 
^Im pretty sure the whole point of GS is to NOT have those things.

I wish GS size was up to 9.5. I would get the 6s, 11s, and 12s in that size. A lot of GS sizes looks arguably better but those 3 models in particular tho.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

therealest1
Jordan IV RM
Replies
16
Views
3K
Public Enemy
Public Enemy

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom