- 33,427
- 39,199
What’s your opinion?
Nike Air Jordan Retro 3 OG “Fire Red” 2022
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by Jordanbball,
- Start date
- 1,467
- 4,061
I'm Making a assumption that she means they mess them up on purpose to make us by another pair of bc4s with 89 shape or some bs they pull you know.
- 4,319
- 7,453
Only thing I can think of is that someone within the brand or maybe even MJ himself doesn't like the 4.
Two reasons that I think are significant.
1.) After the 1-2-3 retroed in 94-95 they were going to retro the Jordan 5 in 95-96 skipping over the Jordan 4.
2.) The 99-00 retro had a significant shape change during the run and the last three colors were pretty far off from the OG shape. Have we ever seen a shape change in the middle of a shoe's retro run? (I mean back then when each shoe had their 1-2 year retro run. It's different now)
- 5,316
- 9,779
Interesting point, and to add to it remember how bad the materials were on the 2004 Classic Green IVs? Coincidentally there on todays anniversaries.
XII Twist (1 Year)
XXXVI SE Jayson Tatum (1 Year)
I Low Game Royal (2 Years)
XII University Gold (2 Years)
IV Classic Green (18 Years)
XII Twist (1 Year)
XXXVI SE Jayson Tatum (1 Year)
I Low Game Royal (2 Years)
XII University Gold (2 Years)
IV Classic Green (18 Years)
- 7,634
- 9,686
Been in this lovely hobby for a long time. The 1999 WC BC retro is the best Retro I have ever worn or owned, hands-down.
It’s not even close baby, IMO.
It’s not even close baby, IMO.
- 4,319
- 7,453
Yea, definitely without question, and the Black Cement too.
- 33,427
- 39,199
How long baby?
- 33,427
- 39,199
Very interesting. Thank you for answering.Only thing I can think of is that someone within the brand or maybe even MJ himself doesn't like the 4.
Two reasons that I think are significant.
1.) After the 1-2-3 retroed in 94-95 they were going to retro the Jordan 5 in 95-96 skipping over the Jordan 4.
2.) The 99-00 retro had a significant shape change during the run and the last three colors were pretty far off from the OG shape. Have we ever seen a shape change in the middle of a shoe's retro run? (I mean back then when each shoe had their 1-2 year retro run. It's different now)
- 7,634
- 9,686
Good question my man.
The first ever Nikes that I can remember my parents buying me were the mid or hightop delta force, can’t remember the year. After that I was fortunate enough to get the air Jordan 4 fire red and the Air Force 3 escape in the same year.
I hope that answers your question, how are you doing Dr?
- 3,874
- 8,055
fineline got his review up. they look good
- 9,453
- 13,521
Yo smoking crak for $400
TipsyMcStagga
formerly kod843
- 12,398
- 14,962
That's exactly why they've been sitting on his site. I reached out to see if there was wiggle room on the price and he left me on read. I guarantee the price will drop closer to the release date.
- 3,874
- 8,055
lmao yep
- 33,427
- 39,199
Your parents are good people. They got the ball rolling.
Doing well, thank you. Struck out on Jackie Robinson Dunks and Travis 1 Lows but that’s par for the course baby.
- 914
- 1,723
Same here and I really wanted those Jackie robinsonsYour parents are good people. They got the ball rolling.
Doing well, thank you. Struck out on Jackie Robinson Dunks and Travis 1 Lows but that’s par for the course baby.
- 20,289
- 36,609
- 7,634
- 9,686
Your parents are good people. They got the ball rolling.
Doing well, thank you. Struck out on Jackie Robinson Dunks and Travis 1 Lows but that’s par for the course baby.
Unfortunately the rules for par are changing. Used to be 72, now it’s creeping into the high 60s, it’s just impossible to get want you want for retail.
I know, whiny rant, like an old man trying to send back soup at a deli
- 835
- 1,687
Outside of the long tongue, JB nailed it with these retros. The shape, shiny netting, and durabuck lines all were on par with the originals. The 4s haven’t been the same since the first run of retros in 99-00. Not sure why they changed the mold but I wish they would go back.
- 14,062
- 14,295
Main difference I see is they still don't have the tongue height right. EP a little light lighter, but that's not a big deal. The tongue height NEEDS to be right tho.
- 14,062
- 14,295
Those work boots, better known as "85s", ain't accurate to the shape of actual OGs either so there's that.
- 22,119
- 69,934
Not one retro is accurate to the OG.
Somehow 85's piss people off the most lol
Somehow 85's piss people off the most lol
- 14,062
- 14,295
I'll never forget that day. Was at college after 1st morning class and saw a girl wearing them. They just shock dropped that morning I wanna say it was a Wednesday, no release dates or anything. I skipped my next class and IMMEDIATELY raced to Towson mall and copped from sports zone for $99.99 and I couldn't believe it. Man...
Last edited:
- 14,062
- 14,295
They look off to me. And then there's the bulbous toe and steel toe boot shape. I hate them with a passion.
Last edited:
- 20,289
- 36,609
Main difference I see is they still don't have the tongue height right. EP a little light lighter, but that's not a big deal. The tongue height NEEDS to be right tho.
The 2007 & 2013 versions were a joke, so I'm not even going to try to analyze those. Those fell under the era of bootleg looking retros.
In addition to the tongue height being higher than the original and the elephant print being lighter that you correctly pointed out on the 2022 version, I also noticed all the gray parts on the 2022 version are lighter too. And all the red parts of the 2022 are slightly brighter than the original version. The red on the original version has more of a dullness to them, whereas the red on the 2022 version has more of a fluorescent look to them.
The shape on the 2022 version is very similar to the original for the most part, but the height on the 2022 version is lower than the original version.
The width of the air pocket on the 2022 is smaller, whereas it's longer on the original version.
- 3,085
- 5,876
