- 2,884
- 1,539
Dang it $220? Heck nah.
Nike Air Jordan Retro Metallic V - 7/23/16
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by ozuna23,
- Start date
- 22,119
- 69,930
1 pair and I'm chillin
- 2,884
- 1,539
smart man
- 2,956
- 3,295
what Is Es?
Last edited:
The Fresh Prince
formerly airsakuragi
- 13,535
- 9,570
But my opinion is trash though
The Fresh Prince
formerly airsakuragi
- 13,535
- 9,570
The E on the Nike Air stitching, they're complaining that it looks uneven. People on NT are famous for finding something to complain about on every shoe.
- 2,956
- 3,295
Haha thx
The Fresh Prince
I've never heard anything about the E until now. If yall have pics post I Wana see
The Fresh Prince
I've never heard anything about the E until now. If yall have pics post I Wana see
Last edited:
- 2,884
- 1,539
My friend your opinion on the True Black/Metallic Silver/Varsity Red/White Jordan V is less than a savory one.
But my opinion is trash though
alp
Banned
- 39,966
- 8,990
The Fresh Prince
formerly airsakuragi
- 13,535
- 9,570
@bashmilk an example of the "E problem" personally I think the angle is giving the perception of it looking like that. @AirThompson has a retail pair so maybe he could tell you if this is a real problem or not.
- 2,140
- 3,596
The "E" from the Nike Air on the back looks like it's slightly lower in some of the images. No big deal.
Maybe it showed up hungover for work in that picture, who knows.
- 42,891
- 43,456
Bet you don't listen to Megadeth tho
- 3,476
- 2,299
you have no idea man lol I've been listening to metal my whole life...all my parents listened to plus I been playing guitar for 10 years cut me a lil slack lol
View media item 2090449
Last edited:
The Fresh Prince
formerly airsakuragi
- 13,535
- 9,570
It's Black, Metallic Silver, and Varsity Red (Black, Black, and Metallic Silver for the 1990 and 2000 versions) not True Black, Metallic Silver, Varsity Red, and White. Also you agreed with my opinion on just purchasing one; have a nice day sir.
My friend your opinion on the True Black/Metallic Silver/Varsity Red/White Jordan V is less than a savory one.
Last edited:
- 622
- 869
Not trying to nitpick, but the truth is the embroidered "E" on the heel does noticeably look a little shorter and thicker than the embroidered "NIK" on pretty much ALL of the "early retail" pics out there. I went back and looked at as many of them as I could find. It didn't look like this on the pics of the official Nike prototype from last year from when they announced OG remastering. Maybe they altered something about the stitching process? Hard to say.
The other thing I've noticed is the font on the "NIKE" on the bottom of the shoe is visibly NOT as slanted as it was on the OGs and 2000s. I also think it looked better on the prototype.
Are either of these relatively minor details going to be dealbreakers to me? No. I'll still be getting my pairs.
But I'm not going to lie. These differences ARE ultimately disappointing.
When JB goes out of their way to charge an additional $30 per pair markup on top of an existing $65 per pair markup on decades old technology (OG Vs were $125, 2000s were $120), and justify it by publicizing and highlighting to consumers a process that they say will keep so-called "storied silhouettes" as close as possible to original designs and materials, and they then visibly deviate from that process, it's disappointing. Maybe that disappointment is amplified to people like me who have owned every single iteration of this model over the years, for whom it's one of our favorite sneakers ever. In the end I doubt younger consumers are going to care much. And it's not like they totally butchered the shoe.
It's not the earlier release of the ATC III for Christ's sake.
To purists though, it IS disappointing. Without a doubt. Just another example of where JB gives us ALMOST but not quite what we wanted.
End rant.
EDIT:
Prototype:
View media item 2090466
Prototype:
View media item 2090471
Early Release YouTube video:
View media item 2090472
Early Release YouTube video:
View media item 2090474
One of AT's Early Release pics:
View media item 2090475
The other thing I've noticed is the font on the "NIKE" on the bottom of the shoe is visibly NOT as slanted as it was on the OGs and 2000s. I also think it looked better on the prototype.
Are either of these relatively minor details going to be dealbreakers to me? No. I'll still be getting my pairs.
But I'm not going to lie. These differences ARE ultimately disappointing.
When JB goes out of their way to charge an additional $30 per pair markup on top of an existing $65 per pair markup on decades old technology (OG Vs were $125, 2000s were $120), and justify it by publicizing and highlighting to consumers a process that they say will keep so-called "storied silhouettes" as close as possible to original designs and materials, and they then visibly deviate from that process, it's disappointing. Maybe that disappointment is amplified to people like me who have owned every single iteration of this model over the years, for whom it's one of our favorite sneakers ever. In the end I doubt younger consumers are going to care much. And it's not like they totally butchered the shoe.
It's not the earlier release of the ATC III for Christ's sake.
To purists though, it IS disappointing. Without a doubt. Just another example of where JB gives us ALMOST but not quite what we wanted.
End rant.
EDIT:
Prototype:
View media item 2090466
Prototype:
View media item 2090471
Early Release YouTube video:
View media item 2090472
Early Release YouTube video:
View media item 2090474
One of AT's Early Release pics:
View media item 2090475
Last edited:
- 8,799
- 10,386
NIK is at a 18 font, then the E is at like a 15. Somebody forgot to highlight the whole word during an edit in the design process.
Last edited:
- 42,891
- 43,456
Touché
Aquamanjay_
formerly jaylaw15
- 8,180
- 9,262
Maybe the height challenged E will help distinguish fakes.
View media item 2090504This is @AirThompson pic
View media item 2090504This is @AirThompson pic
- 622
- 869
UGH, is THAT what you think happened with the E? If true, that means there were a LOT of points in the manufacturing process that they could have caught this before the line in the factory ever got started. That is, IF Jordan Brand or its manufacturing partners had any kind of quality control.
Just the possibility that this is true now really pisses me off. This makes sense to me though. In the past I directed ops for a small clothing company. I think I know a little bit about the production process, LOL. I could imagine some E on some master spreadsheet within the design team being mis-formatted. This would be an inexcusable error. SOMEONE should have caught it. The owner at my old company would have had someone's head. Literally. I mean, like Lucy Liu prancing on top of the board room table in Kill Bill. LOL.
I can't imagine the man himself approving manufacturing to go ahead with a visibly misshapen E. But then again, maybe they're not running final prototypes by him anymore? Just a thought.
- 2,715
- 9,057
Well if you really wanna nitpick @Pain, the swoosh isn't crisp either.
It starts to lean toward the end, on that retail pair.
On the OG's, it was perfect. Oh, & you're not nitpicking @Pain. You're stating a very valid opinion. Repped G.
Last edited:
- 622
- 869
Well if you really wanna nitpick @Pain
, the swoosh isn't crisp either.It starts to lean toward the end, on that retail pair.
On the OG's, it was perfect.
TRUE! That too. LOL.
The Fresh Prince
formerly airsakuragi
- 13,535
- 9,570
Pair off of the J23app:
As you can see the E is uniform
As you can see the E is uniform
- 622
- 869
^^^That's a better look, but then why do the retail pairs people already actually have in their hands have the misshapen E? I hope somehow they come out looking like the above pic, but I won't hold my breath. And the Swooshes still aren't straight. LOL.
Last edited:
- 2,715
- 9,057
- 3,476
- 2,299
Let the nt denim cover it up.. it'll be alright
