THE OFFICIAL AIR MAX 1 THREAD

is Nike ever gonna show some love to men w/a pinnacle release for 87's? Those ones AMD just posted look good and the leather set that came out in March were nice as well. Anyone that wears a 12 and up is left holding their ****. What gives?
 
FrankWh1te said:
is Nike ever gonna show some love to men w/a pinnacle release for 87's? Those ones AMD just posted look good and the leather set that came out in March were nice as well. Anyone that wears a 12 and up is left holding their ****. What gives?
Click to expand...
pinnacle am1 and am90s are wmns only, so people that are wearing mens size 11.5 and larger are out of luck
 
Trying to learn here, why does it matter where they were made? Different shapes from different suppliers?
 
Different tools in different factories.

Nikes QC is so ****** lately rather than make the tools and send them to all factories, they allow the factories to produce their own.

So shape differs from country to country. QC with materials and construction differs between factories.

And Nike couldn't care less.

All about mass production, the consumer going out to buy 'some new shoes' and grabbin any nikes coz it looks ok.

Only people that notice and care are collectors and OGs.
 
Last edited:
You can't repeat the same process with the same tools for 30 years and counting without there being changes in things. Just not logical.

Sucks but its the reality and like a lot of people have said all of us here are a small percentage of the entire consumer base who notice the change in shape.
 
y'all keep talking about us vs them.  are there that many people aimlessly buying higher profile am1s?  or we talking gr stuff, and theyre cutting the same materials etc for higher profile am1s?  lets take the safaris for example.  is this really being geared towards and released to a mass audience? if so, then why so much exclusivity? 

there has to be another reason other than target audience for them to change the shape of the mold or whatever.  is it new research in ergonomics?  is it really about saving money on a newer shape?  is it materials that dont adhere to the old shape?  again, i cant see nike being like, oh the sneakerheads are 5% so lets change the shape to appease the 95% gr market.  thats not a good enough reason.  you would consider changing all the dyes and machinery as being more costly from a preexisting modality.  unless theres some type of long term profit.  maybe its easier to crank out the new shape than the former.  maybe there was more hand made parts of the old shape. 

someone help me understand. 
 
NomadicSole21 said:
You can't repeat the same process with the same tools for 30 years and counting without there being changes in things. Just not logical.

Sucks but its the reality and like a lot of people have said all of us here are a small percentage of the entire consumer base who notice the change in shape.
Click to expand...
Plenty of manufacturers particularly in Europe and Asia make products to the same standard they did as far back as 100 years ago. Housewares, clocks, fabrics, etc.
 
QC for nike does suck. had a big green spot on the toe box of my yellow HTM AM1s. they shipped them anyway. tried to accept the spot as not being that bad. then, called nike to see if they would compensate me for the issue. they didnt. so i sent them back for a refund.

i'm not f*****g around with nike anymore. if they send me inferior product, i am taking it right back and getting my money. the gets no love from now on.

just got a pair of simple stan smith mi adidas, and they were vastly superior to any iD product nike has put out. and they included extra laces and a dust bag, all of that for a few bucks more than retail. nike has no excuse.
 
i dont even buy GR AM1s. if i did actually see one i had to have, i have already accepted the fact that i will need to modify the toe box. all of them are completely f****d to me.
 
Look at NB MUK/MUSA lines, quality is there and possible today if you're happy to pay the extra cost. Although according to some true NB heads I've seen talk even they're not 100% true to OG shapes
 
Last edited:
unseen said:
 
y'all keep talking about us vs them.  are there that many people aimlessly buying higher profile am1s?  or we talking gr stuff, and theyre cutting the same materials etc for higher profile am1s?  lets take the safaris for example.  is this really being geared towards and released to a mass audience? if so, then why so much exclusivity? 

there has to be another reason other than target audience for them to change the shape of the mold or whatever.  is it new research in ergonomics?  is it really about saving money on a newer shape?  is it materials that dont adhere to the old shape?  again, i cant see nike being like, oh the sneakerheads are 5% so lets change the shape to appease the 95% gr market.  thats not a good enough reason.  you would consider changing all the dyes and machinery as being more costly from a preexisting modality.  unless theres some type of long term profit.  maybe its easier to crank out the new shape than the former.  maybe there was more hand made parts of the old shape. 

someone help me understand. 
Click to expand...
I think your going too deep with it. Nike is the only one who knows the reason for the shape change. As far as I know they have never addressed it. Everything else is just speculation. There is no 95% gr market vs 5% sneakerheads. 99% of the market is buying. GR shoes sell and when nike throws the limited word on a pair of AM1s they sell. Hypebeast don't care about the shape and so called true sneakerheads will snatch them up and then lie to themselves about the quality. They still make money even when pairs go on disco and outlet prices. It would take a bigger outcry like what happened with Jordan brand to change anything.
 
HTM iD's for today.

400
 
blankblank said:
 
I think your going too deep with it. Nike is the only one who knows the reason for the shape change. As far as I know they have never addressed it. Everything else is just speculation. There is no 95% gr market vs 5% sneakerheads. 99% of the market is buying. GR shoes sell and when nike throws the limited word on a pair of AM1s they sell. Hypebeast don't care about the shape and so called true sneakerheads will snatch them up and then lie to themselves about the quality. They still make money even when pairs go on disco and outlet prices. It would take a bigger outcry like what happened with Jordan brand to change anything.
Click to expand...
yes i agree but why then the shape change?  if ish wasnt broke, why fix it?  clearly something happened for them to make the change.  im a bit of a conspiracy theorist, so ima lean towards that more profit is being made this new way.  otherwise, theres no need to change. 
 
rawdawg34 said:
QC for nike does suck. had a big green spot on the toe box of my yellow HTM AM1s. they shipped them anyway. tried to accept the spot as not being that bad. then, called nike to see if they would compensate me for the issue. they didnt. so i sent them back for a refund.

i'm not f*****g around with nike anymore. if they send me inferior product, i am taking it right back and getting my money. the gets no love from now on.

just got a pair of simple stan smith mi adidas, and they were vastly superior to any iD product nike has put out. and they included extra laces and a dust bag, all of that for a few bucks more than retail. nike has no excuse.
Click to expand...
I feel the exact same way. The QC on Jordans is the worst, no question about that. From what I've noticed am's dont have too many problems but other brands I've never had a problem with. Off the top of my head I just had three pairs of ultra boost's delivered and every shoe was perfect. Nike needs to step it up because I've been returning pairs that have things wrong with them too, I've been convincing myself that the issues arent that bad but I'm done doing that now.
 
Last edited:
rawdawg34 said:
i dont even buy GR AM1s. if i did actually see one i had to have, i have already accepted the fact that i will need to modify the toe box. all of them are completely f****d to me.
Click to expand...
This doesn't only apply to GRs, although the hypebeasts tell themselves that QSs are better. They're not.

It's just a label.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

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