2018年05月25日

Air Jordan 1 “Royal” 2013 VS. 2017 Comparison

How many of you are planning on picking up the return of the Air Jordan 1 “Royal” on April 1st? I’m sure a lot of you guys answered yes, and for good reasoning too.


Jordan Brand is finally giving us a remastered release of the Air Jordan 1 Retro High OG “Royal” as they continue to bring back legendary original Air Jordans.

Last seen in 2013, the classic Air Jordan 1 will return in its OG high-cut that’s dressed in the traditional Black and Varsity Royal color scheme. The shoe features a clean Black leather upper with Royal overlays on the toe, heel and Nike Swoosh logos. Staying true to its heritage, the release will also come with OG Nike Air branding on the tongue and outsole.

Similar to recent remastered reissues, this Air Jordan 1 release compared to the 2013 version will come with better quality. Featuring a mix of smooth and premium textured leather that’s dressed in the OG Black and Varsity Royal with Nike Air branding throughout.

Look for the Air Jordan 1 Retro High OG “Royal” to release on April 1st at select Jordan Brand retailers. The retail price tag is set at $160 USD.

  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 20:10Comments(0)Air Jordan 11

2018年05月23日

Which is The Best Shoe to Resell: adidas or Air Jordan?

It’s a common question among beginner sneaker resellers who are not sure what brand to sell:

What’s better to resell, Adidas or Nike Jordan?

(if you want to know how to sell both and all brands of shoes profitably as a business, check out the Reseller’s Field Guide here.)

We will give an answer to at the end of this article. Although there is a winner in this article, this number one spot is both subjective and subject to change. However, for the following reasons, one of these two is the winner right now.

Let’s first dive in to what gives a shoe resale value to answer this question.

There are 3 main factors for shoe resale value:

History
Hype
Scarcity
So let’s rank Adidas vs Nike Jordan on these 3 factors.

Nike Jordan

History

Nike was born in 1964, co created by track athlete Phil Knight and his coach Bill Bowerman out of Oregon State.

It quickly rose to become the authority in athletic footwear for both track athletes, runners, and aerobic exercisers as it passed older competitors like Reebok in market share.

As Nike made a move in to the basketball arena, it was first met with mixed reviews. Nike needed the endorsement of a professional athlete. Tinker Hatfield was recently enlisted as Nike’s primary shoe designer. Nike and Tinker went for the biggest partnership possible in the basketball world, which was an agreement with the undisputed reigning king of the court Michael Jordan, but it wouldn’t be easy.

Nike had first partnered with Jordan to make the Air Jordan 1, and it remains one of the great Jordan designs with excellent resale value to this day. However, after the Air Jordan 2, it seemed that Jordan was losing interest in the continued partnership with Nike. Nike needed to do something to keep the Jordan brand valuable.

The year was 1985, and Tinker Hatfield and Nike were able to arrange a meeting with Jordan, but the basketball great arrived hours late and it seemed like he was not interested at all in the partnership.

Tinker then unveiled the Air Jordan 3 black cement. Jordan was so impressed with the overall design, with both its luxurious looks and its unprecedented comfort and performance, as well as its bold elephant print accents which became a Jordan signature of many shoes that were valuable on the resale market.

Based on this, Jordan’s History is quite strong. It has had resellable shoes for over 30 years and continues to have models every month that have resale value.

Hype


The hype for Jordans is real. Ever since Jordans released online in the early 2000s, there has been a large group of people going after Nike Jordans to profit on the resale market, with increasingly sophisticated methods as the years go by.

However, the hype in recent years, especially 2017, has shown to drop drastically as Jordans sat on shelves and historically hyped releases like the Nike Air Jordan 11 which had been releasing with great resale value every December, in 2017 its “Win Like 96” Variation struggled to resell with the hype of past 11’s.

The Air Jordan 11 Win Like 96 is just one of my examples of Jordans that did not do well last year.

However, last year was also the debut of the Kaws Jordan 4’s which saw resale value in the thousands of dollars, as well as a collaboration with Off-White for a whole slew of Jordans that were worth close to or over $1,000. Nike also has released some of the most hyped sneakers of all time with Kanye West and the Air Yeezys, the Air Mags from Back to the Future, and Drake OVO Jordans, which each have aftermarket values in the thousands of dollars presently or at some point in the recent past.

On the overall hype scale, Nike and its Jordans are still up there, but there are so many models to sort through, it is hard to know which shoes are best to resell or which shoes to avoid as possible flops or financial losses.

Scarcity


There are so many Jordans now, including lifestyle models like the Air Jordan Future and Eclipse which both never have resale value. Jordans are everywhere and are not the least bit scarce as a whole.

However, for rare models like certain Retro Jordans, scarcity seems to be making a come back in the upcoming years.

Jordans are becoming harder to buy in 2018, first told at the end of 2017, and proven by the resale value and difficulty to get of recent releases like the Air Jordan 1 Bred toe. This increase in current scarcity will certainly revitalize Nike Jordan’s spot as a great sneaker to resell.

Adidas

History


The brand with three stripes is actually older than Nike, having started in 1949. Although it had a solid run of releasing athletic shoes, it was more well known in the soccer arena than it was in the basketball court, and there is much more resale value in the latter than in the former. Adidas never did have the longevity or greatness of a partnership like Nike did with Michael “Air” Jordan, but it did have greats like Kareem Abdul Jabbar, for which the three stripes brand had the very first basketball player endorsed sneaker in history with its Adidas Superstars, years before Nike and its Air Jordan. However, these Adidas Superstars were not a unique design as Adidas released many non Jabbar superstars. Surprisingly, the Kareem Abdul Jabbar is known more to depreciate than to have resale value, with pairs sitting as low as $10 on eBay at the time of this writing in March of 2018.

2015 marked the beginning of a renaissance for Adidas with its partnership with Kanye West made official, kicking it off with the Yeezy Boost. Its boost technology spread on to many more valuable pairs of sneakers like the UltraBoost, NMD and Pharrell Human Race, some of which commanded resale values that greatly surpassed that of many Nike Air Jordans.

Adidas surpassed the market share of Nike’s Jordan brand for the first time ever in 2017. However, with new scarcity to Jordan models for a revitalized hype and resale value, Adidas will have to fight to maintain its number one spot.

 

Hype


Thanks almost entirely to its partnership with Kanye West, Adidas is reaching a level of hype that a lot of the younger crowd (who don’t know the full history of Nike Air Jordans) prefers to Nike and its Jordan brand. Adidas’ UltraBoost technology and cozy Primeknit technology has garnered copycats from brands like Skechers and Zara. Copying is a classic form of flattery and also a sign of hype in the shoe resale world.

Hype also centers around celebrity partnerships. Following its marriage with Kanye West, who is the undisputed king with a Midas touch for a shoe company, Adidas is looking to add Drake to its team as soon as this year in 2018, which will make things very interesting and certainly birth some of the hottest and most hyped shoes to date with juicy profit margins.

Interestingly, Yeezy hype is fading. Kanye arguably went too far in his newfound creative freedom and released one too many (or five too many) Yeezy models that saw record lows in resale, with more than one shoe model, including the Yeezy 950 and the Yeezy cleats losing resale value. Familiarity creates boredom: have you ever heard your favorite song too many times and then gotten sick of it? Kanye is dangerously close to doing this with the Yeezy brand and its shoes.

Other Adidas models like the Human Race by Pharrell and new Bape collaborations remain super hyped, as do NMDs and UltraBoost in the fashion world as Adidas continues to innovate and maintain its hype level.

Scarcity


The Adidas Yeezys 350 go from impossible to get to just about impossible to get. Even when Yeezys have low resale value and they are considered “general release” by Yeezy standards, a lot of people left empty handed who wanted a pair. Examples include the recently released Beluga 2.0’s and Blue Tints which values dropped to below 100% above retail for the first time ever for Yeezys, which remained scarce despite large release numbers since the number of people trying to get them was so large.

On top of Yeezys being hard to get regardless of how many there are, recent hard to get shoes like the Adidas Dame 4 “Bape” and the Adidas Pharrell HU NMD prove that the Adidas models worth reselling remain scarce and hard to get, making the resale value high.

 

Conclusion

Which shoe brand is better to resell, Adidas or Nike Jordan?

Although Adidas has been Pepsi in comparison to Nike as Coca Cola, it seems like in 2018 the tables are turning. Nike is putting up a fight by making Jordans rare again, but Adidas definitely has the attention of the younger crowd who makes up a large part of the resale community. Coupled with the supposed upcoming collaboration with Drake and his OVO brand, Adidas is better overall to resell if you were to just focus on one shoe, especially given that Yeezys are an Adidas shoe.

Jordan came in a terribly close second place and collaborations like its “Off-White”, KAWS, and of course Supreme, make it hard to overlook. However, as the world changes and Adidas aggressively innovates, and since there had to be just one winner in this match, Adidas will win this one, in an overtime that is arguably still going until the partnership between Drake and Adidas is official.

Of course it’s best to sell both of them, and to make tons of money doing it.

For those curious about what it takes to do so, and for the best step by step guide complete with history and info about Sneaker bots, streetwear and more, have a look at the full 5 part field guide available exclusively on this site.  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 19:02Comments(0)

2018年05月22日

Better Air Jordan 11: “Gamma” or “Cap and Gown”

Every year Jordan Brand either releases original or new colorways of the Air Jordan 11 typically during the holiday season.


Back in 2014, they introduced the Air Jordan 11 Gamma, which featured a Stealthy all-Black upper highlighted with Gamma Blue and Varsity Maize accents.The Jordan Brand serves up an all-new colorway of the iconic Air Jordan 11 for Holiday '13. This retro features a black cordura and patent leather upper with Gamma Blue 11's Jumpman Branding. Varsity Maize provides subtle detailing on the tongue and heel. A blue-tinted translucent outsole caps off the look below

For May 2018, Jordan Brand will be releasing a dressed-up Air Jordan 11 Cap and Gown that also comes in a full Black-based upper with premium detailing. It comes with a suede base, Metallic Jumpman logos and laces that resembles graduation cords.the Air Jordan 11 ‘Cap and Gown’ which will release on May 26th.


While both pairs strongly resemble one another, if you could only select one, which would it be?  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 18:44Comments(0)

2018年05月18日

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Flytrap head-to-head performance review

Affordable entries to Nike Basketball’s signature lines have a track record of not just being great values, but great sneakers, period. Devoid of frivolous gimmicks and not-quite-ready-for-basketball tech features, sneakers like the KD 2, Kyrie 1, and PG 1 put all of their resources where they mattered most: performance.

Those aforementioned examples utilized tried and true tech and combined it with “best practices” design elements to create sneakers that just worked. They may not have broken much ground, but they represented the full realization of past innovations.

Thanks to that history, last October’s announcement of an even more affordable addition to Kyrie Irving’s signature line was welcomed with open arms. It offered the potential to not only make the line more accessible to Irving’s fanbase, but offer another viable performance option for players who prefer no-frills models on court.

Based on my cushioning preferences and its unique fit system, the $80 Nike Kyrie Flytrap looks like an even more attractive sneaker than the $120 Nike Kyrie on paper. But how do those features translate to performance?.

Hover over the dots below for a head-to-head breakdown of the two models, and an analysis of which one does it better.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Fit

Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
It may not be fancy, but the Kyrie 4’s half-bootie construction allows for a glove-like fit thanks to its sculpted shape and traditional eyestay construction. When fully tightened, the upper fully engages and hugs the foot, offering a reassuring fit that inspires confidence through cuts. Unfortunately, my first time lacing the shoe up resulted in a ripped eyelet. To the shoe’s credit though, the reinforced backing prevented the rip from tearing completely though, and it caused no further issues.

The concept behind the Flytrap’s closure system is a solid one, but the execution falls flat thanks to a sloppy overall shape and sub-par materials. I typically only play in a single pair of socks, but had to double up in order to fill some of the excess space that couldn’t be tightened out of the shoe when fully laced. Going down a half size may help alleviate some of the extra room, but it is more of a volume issue than length.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Ankle Support

Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
The Kyrie 4 and Flytrap have different cuts, but both rely on the collar padding to provide heel lockdown. In theory, they should match up well based on utilizing the same philosophy on ankle support, but the corners cut on materials in the Flytrap give a clear advantage to the more expensive Kyrie 4. The padding, while shaped properly, is just not dense enough to actually engage and fully stabilize the heel. The Flytrap’s ankle support isn’t necessarily bad, just not as comfortable or confidence-inspiring as the 4.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Cushioning

Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
My favorite cushioning configuration from Nike is Zoom Air in the forefoot and and foam in the heel because I find it provides a perfect combination of responsiveness and impact protection where each is most needed. That should have boded well for the Flytrap, but not all Zoom Air is created equal. The bag found here is comically small—roughly the size and shape of a quarter—and about as effective. It’s placed directly under the ball of the big toe, which is fine, but it’s so low volume that it offers nothing in terms of response. Even the shoe’s insole is of the cheapest persuasion possible; there’s not as much as a Nike logo screen printed on the wafer-thin unit.

Meanwhile, the Kyrie 4 improved greatly in the comfort department over the nike Kyrie 3, despite using the same configuration of heel Zoom and forefoot foam. I found the 3’s ride to be downright harsh, but the addition of a Cushlon midsole turned the cushioning into one of the high points of the 4. It’s not as protective as a shoe like the LeBron 15 with its massive Zoom Max hybrid units, but for players who want more court feel, it’s an excellent compromise.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Traction

Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
Traction is the one area where the Kyrie 4 and Flytrap share the most similarities, and it’s a positive point for both shoes. But despite using a very similar traction pattern, the Kyrie 4 edges out the Flytrap thanks to its level of refinement. The large zig-zag groove that runs up the middle of the sole enhances its radiused shape and offers a sticky surface regardless of the angle from which it engages. It also has the additional benefit of creating a smoother transition. That same groove is implied on the Flytrap, but doesn’t offer the full benefits of the effectively decoupled design of the 4.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Conclusion
Image via Nike
Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
The Nike Kyrie 4 tops the Flytrap in almost every measurable category, including value. “Affordable” doesn’t always equate with “good value”—sometimes, like in the case of the Kyrie Flytrap, it mostly means “cheap.”

It’s commendable for Nike to offer such a budget-conscious option for Irving’s fans, but it’s just not one I can recommend from a performance standpoint. There’s simply not enough support and protection other than for the smallest and lightest of players. Furthermore, excellent performers like the PG1 have been regularly available on sale for even less than the Flytrap’s $80 retail price, rendering it’s primary selling point moot.

But the Kyrie 4 doesn’t just win this head-to-head matchup because the Flytrap is so bad. The Flytrap feels so cheap that it doesn’t even feel like it was made by Nike—but the Kyrie 4 is good in its own right. While not spectacular at any one thing, it’s a well-rounded sneaker that does pretty much everything one could ask for in a performance model, at a price point that’s still relatively affordable in context of the signature sneaker world. And it feels downright premium in direct comparison.  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 17:48Comments(0)

2018年05月18日

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Flytrap head-to-head performance review

Affordable entries to Nike Basketball’s signature lines have a track record of not just being great values, but great sneakers, period. Devoid of frivolous gimmicks and not-quite-ready-for-basketball tech features, sneakers like the KD 2, Kyrie 1, and PG 1 put all of their resources where they mattered most: performance.

Those aforementioned examples utilized tried and true tech and combined it with “best practices” design elements to create sneakers that just worked. They may not have broken much ground, but they represented the full realization of past innovations.

Thanks to that history, last October’s announcement of an even more affordable addition to Kyrie Irving’s signature line was welcomed with open arms. It offered the potential to not only make the line more accessible to Irving’s fanbase, but offer another viable performance option for players who prefer no-frills models on court.

Based on my cushioning preferences and its unique fit system, the $80 Nike Kyrie Flytrap looks like an even more attractive sneaker than the $120 Nike Kyrie on paper. But how do those features translate to performance?.

Hover over the dots below for a head-to-head breakdown of the two models, and an analysis of which one does it better.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Fit

Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
It may not be fancy, but the Kyrie 4’s half-bootie construction allows for a glove-like fit thanks to its sculpted shape and traditional eyestay construction. When fully tightened, the upper fully engages and hugs the foot, offering a reassuring fit that inspires confidence through cuts. Unfortunately, my first time lacing the shoe up resulted in a ripped eyelet. To the shoe’s credit though, the reinforced backing prevented the rip from tearing completely though, and it caused no further issues.

The concept behind the Flytrap’s closure system is a solid one, but the execution falls flat thanks to a sloppy overall shape and sub-par materials. I typically only play in a single pair of socks, but had to double up in order to fill some of the excess space that couldn’t be tightened out of the shoe when fully laced. Going down a half size may help alleviate some of the extra room, but it is more of a volume issue than length.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Ankle Support

Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
The Kyrie 4 and Flytrap have different cuts, but both rely on the collar padding to provide heel lockdown. In theory, they should match up well based on utilizing the same philosophy on ankle support, but the corners cut on materials in the Flytrap give a clear advantage to the more expensive Kyrie 4. The padding, while shaped properly, is just not dense enough to actually engage and fully stabilize the heel. The Flytrap’s ankle support isn’t necessarily bad, just not as comfortable or confidence-inspiring as the 4.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Cushioning

Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
My favorite cushioning configuration from Nike is Zoom Air in the forefoot and and foam in the heel because I find it provides a perfect combination of responsiveness and impact protection where each is most needed. That should have boded well for the Flytrap, but not all Zoom Air is created equal. The bag found here is comically small—roughly the size and shape of a quarter—and about as effective. It’s placed directly under the ball of the big toe, which is fine, but it’s so low volume that it offers nothing in terms of response. Even the shoe’s insole is of the cheapest persuasion possible; there’s not as much as a Nike logo screen printed on the wafer-thin unit.

Meanwhile, the Kyrie 4 improved greatly in the comfort department over the nike Kyrie 3, despite using the same configuration of heel Zoom and forefoot foam. I found the 3’s ride to be downright harsh, but the addition of a Cushlon midsole turned the cushioning into one of the high points of the 4. It’s not as protective as a shoe like the LeBron 15 with its massive Zoom Max hybrid units, but for players who want more court feel, it’s an excellent compromise.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Traction

Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
Traction is the one area where the Kyrie 4 and Flytrap share the most similarities, and it’s a positive point for both shoes. But despite using a very similar traction pattern, the Kyrie 4 edges out the Flytrap thanks to its level of refinement. The large zig-zag groove that runs up the middle of the sole enhances its radiused shape and offers a sticky surface regardless of the angle from which it engages. It also has the additional benefit of creating a smoother transition. That same groove is implied on the Flytrap, but doesn’t offer the full benefits of the effectively decoupled design of the 4.

Nike Kyrie 4 vs. Nike Kyrie Flytrap - Conclusion
Image via Nike
Advantage: Nike Kyrie 4
The Nike Kyrie 4 tops the Flytrap in almost every measurable category, including value. “Affordable” doesn’t always equate with “good value”—sometimes, like in the case of the Kyrie Flytrap, it mostly means “cheap.”

It’s commendable for Nike to offer such a budget-conscious option for Irving’s fans, but it’s just not one I can recommend from a performance standpoint. There’s simply not enough support and protection other than for the smallest and lightest of players. Furthermore, excellent performers like the PG1 have been regularly available on sale for even less than the Flytrap’s $80 retail price, rendering it’s primary selling point moot.

But the Kyrie 4 doesn’t just win this head-to-head matchup because the Flytrap is so bad. The Flytrap feels so cheap that it doesn’t even feel like it was made by Nike—but the Kyrie 4 is good in its own right. While not spectacular at any one thing, it’s a well-rounded sneaker that does pretty much everything one could ask for in a performance model, at a price point that’s still relatively affordable in context of the signature sneaker world. And it feels downright premium in direct comparison.  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 17:44Comments(0)

2018年05月17日

Air Jordan 10 Comparison: Orignal 1995 Vs 2015 Remastered

Remastered or (re) diculously priced ?

I used to be a huge Air Jordan 10 Collector up until 2005/2006 when retro quality quickly went downhill.  Glue spots galore, cheap materials, and sudden increases in prices really turned me off  so I was intrigued by the entire “remastered” idea. Was this an admission by Jordan Brand that they were making pure shit for the past ten years ? In my eyes, yes but we all know quality was not JBs top priority. To make amends, JB has promised better quality with an uptick in price. Let’s see how they compare.

Original 1995 Orlando Magic Jordan X DS

2015 Jordan X “Double Nickle” DS

MATERIALS

Leather quality appears almost identical to the originals. It seems more manufactured than the OG, meaning the OG pair had smooth, non textured spots whereas the retro looks exactly the same all the way around the shoe.

 Above: retro, below OG

Materials get a thumbs up from me but the AJ X never got hit by the bad quality bug as bad as other retros such as the IV V and VI. I’ll see if I can find my other Air Jordan 14 Desert Sand from 2018.

STITCHING AND GLUE

Very happy to say my pair didn’t have any excess glue spots or poor stitching



Above: retro, notice how smooth the second (bottom) layer of leather is? Almost too smooth and fake looking  but that’s just me being nitpicky (compare to below)

below OG



MIDSOLE AND SOLE

Spot on again



TONGUE

OG 

Retro



The stamping on the retro jordans is actually more defined and clearer than the original.  The tongue’s material on the retro feels stiffer so maybe that’s why they were able to print it more clearly

BOXES

Nothing beats an OG box sorry lol



.

PRICING

The OG Aj X retailed for $125 20 years ago so taking inflation into account you get $192.

 

Although pricing is the same, Nike’s economy of scale has increased a lot so they are still making a lot more off these shoes than back in 1995.  In other words, Since they have grown so much in 20 years , production has increased , manufacturing is way more efficient and material prices have dropped since they buy so much more nowadays.

Overall though, as a big Aj collector, I can say that these remastered Aj Xs look and feel great, and are not over priced. If the rest of the remastered Jordans look like this I wouldn’t hesitate to buy them. Good job Jordan Brand !  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 18:41Comments(0)

2018年05月16日

Better Air Jordan 3: “True Blue” or “Seoul”

Jordan Brand is currently celebrating the 30th Anniversary of the Air Jordan 3 in 2018. For the occasion, there has been a few OG and new colorways that have debuted.

One OG pair that didn’t arrive during its celebration is the “True Blue” colorway, which was last released back in 2016. The remastered version came with “Nike Air” logos on the heels.

Technically, the 2016 Nike Air Jordan 3 will be the second time we see them release, the first of course being in 1988. We saw the True Blue 3 retro for the first time in 2001 which came with the Jumpman branding. We once again saw this pair release in 2011 when the brand celebrated the 23rd anniversary of the shoes. They still came with Jumpman branding, but did have the original style box.

For 2016, the brand will return the True Blue Jordan 3 just like the originals. Featuring tumbled and smooth leather through the uppers, while Blue runs through the mudguard, Nike Air branding on the heel, eyelets and liner. The elephant print is expected to return just like in 1988, which will wrap the heel, toe box and hinted on the uppers. The last details are a White midsole and Grey outsole.

Released in very limited quantities and only available in South Korea, the “Seoul” Air Jordan 3 was one of the newer colorway that arrived in 2018. This special edition release celebrates two sports milestones that took place in 1988: the NBA Slam Dunk contest won by Michael Jordan after taking flight from the free throw line, and the Summer Olympics in Seoul, South Korea.

The Air Jordan 3 Seoul isThe Taegukgi (Korean flag) inspires the shoe’s overall color scheme, with the “taeguk” symbol expressed through the lining and collar’s blue and red and the white upper representing peace and purity (as it does on the flag). 서울 (Seoul) is featured on the left inner tongue, while the 1988 summer games motto 화합과 전진 (Harmony and Progress) is featured on the right inner tongue. The heel reads “Nike Air” in a clear nod to the original Air Jordan 3.

While majority of us weren’t able to get our hands on the “Seoul” Air Jordan 3, if you did have the option of picking one of these to buy for retail, which would it be?  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 19:23Comments(0)jordan 7

2018年05月15日

Jordan Fly Lockdown Performance Review

Jordan Brand has had a killer season for performance, but a new silhouette has dropped with hardly any warning or hype. So how does the Jordan Fly Lockdown stack up against the rest of the lineup? Here we go…

Circles and herringbone, two patterns that Jordan Brand has proven to work in the past, are both featured on the sole of the Jordan Fly Lockdown. The forefoot has the large concentric circles for traction under the middle of the forefoot, and it works. However, breaking up the circles is a thick, wide-spaced herringbone pattern that leads to the medial side, where a player would toe off and need that extra bite. The circles come back in under the heel with the herringbone covering the midfoot.

The magic of this pattern is the spacing. Looking like the Death Star tunnels — with gaps and spaces placed throughout the sole — the treads are wide and deep and brush dirt away and out. I think I wiped twice during play for the entire length of this review. Not twice a game, or twice a night, but twice, period. It works.

One little detail: it doesn’t bite the floor in that loud, screeching stop like the Kobe 9 or Rose 7. It’s a smooth, quiet stop, but it is a serious stop.

Outdoors? This is a two-part answer; the tread pattern is deep and wide, so there is lots of rubber to burn through. However, you will burn through it because it is a softer rubber than Nike’s XDR soles. Honestly, if the court isn’t extremely rough, you should be good for a summer of play.
While Zoom Air and injected Phylon have been around before most of you were born, this setup would seem to be outdated. When done right, however, there are very few systems better for basketball. The Jordan Fly Lockdown is extremely close to getting it right, and if I was a lighter high-flyer these would have been perfect.

The forefoot Zoom feels bottom-loaded so the initial response isn’t felt, but when playing the forefoot feels low and quick with no impact problems at all. Coupled with the great forefoot traction the Fly Lockdown is one of the quickest-feeling shoes I have played in recently.

The midfoot and heel are just Phylon, but whatever Nike has decided to do with its normal budget foam lately, thank you! When Phylon first appeared it was a softer carrier (or in some budget cases, the whole midsole), and it felt great underfoot. Over the past couple of years, Phylon became stiff and unforgiving and basically sucked @$$. This season, the real Phylon has made a reappearance (along with Cushlon on the Kyrie 4) and the feel is outstanding.

My only complaint — and again, I weigh in at 200 lbs on a 5′ 10″ frame — is that the Phylon is too soft. I could feel the Phylon compress and rebound, which made the heel-to-toe transition seem a little slow. If you are a quicker guard/forward who is light on your feet, this won’t be an issue at all and the Jordan Fly Lockdown should feel great on-court.

First of all, some sites say that the Jordan Fly Lockdown features a “mixed-media upper of leather, synthetics, and textile.” Leather shouldn’t even be mentioned because it is only on the top of the tongue — not exactly a piece for performance. What we do get with the textile is a form-fitting upper that flexes in all the right ways but holds solid where it needs to.

The material is not exactly a woven like the Jordan 32’s Flyknit or even the Jordan 29, but more like the Jordan 15 — wide bands of fabric woven over and under so one strand will pull against the other, providing lateral stability when playing but allowing the toebox to flex freely while running. I know, it’s an evolution of the Jordan 19 lace cover concept. I never understood how an independent lace cover was supposed to provide containment, but the Jordan Fly Lockdown does. Fuse is found on the high-wear areas of the toebox, and the midfoot laces almost mimic the Jordan III look with rubber lace holes. Otherwise, all textile, all the time.

By using a full textile upper, the Jordan Fly Lockdown provides great — you guessed it — lockdown. When first stepping into the shoe you will notice the forefoot is cut narrow but it isn’t restrictive (thank you again textile upper).

The lacing system is both traditional and internal, but it’s straight-forward; it allows the shoe to be pulled easily around the foot. The heel has a thick area of padding just around the ankle area, and coupled with the padded tongue, it takes up any dead space in the area for complete…yeah, lockdown. There is seriously no movement inside the shoe when laced tight, although I did get a little lace pressure at the next-to-top lace hole where it switches from the runner eyelets back to one internal loop. No numbness, but you may have to loosen slightly to prevent irritation.

As for length and sizing, definitely stay true-to-size unless you are super-wide. I am a little wider but not enough to switch from a normal D, and the Jordan Fly Lockdown fit me perfectly. I had about a thumbs-width in the length of the toebox (which is normal for me), so if you want that serious 1:1 fit, you could go a half size down.

For a textile upper and a lower cut, the support isn’t bad. The base is wide and solid, with a forefoot outrigger and one of the strangest midsole formations you will see anywhere. While the outrigger is on the smaller side, it works perfectly to keep you from rolling over on hard slides and cuts.

The midfoot rollbar is where it is at though. We have seen companies try constructs like this before, but Jordan Brand has taken it to an aesthetic next level by incorporating a side-bumper into the overall upper design. While I never felt the tool being used when playing, the idea works (I am talking about the grey bridge running along the midfoot; when the shoe rolls over laterally it should stop the extreme rolls that lead to ankle injuries).

The heel design of the Jordan Fly Lockdown is also serious, with the midsole rising up and forming the heel counter and an extended heel clip. Your foot sits down around MJ’s waist so there is plenty of stiffness to hold you down and in. This also helps on lateral stability if you happen to land back on your heels and — especially for me, feeling the midsole was too soft in the heel — not roll over on bad landings.

The ankle area is, again, completely locked in with the lacing and internal padding. The cool heel loop, that looks like the one used on the Off-White x Converse , is just that — cool, but with no real purpose.

Jordan Brand was started with performance in mind — specifically, for the greatest basketball player who ever lived. The 2017-2018 season has been a complete return to that ethos. The Jordan Fly Lockdown is, for pricing purposes, a budget Jordan model that performs like a signature shoe (which, if rumors are true, is exactly what the shoe was in the first place).

If you need a quick, stable, low-riding foot rocket look no further than Jordan Fly Lockdown. If you need a solid cushioning base or a little more lateral containment in the forefoot, or if you are a bigger post player looking for ankle coverage, the Fly Lockdown may not be for you (but the Jordan Why Not Zer0.1 may be). This is the year Jordan Brand has offered great performance for every player, and the Jordan Fly Lockdown only strengthens the lineup. It’s a good year to be a Jumpman fan.  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 17:42Comments(0)Air Jordan 11

2018年05月14日

Why the Remastered “Chicago” Jordan 1 is a Must-Have

It would not be hyperbolic—or, you know, wrong—to say that the Air Jordan 1 Chicago was the shoe that changed everything. In fact, if anything, that’s not saying enough. It would be more fair to say that the Air Jordan 1 started everything. It didn’t make Michael Jordan—he did that by himself—but it was there at the start as he, the Chicago Bulls, and Nike became juggernauts. The Air Jordan 1 wasn’t the first basketball sneaker, not by a long shot, but it was the first basketball sneaker that transcended basketball while it was still new. Designed in Portland, Ore. and worn in Chicago, it became a nationwide phenomenon before conquering the world.Let’s get more specific: This is about the red/black/white Air Jordan 1—the one that wasn’t banned. The black and red pair had its Letterman moment, but the red/black/white pair was the version Michael Jordan wore most often, from November ’84 in his rookie year, to April of ’86, when no less than Larry Bird called him “God disguised as Michael Jordan.”
















  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 12:28Comments(0)

2018年05月11日

Air Jordan 32 Low REVIEW A Comprehensive Comparison

I always want to test out and review as many shoes as I can since every single player likes different types of shoes. Some like lows, some prefer the mids or even the highs. Today, we got a low top version of the Air Jordan 32 to the test. This will be a quick review detailing all the differences from the Mid, which I already made a review on.

I’ll talk about the shoe’s tech specs, the fit, performance, the upper and decide if it’s worth the price. By then, you’ll be able to decide which version you like more. Let’s start the Air Jordan 32 Low review!

THE TECH
ZOOM AIR & FLIGHTSPEED

The same cushion setup is present – ZOOM AIR units in the heel and forefoot areas, along with the torsional FlightSpeed plate that smoothens out step transitions, provides stability and properly activates the ZOOM units for maximum energy return.
FLYKNIT

We also have the same Flyknit upper construction. If you read the Mid review, you know it – this is as close to 100% pure Flyknit as it gets. It’s awesome.

FIT
SAME THING PLUS ROOM FOR THE ANKLE

So the fit experience is overall very similar to the Mid simply because all the tech, materials and construction is identical. The only difference is the absence of the relatively high ankle collar.

The shoe fits great after a break-in period. It’s comfortable, soft on the inside, has proper lockdown and I experienced zero major issues (no dead space, slipping etc.). Go true to size whether you’re a narrow, regular or wide footer. The Flyknit will gladly mold to your foot shape in time.

The key difference from the Mid was how much more free my ankle was (duh). The shoe doesn’t really weigh less without the collar but it does feel that way just a tad bit. If you want more mobility and speed with the cost of no ankle protection, go with the Low.

PERFORMANCE
CUSHION

There’s no reason to talk about the cushion setup since it’s excatly the same. Balanced, versatile, more on the responsive side, some impact protection. These would be the ke phrases to describe the Jordan 32’s cushioning.
TRACTION

Once again, the same outsole = same traction. Fantastic grip but pretty sensitive to dust and not really durable enough for proper outdoor play. Not that you’d want to spend $160 for an outdoor beater.
SUPPORT

This is where I felt the biggest difference from the mid top.  I felt that the Mid was relatively restricting and bulky. That doesn’t take away the fact that the shoe does support you and lock you in nicely. If you prefer a bit more mobility and comfort though, I think the Low does that better.

You will lose the potential ankle protection and extra lockdown in the upper foot area but it’s not really a drastic loss. I’ve played in shoes that basically have useless ankle collars and while this may not be one of them – it’s not on the opposite side either.

UPPER
IDENTICAL – STILL PREMIUM

The same Flyknit at the front and synthetic leather at back combo is back and it’s still awesome. From the Air Jordan XXX1 to this one, this upper just works. Legit pure Flyknit at the front makes for one hell of an experience in terms of softness, comfort, mobility and lightness.

The back where the leather sits also does a nice job of locking in the heel, securing and supporting.

Overall, an excellent material combo that kills it performance-wise..

PRICE VS. QUALITY
THE SAME SHOE FOR CHEAPER

Comparing to the $185 Mid’s, this is fantastic deal for $160. Yeah, it’s still expensive these days but you pretty much get the same shoe with a 5% difference for $15 less.

You won’t lose much by taking the Low’s, so if you’re targetting the AJ 32, getting the low top option is definitely a good idea in my opinion

OVERALL
BEST FOR ANY MEDIUM-HEAVY PLAYER

The Air Jordan 32, mid or low, are great shoes that do what they’re supposed to do. They are comfortable, provide good traction, solid cushioning, confident support and a fantastic upper. The price is high comparing to recent budget models that are really good. But if you’re willing to pay for it, $160 AJ 32 Low is pretty damn worth it.

Okay, that’s it for the review! I hope you found it useful!  


Posted by Newtruckspring.com - suspension parts at 18:35Comments(0)