Nike Air Jordan Retro Metallic V - 7/23/16

[sthebest]

My local Finishline has these but aren't releasing them yet. Very impressive in person. 3m is close to what it looked like on the OGs


View media item 2072251

 

[cobrab19]

My local Finishline has these but aren't releasing them yet. Very impressive in person. 3m is close to what it looked like on the OGs


View media item 2072251

What no early release?

 

[x-alt]

My local Finishline has these but aren't releasing them yet. Very impressive in person. 3m is close to what it looked like on the OGs

Nah the 3m is inzein on the 2000's and OGs.

 

[Aquamanjay_]

They made it better lol

 

[justed381]

They made it better lol

Relative to the 2011s that is a true statement. I've seen a lot of various 2016 pics, some showing good 3M and others showing weak 3M. Looking forward to Nike pics of the shoe. Should be soon.

 

[sthebest]

Nah the 3m is inzein on the 2000's and OGs.

Compared to what we've been getting, it's a lot better. The 3m doesn't look spotty like the 2006-2015 5s have looked. The shine looks a lot better. I've owned 1990 Jordan 5s and 2000 Jordan 5s as a adult and can attest that these are close to the 3m from the 1990 5s. The 2000 5s had a tongue chipping problem and that's one of the reasons they changed it. And when that material chips, it can't be repaired. The 1990 5s were infinitely more durable.

 

[sthebest]

Comparison of my supreme 5s to the 2016 Metallica. The 3M isn't spotted like on the supremes. It's a consistent shine, really bright

View media item 2072787
View media item 2072789

 

[jhaime21]

The top 3m looks cleaner but the bottom 3m looks louder. I prefer the latter. I hope that is what we are getting!!

 

[justed381]

The top 3m looks cleaner but the bottom 3m looks louder. I prefer the latter. I hope that is what we are getting!!

If that pair is from finish line I can't imagine how it would be different from what we are getting.

 

[sthebest]

The top 3m looks cleaner but the bottom 3m looks louder. I prefer the latter. I hope that is what we are getting!!

The bottom 3M IS what we're getting. I took both pictures myself. The 3m looks kinda glossy but it's really a big improvement over what we've been getting. It's a similar, if not the same, 3M that we got on the BIN 23 5s.

Other things worth noting

-only downfall is these is the blue tinted sole. But that will fade in a few months
-shape looks REALLY good. They look a lot like the 2000 pair and did away with the boot like toebox

 

[jhaime21]

These will be my first pair of 5s. Im glad i hopped on the JB bandwagon at the right time. Some the previous ones definitely look weaker.

 

[negrotastic]

These will be my first pair of 5s. Im glad i hopped on the JB bandwagon at the right time. Some the previous ones definitely look weaker.

These will be my first 5s as well

 

[airthompson]

View media item 2072845One of the releases I was excited for this year. Was a tad discouraged about the translucent blue outsole, and different material scotch-brite on the tongue. The ankle bumps are actually padded...PADDED! No more ankle padding that just deflates when pressed, making them virtually obsolete. The tongue and blue tint soles isn't as bad as the early pairs showed. If you have, or felt the Supreme 5s it's similar to those. Nice plush interior was missing on the V's after the '07 retros, very soft insole you'll feel when you step, and nice smooth grain of durabuck upper.

 

[Aquamanjay_]

View media item 2072845One of the releases I was excited for this year. Was a tad discouraged about the translucent blue outsole, and different material scotch-brite on the tongue. The ankle bumps are actually padded...PADDED! No more ankle padding that just deflates when pressed, making them virtually obsolete. The tongue and blue tint soles isn't as bad as the early pairs showed. If you have, or felt the Supreme 5s it's similar to those. Nice plush interior was missing on the V's after the '07 retros, very soft insole you'll feel when you step, and nice smooth grain of durabuck upper.

can we get some additional pics?

 

[jsonmyfeetz]

View media item 2072845One of the releases I was excited for this year. Was a tad discouraged about the translucent blue outsole, and different material scotch-brite on the tongue. The ankle bumps are actually padded...PADDED! No more ankle padding that just deflates when pressed, making them virtually obsolete. The tongue and blue tint soles isn't as bad as the early pairs showed. If you have, or felt the Supreme 5s it's similar to those. Nice plush interior was missing on the V's after the '07 retros, very soft insole you'll feel when you step, and nice smooth grain of durabuck upper.

Sounds good.

 

[justed381]

Were the ankles padded on the 2011s? I'm drawing a blank on those.

 

[x-alt]

Compared to what we've been getting, it's a lot better. The 3m doesn't look spotty like the 2006-2015 5s have looked. The shine looks a lot better. I've owned 1990 Jordan 5s and 2000 Jordan 5s as a adult and can attest that these are close to the 3m from the 1990 5s. The 2000 5s had a tongue chipping problem and that's one of the reasons they changed it. And when that material chips, it can't be repaired. The 1990 5s were infinitely more durable.

90's were less bright than the 00s, but a bit more than this.

 

[lamekilla]

 

[kennmo08]

The ankle bumps are actually padded...PADDED! No more ankle padding that just deflates when pressed, making them virtually obsolete.

 

[sthebest]

90's were less bright than the 00s, but a bit more than this.

In this day and age, we have be be thankful it's even this bright. I personally don't want that scotch lite that peels over time. Once that happens, the shoe is ruined and you reall can tell when you take a picture with flash.

 

[willie mcfly22]

Mannnn this release can't come soon enough!!

 

[pain]

Honestly, I wore one pair of OGs and one pair of 2000s into the ground, and I never really had much of a problem with the reflective material peeling. On the 2000s it got a LITTLE patchy over time, but not that bad. Didn't notice that problem on the two pairs of my '07s that I wore, and I never wore any of my 11s.

The ONE thing that slightly bugs me about the '16s is the appearance of the tongue in normal light. I love how they look with a flash. But I'm not a big fan of the "satin" looking finish, except on the forthcoming white/gold V's, and those are SUPPOSED to look like that. It's just one of those things that, when JB makes a big deal out of their "remaster" efforts and attention to detail, I kind of take it with a grain of salt because both the tongue (in normal light) and the mesh on the '16s do NOT look like the 1990s (the mesh on the '16s is more opaque). Even the 2000s, which are my personal favorite version of this shoe, didn't totally look like the 1990s. That all being said, these are relatively small details to quibble about, and they're not going to deter me come July 23.

Still, why JB toots their own horn about remastering when it's obvious they STILL don't stay true to some of the OG details gets on my nerves. Remastering is simply another gimmick to jack up Retro prices.

 

[Aquamanjay_]

Looks good to me
View media item 2073073

 

[The Fresh Prince]

Comparison of my supreme 5s to the 2016 Metallica. The 3M isn't spotted like on the supremes. It's a consistent shine, really bright

 

[Magic33]

One of the releases I was excited for this year. Was a tad discouraged about the translucent blue outsole, and different material scotch-brite on the tongue. The ankle bumps are actually padded...PADDED! No more ankle padding that just deflates when pressed, making them virtually obsolete. The tongue and blue tint soles isn't as bad as the early pairs showed. If you have, or felt the Supreme 5s it's similar to those. Nice plush interior was missing on the V's after the '07 retros, very soft insole you'll feel when you step, and nice smooth grain of durabuck upper.

I figured it would be. Those were pretty well done. Can't wait. Thanks