- Aug 15, 2009
- 9,394
- 11,656
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
View media item 2072251
Nike Air Jordan Retro Metallic V - 7/23/16
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by ozuna23,
- Start date
- Jul 10, 2008
- 6,209
- 4,313
What no early release?
x-alt
Banned
- Dec 16, 2015
- 1,216
- 236
Nah the 3m is inzein on the 2000's and OGs.
Aquamanjay_
formerly jaylaw15
- Dec 18, 2014
- 8,180
- 9,262
They made it better lol
- Jul 18, 2012
- 2,315
- 1,289
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.
- Aug 15, 2009
- 9,394
- 11,656
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.
- Aug 15, 2009
- 9,394
- 11,656
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
View media item 2072787
View media item 2072789
- Feb 14, 2016
- 381
- 101
The top 3m looks cleaner but the bottom 3m looks louder. I prefer the latter. I hope that is what we are getting!!
- Jul 18, 2012
- 2,315
- 1,289
If that pair is from finish line I can't imagine how it would be different from what we are getting.
- Aug 15, 2009
- 9,394
- 11,656
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
Last edited:
- Feb 14, 2016
- 381
- 101
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.
- Jun 25, 2015
- 2,884
- 1,539
These will be my first 5s as well
airthompson
Staff member
- Jul 30, 2008
- 13,829
- 9,635
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.
Last edited:
Aquamanjay_
formerly jaylaw15
- Dec 18, 2014
- 8,180
- 9,262
can we get some additional pics?
- Jul 18, 2012
- 479
- 173
Sounds good.
- Jul 18, 2012
- 2,315
- 1,289
Were the ankles padded on the 2011s? I'm drawing a blank on those.
x-alt
Banned
- Dec 16, 2015
- 1,216
- 236
90's were less bright than the 00s, but a bit more than this.
- Sep 23, 2012
- 32,830
- 24,897
- Jul 30, 2007
- 2,218
- 2,495
- Aug 15, 2009
- 9,394
- 11,656
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.
- Jan 17, 2013
- 7,992
- 6,867
Mannnn this release can't come soon enough!!
- Sep 1, 2012
- 622
- 869
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.
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_
formerly jaylaw15
- Dec 18, 2014
- 8,180
- 9,262
Looks good to me
View media item 2073073
View media item 2073073
The Fresh Prince
formerly airsakuragi
- Nov 17, 2014
- 13,561
- 9,650
- May 15, 2003
- 56,776
- 65,940
I figured it would be. Those were pretty well done. Can't wait. Thanks
Last edited:
