- Apr 19, 2005
- 9,380
- 4,223
My local champs got the Chlorophylls so I'm gonna cancel my Eastbay order and use the birthday coupon to cop 
OFFICIAL: Air Trainer 1 Mid Premium aka "Chlorophylls"... paging Wallyhop....
- Thread in 'Nike Retro' Thread starter Started by panaricanretro,
- Start date
- Aug 29, 2012
- 421
- 65
I got my pairs last week. Quality and shape is garbage (which wally already pointed out), but still needed 2 pairs (hope to find the 2000 retros someday)
- Sep 28, 2004
- 13,924
- 5,900
^2000s are nearly unwearable.. This is our only hope, unless you sole swap.
Quantities and selection is looking real nice. They appear to be at my own local champs too... Perfect execution in that regard.. It's what I've dreamed of.. Too bad quality will leave me with only one pair, no pairs, of maybe just two if they drop to $59.99.
Quantities and selection is looking real nice. They appear to be at my own local champs too... Perfect execution in that regard.. It's what I've dreamed of.. Too bad quality will leave me with only one pair, no pairs, of maybe just two if they drop to $59.99.
- Nov 10, 2008
- 1,796
- 210
^^59.99 would be a dream. I'm in for 4 or 5 pairs if that happens.
- Apr 19, 2005
- 9,380
- 4,223
Love these already..gonna need a second pair for WallyHop $59.99 prices
- Sep 4, 2006
- 48,676
- 29,003
^
word, a pair for pure beater rotation
there are about 20 pairs in my size within a half hour, i'll see if they last & go on sale at champs
word, a pair for pure beater rotation
there are about 20 pairs in my size within a half hour, i'll see if they last & go on sale at champs
- Jun 7, 2008
- 3,042
- 491
I'm happy to finally have a clean wearable pair again, but like a lot have mentioned materials and craftsmanship are terrible.
If nike did a better job, I would have definitely bought two at retail. I don't see myself buying a second pair no matter how cheap they get. just my opinion
If nike did a better job, I would have definitely bought two at retail. I don't see myself buying a second pair no matter how cheap they get. just my opinion
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12
- 163
Wore these all day today, and were surprisingly comfortable. Am I the only one that noticed the insole? Yea the leather isn't the best but its nowhere near as bad as the 09 sc trainers. I doubled up at retail and am hopefull to grab a couple more at outlet prices.
- Jul 19, 2004
- 6,760
- 1,470
Everyone's been right about these being small. Now I'm stuck with a 10.5 that doesn't fit since the boutique I ordered from is wack about returns.
- May 4, 2009
- 3,692
- 303
I know I am probably gonna get fried for it, but I am pretty ok with the quality and just happy that I could wear a pair of these whenever, wherever I want now for awhile and not have to worry where the next pair will come from. I know I am crazy but I will probably triple if not quadruple up after all is said and done. This very sneaker is what started my love for Nikes.
- Sep 4, 2006
- 48,676
- 29,003
it's all good fam
- Jul 12, 2011
- 2,520
- 10,423
I literally just sold my 11.5 to my buddy for $90...
I just took the L on this one, I just couldn't stand wearing them and hurting my feet throughout the day. Especially since I want to wear them all da, everyday
I was fortunate enough to get 2 pairs of 12 off Swoosh, so it wasn't too big of a hit losing $50 on my eBay pair.
I just took the L on this one, I just couldn't stand wearing them and hurting my feet throughout the day. Especially since I want to wear them all da, everyday
I was fortunate enough to get 2 pairs of 12 off Swoosh, so it wasn't too big of a hit losing $50 on my eBay pair.
- Oct 22, 2012
- 121
- 17
this will be my new work out shoe
- Dec 12, 2005
- 1,378
- 1,313
I really hope these sit, definitely would like to pick up a second pair on a heavy discount lol. Quality is ehh, but I haven't worn these since my tennis days back when I was a just a youngin' 
- Sep 28, 2004
- 13,924
- 5,900
These hurt like hell . I am so disappointed.
Picked up a 13 knowing how these should fit. But they are just so narrow. They feel like a sz 11.-11.5 Yet I have a thumbs width space in the toebox. So the length is a bit much, making the fake leather toebox creasing that much more pronounced. It almost feels like the chassis/outsole base is that of a much smaller shoe. It could be the stiff upper.. We shall see
I will instantly make these beaters.. They just have to break in in some form, right?
Quality wise:
-Grey synthetic suede looks and feels identical to the 2002-2009 at1 chlorophyll. So no surprises there
-Black basketball looking leather is a bit too shiny for my liking. It appears they wanted to go with a tumbled leather looking but they failed (look at the 2003 at1 sb as a prime example)
-No obvious cosmetic faults with glue stains or stitching.
-Sockliner is surprisingly soft. I was expecting rough mess
-White 'leather' feels exactly like the 2009 at III med. balls. Just highly mediocre
- Note: Tongue tag states AIR TRAINER 1. OGs through to the 2000 retros simply had AIR TRAINER
Comfort: With the sizing the way it is, it will be very hard for me to pick up duplicates. The interior of the shoe feels very rigid. Combine that with the mediocre hard shell exterior, and you have a tough to wear shoe. They almost feel like the pink toe crusher AT IIIs that are out there. I grabbed a trusty pair of 2000 retros and compared the two... My beater pair I've been wearing for 6 years is more comfortable than these out of the box... That's just sad to me.. That foam is just beat up and shouldn't even have cushion power left. Even a 2000 pair I unDSed a few years backs doesn't compare to these. I can wear those 2000 at1s in my true size all day with no issues... The 2012s are another story.
In closing, these compare almost identical to the 2010 trainer 1.2 chlorophyll. With a price point of $90 and subsequent price drops, I feel these are better suited for the $59.99- $69.99 range like the tr1.2 was.... I hope by the time I break my pair in, I can decide if a second is worthy or not.
The wearing begins with no worries of them falling apart. I'll give them a fair chance before I write anything too outlandish.. RIP all the lost 2000s
Picked up a 13 knowing how these should fit. But they are just so narrow. They feel like a sz 11.-11.5 Yet I have a thumbs width space in the toebox. So the length is a bit much, making the fake leather toebox creasing that much more pronounced. It almost feels like the chassis/outsole base is that of a much smaller shoe. It could be the stiff upper.. We shall see
I will instantly make these beaters.. They just have to break in in some form, right?
Quality wise:
-Grey synthetic suede looks and feels identical to the 2002-2009 at1 chlorophyll. So no surprises there
-Black basketball looking leather is a bit too shiny for my liking. It appears they wanted to go with a tumbled leather looking but they failed (look at the 2003 at1 sb as a prime example)
-No obvious cosmetic faults with glue stains or stitching.
-Sockliner is surprisingly soft. I was expecting rough mess
-White 'leather' feels exactly like the 2009 at III med. balls. Just highly mediocre
- Note: Tongue tag states AIR TRAINER 1. OGs through to the 2000 retros simply had AIR TRAINER
Comfort: With the sizing the way it is, it will be very hard for me to pick up duplicates. The interior of the shoe feels very rigid. Combine that with the mediocre hard shell exterior, and you have a tough to wear shoe. They almost feel like the pink toe crusher AT IIIs that are out there. I grabbed a trusty pair of 2000 retros and compared the two... My beater pair I've been wearing for 6 years is more comfortable than these out of the box... That's just sad to me.. That foam is just beat up and shouldn't even have cushion power left. Even a 2000 pair I unDSed a few years backs doesn't compare to these. I can wear those 2000 at1s in my true size all day with no issues... The 2012s are another story.
In closing, these compare almost identical to the 2010 trainer 1.2 chlorophyll. With a price point of $90 and subsequent price drops, I feel these are better suited for the $59.99- $69.99 range like the tr1.2 was.... I hope by the time I break my pair in, I can decide if a second is worthy or not.
The wearing begins with no worries of them falling apart. I'll give them a fair chance before I write anything too outlandish.. RIP all the lost 2000s
Last edited:
- Sep 4, 2006
- 48,676
- 29,003
and so it is written
- Jul 19, 2004
- 6,760
- 1,470
I also felt the quality was crappy, but whatever. I wasn't up on these in the past, so this is my only shot.
superblytrife
Supporter
- Mar 20, 2002
- 21,066
- 22,833
Nice pseudo-review, Wally.
Honestly, when I was doing my weekly rotation cleaning yesterday, which included these, it really struck me just how awful these are quality and craftsmanship wise. When I was wiping them down and I had my other hand inside of the shoe, it literally felt like I had my hand in a cardboard box lol. I'm crazy about this shoe though, so I'll put up with it. But a little part of me feels like a sucker for giving Nike money for these.
Also, I think the QS SC II's ruined this release for me because we caught a glimpse of the possibilities. Were the SC II's perfect? No. But they at least made me feel like Nike tried lol.
Honestly, when I was doing my weekly rotation cleaning yesterday, which included these, it really struck me just how awful these are quality and craftsmanship wise. When I was wiping them down and I had my other hand inside of the shoe, it literally felt like I had my hand in a cardboard box lol. I'm crazy about this shoe though, so I'll put up with it. But a little part of me feels like a sucker for giving Nike money for these.
Also, I think the QS SC II's ruined this release for me because we caught a glimpse of the possibilities. Were the SC II's perfect? No. But they at least made me feel like Nike tried lol.
- Mar 20, 2001
- 3,865
- 1,999
Agree all the way w you Trife. For the long haul, I'm not even sure these will crease b/c the leather feels absolutely like cardboard.
And the SC II QS did ruin things. I wore those for a few days before I got these and they're such a treat. The comparison b/w the two is night and day.
I still like/love them to wear but...just smh @ Nike for these.
And the SC II QS did ruin things. I wore those for a few days before I got these and they're such a treat. The comparison b/w the two is night and day.
I still like/love them to wear but...just smh @ Nike for these.
- Mar 9, 2008
- 677
- 112
I passed on this upon seeing them in person, these are not worth the $110 price tag, I really can't pinpoint what's wrong with this release, maybe it's the flimsy material and the shiny black pleather used, I used to be nostalgic every time these releases, I even tripled on the 08's since this is one of my top shoe of all time but I just can't get myself to buy this release.
- Jun 26, 2008
- 5,247
- 4,069
Agreed. But, that's partially why i decided I'll just beat these. My first wear was down to the softball field (they match our uniforms). Sure, I change into cleats, but the kicks I wear even to the games get beat quickly.
- Aug 18, 2012
- 8,560
- 3,537
14-Nov
$110.00 317553-400 Nike Air Trainer 1 Mid Premium Midnight Navy
$110.00 317553-400 Nike Air Trainer 1 Mid Premium Midnight Navy
- Jul 23, 2012
- 255
- 28
This reminds me of the OG Huarache release last year. The quality was so crap you could hardly enjoy the shoe and its greatness. Nike just can't help it smh
- Mar 20, 2001
- 3,865
- 1,999
Anybody worn these vs the prior version released ('09 I believe)?
- Jan 21, 2011
- 336
- 15
I was able to cop with a 20% off military discount. After going to several stores in my mall and inspecting several pairs, I was able to find one without glue stains all over it. I threw them on for the day and halfway through I realized that the perforations on the left toebox or "off" if that makes any sense at all. I'm a perfectionist when it comes to my shoes, but I will just take the L and deal with it because it was enough of a hassle to find a pair without glue stains. I am definitely disappointed with this release compared to the SC IIs that released last year...
