- Feb 12, 2008
- 857
- 46
my feet feel better in the ii's than the og's
OFFICIAL CONVERSE THREAD
- Thread in 'Other Brands' Thread starter Started by trethousandgt,
- Start date
- Apr 15, 2004
- 44,409
- 74,263
pics ?
- Mar 25, 2015
- 1,260
- 351
- Feb 12, 2008
- 857
- 46
anyone else notice the sticker over the sizing on the tongue because of the typo?
- Sep 27, 2014
- 536
- 251
Busted out the 3sixteen collab from a couple years back to celebrate the release of the Chuck II. Still haven't secured a pair since I want to try them on in-person, but they will be had!
mikeycorleone
Supporter
- Dec 2, 2013
- 1,943
- 1,687
Damn the black on white lows are clean. Imma check them out this weekend. We need some on feet pics
- Oct 31, 2009
- 28,825
- 12,043
Funny the II's come out like a week after i said I was done with chucks. Gonna have to grab a pair of the II's sometime when they come down from that $75 price
just looked at the pics of the lows, gonna have to get a blue and a white pair
just looked at the pics of the lows, gonna have to get a blue and a white pair
Last edited:
- Nov 16, 2014
- 7,515
- 10,572
A fan of Chucks hopefully my size in the Chuck II's are available.
- Jan 26, 2011
- 1,689
- 248
#16 to get size 13. Needed that top ten tho
info on the numbered pairs? whats the thing in the box (silver sharpie writing)?
- Mar 25, 2015
- 1,260
- 351
there was a pre-order up on the converse site last week - not sure if it was 100 per size, or 100 pairs total.
the pre-orders came in a special box, were numbered on the tongue, and that card was included. So i guess kinda a collector's item if you're into that.
the pre-orders came in a special box, were numbered on the tongue, and that card was included. So i guess kinda a collector's item if you're into that.
- May 6, 2011
- 589
- 88
You guys prefer chucks in a high or low?
mikeycorleone
Supporter
- Dec 2, 2013
- 1,943
- 1,687
- Jan 26, 2011
- 1,689
- 248
there was a pre-order up on the converse site last week - not sure if it was 100 per size, or 100 pairs total.
the pre-orders came in a special box, were numbered on the tongue, and that card was included. So i guess kinda a collector's item if you're into that.
thanks for the info. looks great!
- Jan 10, 2013
- 1,279
- 200
just picked up a pair of lows in sz 7 (.5 up from my chuck size). There's definitely less room in the shoe due to the extra materials, but I also felt the toe cap area being super cramped. The 6.5 squeezed my end toes so i decided to go up. Ppl with fat feet might have issues with toe space. The length still feels long but prefer the extra space.
Forgot to mention that there are also these two elastic bands on the insides of the shoe. Not sure how I feel about those bands yet because it also restricts space.
Forgot to mention that there are also these two elastic bands on the insides of the shoe. Not sure how I feel about those bands yet because it also restricts space.
Last edited:
- Oct 31, 2009
- 28,825
- 12,043
I prefer lows, but the black originals I always get in high
- May 6, 2011
- 589
- 88
Yeah I'm leaning towards getting the white lows. Think they're easier to put on and off. I have a pair of the rubber black ones in the high, and it's a pain to put on and off
- Dec 13, 2004
- 75,060
- 63,037
I like em hi
- Oct 31, 2009
- 28,825
- 12,043
The regular white lows are known as a women's shoe around here. I wanted a pair a while back but couldn't shake off the stigma of it being so strongly unisex. Hopefully the new white lows don't get that popular around here with the female crowd
- Feb 18, 2013
- 3,765
- 669
My 3 chuck 2s just arrived.Cant believe they sold out in my size 10 on fnl in 4 mins and sold out pretty much everywhere in certain sizes and colors in a matter of an hour.Fortunately I found a low key site called journeys and ordered from there with free shipping.No code worked on footlocker and I wasnt paying 10$ in tax and $10 shipping.
My 1st impressions are they look dope and im loving the new updated design,but they look kinda cheap.For instance,the new canvas material is alot harder/stiffer and looks cheaper because of it.However it seems way more durable/less floppy now and looks like its able to repel dirt and water lol.I never paid more than $50 for chucks so to pay $80 is crazy to me.These have nice rich colors and the insole my god is comfy.Everytime I wore the og chucks my heels/soles would hurt for hrs lol.Its also cool that they include black and white laces and a sticker of the shoe on the box.
-Now for on foot impressions-I went my usual size 10 which I wear in OG chucks and all jordans.
I am a wide fat foot representer.So I like to always give my opinion on shoes for my fellow brothers who suffer from this lol.
These are definitely comfortable and I feel like I could wear these all day with no issues.I am not feeling the new elastic band in the shoes tho.Width wise they are just like the OG's but the elastic band makes it feel more tight/snug on the top of my foot.It gets on my nerves already.Length wise these are def .25-.5 long.My toe definitely doesn't reach the tip of the shoe but I feel like I would want the extra space to help with my wide feet.I personally wouldn't go down .5 but if I had normal feet I would.The new tongue aint bad its definitely stiffer but I prefer the old floppy tongue more honestly.
I aint mad at all with these.The only down side imo is the elastic band which im aint use to.
These still my favorites tho
My 1st impressions are they look dope and im loving the new updated design,but they look kinda cheap.For instance,the new canvas material is alot harder/stiffer and looks cheaper because of it.However it seems way more durable/less floppy now and looks like its able to repel dirt and water lol.I never paid more than $50 for chucks so to pay $80 is crazy to me.These have nice rich colors and the insole my god is comfy.Everytime I wore the og chucks my heels/soles would hurt for hrs lol.Its also cool that they include black and white laces and a sticker of the shoe on the box.
-Now for on foot impressions-I went my usual size 10 which I wear in OG chucks and all jordans.
I am a wide fat foot representer.So I like to always give my opinion on shoes for my fellow brothers who suffer from this lol.
These are definitely comfortable and I feel like I could wear these all day with no issues.I am not feeling the new elastic band in the shoes tho.Width wise they are just like the OG's but the elastic band makes it feel more tight/snug on the top of my foot.It gets on my nerves already.Length wise these are def .25-.5 long.My toe definitely doesn't reach the tip of the shoe but I feel like I would want the extra space to help with my wide feet.I personally wouldn't go down .5 but if I had normal feet I would.The new tongue aint bad its definitely stiffer but I prefer the old floppy tongue more honestly.
I aint mad at all with these.The only down side imo is the elastic band which im aint use to.
These still my favorites tho
Last edited:
- Oct 31, 2009
- 28,825
- 12,043
I'm gonna have to grab the black highs too 
- Mar 2, 2005
- 1,987
- 410
I hope they do the Chuck II like they do with the OG chucks, many many colorways and not keep it to the limited initial releases of solid on solid...
- Jan 26, 2011
- 1,689
- 248
I'm gonna have to grab the black highs too
THIS. i got the black lows but the highs are just classic...finally got around to wearing them...nicely done converse.
- Jul 27, 2012
- 1,563
- 1,828
Went half size up from my OG chucks and they are perfect. I feel I could've went TTS but it's all good
ultralightbeam
formerly i lyricaljkilla i
- Nov 14, 2003
- 7,953
- 1,331
Yikes, feel like there's gonna be an OD amount of returns after all sites suggested sizing down. And now everyone saying they're TTS or to size .5 UP.
- Oct 31, 2009
- 28,825
- 12,043
I wear a 13 in Nikes and Adidas, but for the regular chucks I have to grab a 12. If the 2's actually are TTS I would be very happy
