- Jan 18, 2004
- 2,038
- 3,387
Couldn't help it I was 19 when these came out and I'm going to wear them till they crumble. Going for a little workout, 5 mile run, tennissession!
Official Nike Trainer SC Total Orange (Bo Jackson's - OG Colorway)
- Thread in 'Nike Retro' Thread starter Started by clezzie,
- Start date
Couldn't help it I was 19 when these came out and I'm going to wear them till they crumble. Going for a little workout, 5 mile run, tennissession!
- Sep 28, 2004
- 13,924
- 5,900
you're braver than I. I just cant do those things in this generation of retro trainers.. 97-01 retro phase was decent enough to where they could be trainedin, but these, as the box suggests, are truly sportswear casual shoes.
- Feb 15, 2009
- 9,141
- 1,797
Originally Posted by notoriusWES
- May 13, 2005
- 9
- 10
thank god nike put these out. def a classic!
- Sep 28, 2004
- 13,924
- 5,900
this likely wont change things, but the webtec strap siding used to have some real in depth detail.. Now it's just one dimensional and ugly to look at.
A real legit "working" strap system:
-plastic outer layer is just the starting point of what we're missing
-1990 originals above show a true interweaving of the nylon threads. A weave pattern like this is as strong as anything out there.
-Couple that with a dual stitch keeping the strap in place.
-1999 era retros still have this weaving in place on the straps. up and over.. in and out type design.
STRENGTHENING this area was KEY.
But now that these shoes are all casual "SPORTS WEAR" releases. no need for that.
-It now looks like its plastic based weaving that is glued, almost mechanically.
It's not even about cosmetic looks here. We're talking about an inferior system to what we had 20 years back.
A real legit "working" strap system:
-plastic outer layer is just the starting point of what we're missing
-1990 originals above show a true interweaving of the nylon threads. A weave pattern like this is as strong as anything out there.
-Couple that with a dual stitch keeping the strap in place.
-1999 era retros still have this weaving in place on the straps. up and over.. in and out type design.
STRENGTHENING this area was KEY.
But now that these shoes are all casual "SPORTS WEAR" releases. no need for that.
-It now looks like its plastic based weaving that is glued, almost mechanically.
It's not even about cosmetic looks here. We're talking about an inferior system to what we had 20 years back.
- Jul 2, 2006
- 7,805
- 247
Yeah, the straps now just look decorative.
Sad how that seems to be the norm now with retros: take actual, functional elements and reduce them to being decorative items on the shoe.
Sad how that seems to be the norm now with retros: take actual, functional elements and reduce them to being decorative items on the shoe.
- Jun 25, 2007
- 838
- 12
I love these damn shoes.
Best shoes I brought in a long time.
Best shoes I brought in a long time.
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
do these run big? my royal blue in these imma 9.5...
- Apr 4, 2003
- 4,184
- 2,800
^^^depends if you have wide feet, since Nike/JB loves that banana shape on all their shoes lately if you have even a slightly wide foot you will most likelyhave to go a half size up otherwise you should be ok with your true size. I bought two size 11.5's one pair does not fit, the other one does, don't askme how the hell they managed to do that.
- Jul 2, 2006
- 7,805
- 247
I once bought a pair of Nikes where one shoe's laces were longer than those on the other.
- Jul 18, 2008
- 3,454
- 10
well...everybody should have a foot thats bigger than the other lmao im sure thats not the problem tho...i think ima order some today
- Aug 5, 2003
- 796
- 151
If they were to produce these shoes with the same quality materials they did back then, the shoes would never be able to be at the same price point as theywere over 15 years ago...so it comes down to what do you want...same quality now that was used back then and higher prices now...or the same nostalgic look forthe same price as when they first were released...I mean if they were to produce these the way they produce their performance product today the minimum wouldprobably be $160...and lets face it not too many people are buying these for any other reason but nostalgia anyway.
- Sep 28, 2004
- 13,924
- 5,900
is that a joke?
nike can produce high quality NEW SHOES at $110 dollars, which includes R&D costs and great materials. Two HUGE things to overcome. But for a retro modelthat has the molds and castings all taken care of, what R&D costs are we looking at here? cheap materials + cheap shoe to make yet still charging $105?uhhhh NO!
bottomline, nike retro is nikes cash cow. They are charging prices that should be 20-30 lower. There is no doubt in my mind, if they wanted a quality workingproduct, they could do that at the same price point. But noone is pushing them.
now ive thought about this before.. a $110 dollar shoe in 1990 is valued at around $190 dollars in todays $$$$$. With technology advancements, R&D coststhat are almost zero, and you really should be able to have these quality shoes built for $110 dollars
- Dec 21, 2002
- 28,114
- 2,665
Joeysole,
hold ya boy down for that 11.....
im being cheap, i get paid in two days
hold ya boy down for that 11.....
im being cheap, i get paid in two days
- Dec 21, 2002
- 28,114
- 2,665
Acting like 100$ aint alot for shoes, you funny.
MaxP_3
formerly vcof2005
- Dec 3, 2004
- 4,959
- 1,875
I got my pair yesterday. One of the hardest shoes i've had in a while. Thanks to Wally for helping me track down a pair.
- Jan 28, 2007
- 1,310
- 10
- Feb 29, 2000
- 88,762
- 47,972
this has always been the case with nike. i remember back in the 90's the penny 3 sizes were different. one pair was wide one pair was narrow.
- Feb 29, 2000
- 88,762
- 47,972
yea.... plus u have to take into account shoes made back in the day the technology is way inferior to todays nike shoes.
both pairs of my air trainer max 91 retros, which came out after the sc originally, retailed at $90 each....and this shoe is 105?
- Jan 5, 2009
- 1,596
- 11
I'm not agreeing with wally to agree with wally...
but yeah... 110 dollars, considering that nike has to
do almost zero to promote/market these shoes...
there is a whole lot of mark-up and profit for nike.
They could have "at least" given us 30 dollars worth of
quality materials. Sweet jesus (for the sake of the
nike heads that have been here since Zack Morris
was rockin' the brick phone, "whatup preppy!").
To those who are sayin, "YOU don't like the quality,
don't buy them." Sweet jesus, that's beyond the point.
I don't want to buy insurance, but i have to have it any
way.
Salt is bad for our diets, but i'm still going to season my
fries a lil bit...
Same thing with retro kicks. Nike knows we're going to
cop them, but throw in a little consideration for the ones
who have made you the GREATEST SPORTING APPAREL
LABEL IN THE HISTORY OF RECREATIONAL GARMENTS AND
SHOES... all i ask is place a little more effort in the kicks
and not tarnish what you worked so hard for.
I have worn my SC's 3 times and it looks like i've had them
for three years. Sweet jesus.
*in Russel Brand voice*
"RIDICULOUS TROUSAHS!!!"
.
but yeah... 110 dollars, considering that nike has to
do almost zero to promote/market these shoes...
there is a whole lot of mark-up and profit for nike.
They could have "at least" given us 30 dollars worth of
quality materials. Sweet jesus (for the sake of the
nike heads that have been here since Zack Morris
was rockin' the brick phone, "whatup preppy!").
To those who are sayin, "YOU don't like the quality,
don't buy them." Sweet jesus, that's beyond the point.
I don't want to buy insurance, but i have to have it any
way.
Salt is bad for our diets, but i'm still going to season my
fries a lil bit...
Same thing with retro kicks. Nike knows we're going to
cop them, but throw in a little consideration for the ones
who have made you the GREATEST SPORTING APPAREL
LABEL IN THE HISTORY OF RECREATIONAL GARMENTS AND
SHOES... all i ask is place a little more effort in the kicks
and not tarnish what you worked so hard for.
I have worn my SC's 3 times and it looks like i've had them
for three years. Sweet jesus.
*in Russel Brand voice*
"RIDICULOUS TROUSAHS!!!"
.
- Jul 18, 2008
- 3,454
- 10
^Like you had em for 3 years? what exactly were u doing these 3 times
- Dec 9, 2006
- 8,879
- 454
lol... i guess i wont be getting these... but ill try them on to make my finally decision.
- Jan 5, 2009
- 1,596
- 11
1st time i had them, went to grab some happy hour with some band members
(well, we air guitar together, but still...).
2nd time: went to go fill up my Geo Prism.
3rst time: went drinking with some friends who live near an airport, so we sat in
his yard, star gazed and watch planes depart/land (no %!$!). Not very much
movement required.
So as you can see... the construction of the shoe is very meager in product and poorly
engineered with the materials to say the least.
When i said they looked like shoes i had for three years... that would be an under
statement as i have shoes that i've owned much longer, worn numerous times and
still have very minimal creases on the toe box (think air maxes and jordans).
This is what you have... after tres wears... my hombre Chancho.
http://img41.imageshack.us/gal.php?g=cimg4464.jpg
damn, coming at me like the PAPA/// PAPARAZZI!!!
.
- Sep 28, 2004
- 13,924
- 5,900
I can type for days on this but to get to my point. Back in '05, i bought three new models of nike trainers. all featured different pricepoints but they all had great quality leathers. maybe I was spoiled early on to expect this sort of thing. I mean, a $80 dollar shoe with real suedes andleathers? get out of here.. Maybe Nike set themselves up for failure.
Just last summer Nike decides to retro one of these shoes and lower the price point, from $110 to $80. With this came material quality changes and constructionchanges. You saw the real degradation from each model and you accepted it knowing the differences.
i guess its not apples to apples here when you apply this to other models out there. let's just say, im glad NIKE is being called out here. It doesn'tmake sense what is happening here. A new model can come out at $110, get retroed at $80, yet here we are still fighting with a $105 price point featuringmaterials worse than shoes that retailed for $80?
Nike, you disappoint me.
btw there are some photos of the beets and raiders on ebay right now.. quality looks like these.. easy pass
- Apr 19, 2005
- 9,380
- 4,223
Just for people that do not have these yet..my store will b gettin these in stock in the next week or two..you know what to do for questions..
