- 2,646
- 4,235
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
If you want high end quality buy a high end shoe
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
I'm not really sure how the 2011 version became the gold standard for true blue 3s, but I'll go out on a limb and guess that it's the only model most users on here have experienced.
The 2009 + 2011 versions were produced when JBs quality was near rock bottom.
The ONLY version of the true blue 3 that I can consider a worthy comparison to the latest 2016 version would be the 2001 retro.
Released on 11/17/01, the true blue 3s were the first OG colorway that JB decided to unceremoniously strip away the Nike Air branding from.
This proved to be a controversial move that angered many who were coming off the heels of an excellent retro of the black/cement 3s earlier in the year.
The 2001 true blues literally set the precedent for almost a decade and a half of what many would consider half hearted retro attempts.
Compared to the original 1988 version, this sneaker was heavily altered. A Jumpman logo on the heel tab, a full strip of blue paint on the medial midsole, "Jordan" stamped on the outsole, and the red inner tongue lining switched to true blue.
Fast forward 15 years later to 11/25/16, and we have our first taste of what is as close to an original pair of true blue 3s as JB produced since 1988.
Yes, the shape and production quality is quite different than the 88 version. But the re-introduction of key details has made this the best retro of a Jordan 3 since the 2001 black/cements in my opinion.
Check out the comparison shots below between the 2001 retro and the 2016 version.
I purchased the 2001 pair the day that they released in 2001 and have worn them quite often ever since.
They've surprisingly held up great and are still wearable to this day.
Just by holding both pairs, I honestly cannot notice much of a difference in the leather quality.
The 2001 pair has slightly more tumbled leather, but that is hardly a key indicator of quality.
They are definitely within the same ball park of each other as far as overall build quality is concerned.
I'll spare you any granular details and let the pics do the talking.
View media item 2243234
View media item 2243235
View media item 2243236
View media item 2243237
View media item 2243238
View media item 2243239
Where all the dudes who were happy with their $300 pairs so they didn't have to stress on release day? [emoji]128514[/emoji]
My exact situation. Can't wait!My delivery got bumped up to today. Hopefully get the notification soon to go pick them up at the ups store.
Agreed. I've seen a few people say that they run TTS, but for me, my 8.5 feels more cramped than any other 8.5 JB model I wear (I wear 8.5 for all my I, IV, V, VII, X, XI, XII, XXIII, and XXX -- can't comment on other models, obviously). Even my 8.5 neoprene XIIs that many said run small feel less tight than these. I can still wear them, though, without any discomfort, but I'd rather be wearing a sz 9 right now.Tried them on just to see if they was at least comfortable , and they run .5 small for me.
On top of that the soles hard af in the heel.
Co-sign, WC4 isYou had to have been either broke or really crazy to pass on the WCIVs. My favorite release of 2016. Can't wait to get my hands on the Jams in a couple of weeks. The official pics are drool worthy.
Tried them on just to see if they was at least comfortable , and they run .5 small for me.
On top of that the soles hard af in the heel.
These are a All around fail.
Between the off white uppers, discolored ep, navy tb color, trash leather , un tts factor, and just out right uncomfortable, all that bs @$220 tag.
1 word to best describe them ,,
"Bricks"..
Oh yeah Nike ,,youre getting this garbo back asap.
If you're paying full price for these, hold this L.. Literally sitting everywhere