q about the most recent retro 4s

Originally Posted by JordanPoe

I've have both, besides the Nike Air/Jumpman there is not that big of difference in my eyes. Of course the CDP will not be the exact shoes as the 99' but name me one retro that is? People tend to B**** just to B****. Now a days if people don't like the quality just don't buy it, simple as that.
truth
 
Another big difference are the midsoles. Look how stupid the air unit and the foam midsole look. Not only that, but the 99 IV's are comfortable, and youcan feel the responsiveness of the air unit and foam midsole. The newer iv's feel like you are walking on concrete. You cant feel the cushioning.
 
Originally Posted by Pig Love

Originally Posted by dunksnjordans1992

well i meant to ask this alot earlier but kept forgetting every-time i signed on lol. so i want to know exactly what is the big problem with recent retros compared to the 99s?? in my opinion the only thing different is that the netting and the shape of it. is there any-other difference besides the jumpman and the nike air and what i mentioned? here are pics of both.
aoqp8h.jpg
28kq9l4.jpg

The quality of the new 4 doesn't suck. My friend at work wears them and they're nice. I can't wait to get them.

yes the quality does suck and you say that they dont because you've never owned OG's. People who know nothing about jordans know that they are lowquality.
 
Originally Posted by iTsThEkIdBeZ

Originally Posted by retrourfeet

Subtle changes like material used and shapes etc but all in all, not to bad imo
wink.gif


i agree the only major difference is the nike air and the front buckles are missing the anchors


$+% r u talkin bout? there is no buckles and anchors on this damn shoe
 
Originally Posted by steff55

Originally Posted by Pig Love

Originally Posted by dunksnjordans1992

well i meant to ask this alot earlier but kept forgetting every-time i signed on lol. so i want to know exactly what is the big problem with recent retros compared to the 99s?? in my opinion the only thing different is that the netting and the shape of it. is there any-other difference besides the jumpman and the nike air and what i mentioned? here are pics of both.
aoqp8h.jpg
28kq9l4.jpg

The quality of the new 4 doesn't suck. My friend at work wears them and they're nice. I can't wait to get them.

yes the quality does suck and you say that they dont because you've never owned OG's. People who know nothing about jordans know that they are low quality.


How old are you little guy, I bought a pair of carmines with my big boy Christmas money in 91. They were like my fifth pair back then
roll.gif
 
Originally Posted by SneakDaFreak81

You'll only notice the difference if you really inspect the shoes. Who the hell cares. As long as they the black/cement colorway and you know the shoes are real.....WHO THE HELL CARES. I'm tired of hearing the complaints myself. Although I've barely begun to post, I've been browsing Nike Talk for many years and all I hear is complaints day in and day out. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

I can see it from a distance. You can see it also.

The toe, shape, color. Yeah all those.

I'd still be satisfied with the CDP IV's. They ain't that bad.
 
Originally Posted by El Bro

Another big difference are the midsoles. Look how stupid the air unit and the foam midsole look. Not only that, but the 99 IV's are comfortable, and you can feel the responsiveness of the air unit and foam midsole. The newer iv's feel like you are walking on concrete. You cant feel the cushioning.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Military 4's felt like cardboard boxes on my feet
 
i keep hearing people complain about the net not being "parallel" to the wing.

i thought parallel meant that the two things will never intersect. on ALL versions of the iv, the net/wingsintersect.



kuwl0.jpg


if the net and wing were parallel, then the net wouldnt be inside the wing. so im confused.

somebody fill me in please.
 
back in the golden days of j's. iv's would last for months and months beating them to the ground. imagine having retros look like deadstock cdp'sexcept you've worn them for a month already. think about it. or you can think of it the other way. imagine the cdp's look like retros that have beenworn for weeks and this is what you buy from JB right from the shoe store, used looking retros.

there is also a FAT difference in the feel of the retros to the cdp's. the retros feel more solid firm to the feet compared to the weak creasing materialthat can't hold its shape.

this is so annoying talking about the difference to cats that deny there is a difference. this subject has been brought up enough to show that there is adifference BIG or small but there is a difference.

FACE IT.......
 
Originally Posted by GUILLERMO GUTIEREZ

i keep hearing people complain about the net not being "parallel" to the wing.

i thought parallel meant that the two things will never intersect. on ALL versions of the iv, the net/wings intersect.



kuwl0.jpg


if the net and wing were parallel, then the net wouldnt be inside the wing. so im confused.

somebody fill me in please.
they're talking about the netting going up and down and not left to right.

the end part of the wing is followed by the up and down lines of the netting......
 
wish i copped this pack. those 4's don't look any different from the og's. just the back
 
I must have been blond this entire time because I just noticed it, but is the pull tag plastic on the 08 IV's???
 
these fit much tighter IMO. The shape sukks but it's not that big a deal. I hate the ashy suede though, i haven't worn mine and they still lookold....already creased.
 
Im Happy wit my CDP 4z
I Also Understand many peeps
Nothin worng wit wantin mo exact OG
 
Back
Top Bottom