BRITISH KNIGHTS APPRECIATION POST (BRITISH KNIGHTS LEADER> NIKE AIR FORCE 1) PICS

trethousandgt

trethousandgt

4,171
2,748
Joined
Apr 4, 2003
I noticed this brand is very overlooked (at least in the states), however the latest crop of retro's is DEAD ON EXACT Re-makes of the original releasesfrom the materials, to the fit, to the comfort level. Nike could DEFINITELY take a pointer or two from how this company does a retro shoe. I Remember the firsttime I personally saw British knights it was back in 1988, I always wanted a set, but at that point i had a pair of Reebok BB 5000's. The first crop ofretro's from British knights back in 2003 were total crap, the only retro they had was I believe two styles. Finally someone got it right the second timearound, the comfort level on these is AMAZING, they are a little on the heavier side, and while they may look bulky, with slim fit jeans they look sleek.Everything down to the box, and wrapping paper is TOP NOTCH hats off to British knights still awaiting a Dymacel retro. OG commercials
 
Glad to hear they are quality shoes. I'll admit when I heard they were retroing again I didn't think they would be. Those black lows there are realnice.
 
Can anyone give info on the sizing of these shoes? According to the box size, is a US 10 equivalent to a UK 9 or EU 43?

Thanks in advance.

Peace
F Sharp005
 
^^^^ I wear an 11.5 in all basketball shoes, these run big, if you wear a size 10 i would get a 9.5, and the insoles used feel like a temper-pedic insole, theyare very soft inside, and the insole molds to your foot something you definitely don't get in an airforce 1, the original L.A. gears (atleast thecatapults) used the same insoles back in 1991.
 
^Thanks for the feedback. I unfortunately can't try the shoes on beforehand, because I live overseas and, well, no shops have them here.

I wear a 9.5 in Air Force I's, a 9.5 in AJ III's, but a 10 in AJ IV's, AJ XX3 and all Air Max shoes, Air Force Max (Fab 5's). I can certainlyimagine them running big, but I guess a lot of it has to do with the insoles (which are easily replaceable) and if the toebox is wide or narrow. Would youstill recommend a size 9.5 or a 10?

Peace
-F Sharp005
 
Tre, those are great photos. I too remember owning these back in the 80's as well as a pair of Troop....
 
can't have a BK appreciation thread without mentioning Derrick Coleman...

I had a pair of Dymacels as a kid...
244e0y0.jpg
 
Here is a vintage pair I got awhile back, peep the needle on the side of the shoe and the teeth on the front!
 
kngeby those are pretty crazy I have to find pics of the derrick coleman's I sold a few years back, had the white black and i believe yellow, and the whiteblack neon's full size runs!!! sold quick mostly overseas ill see if i can dig up some photo's
 
^^^^^ BS, EITHER A.) YOU WEREN'T OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER WHAT WAS HOT BACK IN THE DAY, OR B.) YOU WERE LIVING UNDER A ROCK. British Knights were huge from87-90, matter of fact, in 87-88 British knights, and Reebok's were smacking the hell out of Nike during that time frame. So if YOU think they are wackfine, but to say they were wack back in the day then your just lying to yourself.
 
Cool!

I had the white black ones, and a few other pairs, at the tim these and SPX and Troop were all the rage. I'm off to find some!

If anyone knows where i can get some SPX sTREET SLAM LOW PLEASE PM ME!

Here's some history...great artical, and the same bloke designed all three brands.

http://www.sneakerfreaker.com/feature/troop_spx/
 
Originally Posted by trethousandgt

^^^^^ BS, EITHER A.) YOU WEREN'T OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER WHAT WAS HOT BACK IN THE DAY, OR B.) YOU WERE LIVING UNDER A ROCK. British Knights were huge from 87-90, matter of fact, in 87-88 British knights, and Reebok's were smacking the hell out of Nike during that time frame. So if YOU think they are wack fine, but to say they were wack back in the day then your just lying to yourself.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Yeah. I'm plenty old enough to remember how wack they were. around my way these were considered skippies. They were a fad shoe that diedout quickly, I just didn't buy into the fad. If you think they're dope that's cool just stating my opinion, no need to get defensive.
ohwell.gif
 
Originally Posted by SoleAddict34

Originally Posted by trethousandgt

^^^^^ BS, EITHER A.) YOU WEREN'T OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER WHAT WAS HOT BACK IN THE DAY, OR B.) YOU WERE LIVING UNDER A ROCK. British Knights were huge from 87-90, matter of fact, in 87-88 British knights, and Reebok's were smacking the hell out of Nike during that time frame. So if YOU think they are wack fine, but to say they were wack back in the day then your just lying to yourself.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Yeah. I'm plenty old enough to remember how wack they were. around my way these were considered skippies. They were a fad shoe that died out quickly, I just didn't buy into the fad. If you think they're dope that's cool just stating my opinion, no need to get defensive.
ohwell.gif
Click to expand...
Different trends in different areas.

They were pretty popular when I was kid in SoCal.

I'm VERY tempted to pick up those black low tops, just for nostalgia's sake. I know if I broke those out my big bro would be like "Oh snap!"
 
Thanks for that Sneaker Freaker article! I was always interested to know what happened to Troop shoes.

Peace
F Sharp005
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom