- 486
- 170
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2007
The Official Adidas D Lillard 1
- Thread in 'Other Brands' Thread starter Started by just another pair,
- Start date
- 19,963
- 17,764
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2007
Damn the Easters sold out on the website
- 1,726
- 555
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2013
Having played in both, I would agree. Difference is noticeable, mainly because cushioning in the forefoot of the CL Boost is lacking.
If I could only play in one of them for an entire season, it would be the Lillard 2 for sure. That CL Boost minimal forefoot is great for court feel, but I start to feel it. Can't imagine them being my only shoes for an entire season.
If I could only play in one of them for an entire season, it would be the Lillard 2 for sure. That CL Boost minimal forefoot is great for court feel, but I start to feel it. Can't imagine them being my only shoes for an entire season.
- 137
- 66
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2016
I have the lillard 1 xeno, now just bought the halloween edition, will there be a crazy colorway that is coming out?
Really like the chrome back of the rose red colorway.
Really like the chrome back of the rose red colorway.
I grabbed a pair of XX9's for $90 but I'm debating selling them and getting the Lillards instead. Are the two comparable? I know the xx9 got rave reviews, but so did these (though I'm sure the price point had a lot to do with some of the reviews). Anyone have a preference either way?
- 17,868
- 21,165
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2016
XX9 lows??!
Nah they're the mids
XX9 lows??!
- 2,529
- 1,449
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2010
PR shots dropped for Fool's Gold and these are looking 
View media item 1974220View media item 1974219View media item 1974218View media item 1974217
View media item 1974220View media item 1974219View media item 1974218View media item 1974217
- 589
- 88
- Joined
- May 6, 2011
Let us know!! Also, how did you go about removing some of the traction lines?
- 1,726
- 555
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2013
New XX9's? That's going to be hard to top at $90. The forefoot cushioning didn't last as long as other shoes for me (at 5 9" 175), but the $90 tag helps to offset that.
I would take the XX9's at that price, but they'll both deliver. I like the XX9's transition better and traction might be more dependable on a variety of surfaces. I don't think the XX9's are leaps and bounds better than the Lillard 2's, and the Lillard 2's aren't drastically different enough to warrant selling the XX9's to get a pair.
Yeah, that's what worries me the most about the 29's is the durability/longevity of the cushioning, but I am getting deterred by the mixed reviews on the traction on the Lillards. Thanks for the input though.
- 220
- 164
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2015
I had to use a heated cutting tip on a soldering iron, as it was too hard to do with just a cold exacto knife.
In any case, I gave it a try this week, and it really didn't improve much, if at all. I only did the right shoe and left the left shoe stock.
To be fully honest, it felt like the customized shoe even had LESS traction to me, however weird that may seem. I'm thinking the material might be the culprit here.
On the other hand, I compared them again with the CL/boost outsole, and my updated thoughts are as follows :
- The traction of the regular lillard 2.0 outsole is not a deal breaker IF you're on a clean court, like I was this week. I still like the CL outsole's traction better tho.
- The forefoot on the CL midosle is less cushioned indeed, like a couple previous posters mentioned. When compared side by side, the CL midsole feels "thinner", not as dense.
I still preferred the CL midsolde over the lillard midsole, for a couple reasons. First, I prefer court feel over cushion in the forefoot. Second, I think some of the difference in forefoot cushioning between these two midsoles might be attributed to how noticeable the transition from Boost to Adiprene+ is, as opposed to it just being trash.
-Fitwise, when wearing both shoes simultaneously, it felt like the Primeknit upper was a little tighter compared to regular Lillard 2.0 upper, mainly on the sides.
I'm still hopeful that adidas will bring the Primeknit/CL combo to miAdidas.
EDIT : correction on name of technology used in CL midsole
Last edited:
- 3,979
- 6,000
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2012
1
Last edited:
- 17,037
- 12,165
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- 33,349
- 15,147
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
Show me the way to this plug...
- 17,037
- 12,165
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
hes one of the best ones out there
- 939
- 361
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2013
I was a big fan of those Triple White Harden PE's, I have no idea why they only made 100 of them. I know the signing came quick, but Adidas really under-utilized him this year. Can't believe they're going for $1000+ on eBay.
- 17,868
- 21,165
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2016
Austin Rivers in the static...
- 106
- 58
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2014
Got to play first time in my Rose Citys, and I prefer them over Rip Citys performance-wise. The outsole has that Continental-badge and it smells like tire rubber 
the fabric upper is a bit rougher, almost a denim-like material. The fit is a little bit tighter in the Rose City's. Small things but a little bit better fit for me.
the fabric upper is a bit rougher, almost a denim-like material. The fit is a little bit tighter in the Rose City's. Small things but a little bit better fit for me.Good to know, any difference between the traction at all?
Got to play first time in my Rose Citys, and I prefer them over Rip Citys performance-wise. The outsole has that Continental-badge and it smells like tire rubber
- 106
- 58
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2014
I'd
I'd say Rose City's traction is a little bit consistent and stickier. But not much. Just enough to notice it at times.
- 1,132
- 304
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2012
I've been told the forefoot on the Harden's feel a bit better than GR CLB 2015s, do you have any to compare them to and confirm?
- 17,037
- 12,165
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
I do not sorry. These are also samples so I would love to compare them to the released pair
- 2,529
- 1,449
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2010
- 43,541
- 27,837
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2002
April 15. Rip City replacement? lol
View media item 1983101
View media item 1983101
