the thread about TWOs

^ I so regret not buying all of those candie 2's released that year. It's actually crazy because I remember seeing them on sale at multiple stores.
 
Last edited:
Well, my '95s are very wearable and look and feel almost like new. Of course you have to take care of them, but I never did anything special to take care of mine. I didn't wear them too often, I never wore them in the rain or snow and I kept them in the box in a dark closet when I wasn't wearing them and that's about it. I don't know under what conditions they would rot, but that has definitely not been my experience. I have a pair of the '95 lows and 2 pairs of the highs and all are in great condition.

PS: paid retail for the lows, $75 for one pair of the highs and $65 for the other... I miss those days.


your situation is very rare
it is pretty common knowledge that most 95s are unwearable at this point; there are a lot of online examples to back this up

congrats to you! lows too!

the rubber used on the midsole is the same as used on a lot of hiking/work boots...that fall apart after about 10 years
 
^ That is the only pair from the Candy Pack that I wanted.
My Alma Mater's colors; still regret not scooping on RD.
:smh:
 
*Sigh* Whatever, they're decent enough I guess.

In for one if the leather is soft.

Nah fam, these have a horrid banana boat shape and it's a given that they'll feature that garbage pleather that's been plaguing retros for several years now.

Whoever says they put that crap material to stop creasing is a liar, if anything pleather shoes get very deep creases similar to folds. I've had (and sold) several Nike/JB shoes with this junk material and after 2-3 solid wears they are toast.

Just a damn shame to see the AJ II being done dirty for a decade now save for that BIN joint which had decent leather but poor execution.
 
Y'all gotta understand that some molds have been destroyed so the shape wont be perfect.

I wonder if the ironing technique works with Leather like it does with Durabuck. People are having success slanting the jacked up toe boxes that are released in the past 7 years.
 
steelo - i posted that info a couple pages back from a direct source, you don't have to tell me molds must be re-created
 
My apologizes for not quoting but my post was more so for vood99 and the recent mold talk. I know it's upsetting tho and I probably won't feel how y'all feel about it but I'm just saying it won't ever be the same.
 
Nah fam, these have a horrid banana boat shape and it's a given that they'll feature that garbage pleather that's been plaguing retros for several years now.

Whoever says they put that crap material to stop creasing is a liar, if anything pleather shoes get very deep creases similar to folds. I've had (and sold) several Nike/JB shoes with this junk material and after 2-3 solid wears they are toast.

Just a damn shame to see the AJ II being done dirty for a decade now save for that BIN joint which had decent leather but poor execution.

I know, I just feel like I'm either going to just have to get the 2004 White/Black/Red and Chromes and accept that I'm never going to get these White/Red's done properly or somehow find the good in this upcoming release since the CDPs aren't good enough for me to pay resale.

Honestly if the leather is trash, then I flat out won't settle; option A it is. I wasn't saying that people complaining about creases is the sole reason for the switch, but the complaints gave them the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. As for how recent pairs have creased for you, I guess you're in the minority. I wore White Cement IVs 3 times before I just couldn't deal with the quality anymore and let one of my boys take them off my hands. People on here have worn their pairs 30+ times and LOVE that they still look brand new. Different strokes, and so on.

That mold **** is nonsense to me considering that it seems like a no-brainer to reference an original pair when recreating the mold. They just don't give a **** and people are buying the shoes anyway :lol:
 
Last edited:
Part of the original draw of the 2 was how rich it looked with the wonderful shape and quality leather. I agree that the toe on these is very, very different and almost an insult on this particular model. Still going to cop but I don't think we will ever see a 2 truly done right again. It's just not possible with this model since the material and shape is such a deciding factor for these.
eyes.gif
 
I can't wait for next weekend to cop the Infrared 23 Retro 2's and soon enough the White/Red Retro 2's. I'm definitely passing on them purple 2's.
 
thinkin of grabbin a pair black/infrared next week.  never owned a pair of ii before, any1 know how they fit ?
 
its looking like the black/infrared 2 will be a easy cop for me, at least i hope 

Yeah, there's a FSR on these launch calendar's I believe last time I checked. That's great though, I've been into the shoe since I first saw picture's and frankly I don't really feel like there's a good enough reason on why shoe's that people legitimately want should be limited and hard to get.
 
I am not generally a fan of the 2s, they seem bland to me and I have only had two pair, red/whites which I bought 10 years ago just so I could say I had at least one pair of them, LOL, and then also the "Melo" 2s from 2005.

But, I've had my eye on the infras. This colorway looks hot and I am very tempted to cop them, even with the XI lows and VI carmines on the immediate horizon.
 
Last edited:
 
thinkin of grabbin a pair black/infrared next week.  never owned a pair of ii before, any1 know how they fit ?
I have just two pair, but they fit comfortably, meaning I didn't have to go up or down from my regular shoe size.

Specifically, I have a wide foot, so while lengthwise I'm a natural 12.5, unless a shoe comes out in extra-wide, a 13 usually fits best because a 12.5 will feel tight on the sides. But my 12.5 twos are just right.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom