- 492
- 331
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2012
toe is diff too, wow i never noticed that
2019 All Star Black Infrared Air Jordan 6
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by Aquamanjay_,
- Start date
- 2,267
- 5,926
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2018
We'll agree to disagree on that one. 19' has better shape, more accurate Infrared shade, 3m, and better materials.
- 14,036
- 14,199
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
- 554
- 1,363
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2020
These have probably been posted here before, but oh well
- 10,422
- 22,541
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
This pic was directly responsible for my Jordan problem.Notice how in this promotional photography, that Jordan has the AJ5 lace lock. This may have been taken in 1990, as Jordan has not fully shaved his head...yet!
- 9,108
- 31,739
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2003
I'm wondering how far I can push things on this board♨
which would just be normal conversation 10-20 years ago
Welcome to NT.
Prepare to be warned/banned soon.
Last edited:
- 1,200
- 2,157
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2019
Definitely amazing I would pay 232 for that excat shape and material. Also some of the OGs have a 3ed eyelet and some dont.
AIR J XIII
Supporter
- 6,497
- 12,651
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2002
Go for the asymmetrical look and do one each way.
It was the latter runs that had it. Apparently it was to address a durability issue around the stitching in that area.
WHAT?
Better shape? Better MATERIALS?
You’ve got to be joking.No doubt the ‘19 pair wins the 3M battle. Shape? How Sway? The shape is basically identical on the two pairs, neither of which properly replicate the OG. MATERIALS? Bruh... The ‘00 has proper durabuck that was soft with the white edged rands, the ‘19 has some sort of replica durabuck without the white edges. Neither of the two truly replicate the heel piece.
In my view, it’s extremely close between the 2000 and the 2019. After the notable differences, I give the edge to the 2000 because the Nike Air has the correct font and they had pure clear soles with no blue tint.
No hate for the ‘19, I ended up with 5 pairs
, but they are the 1b to the 2000’s 1a.
- 4,155
- 6,971
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
Go for the asymmetrical look and do one each way.
It was the latter runs that had it. Apparently it was to address a durability issue around the stitching in that area.
WHAT?
Better shape? Better MATERIALS?
No doubt the ‘19 pair wins the 3M battle. Shape? How Sway? The shape is basically identical on the two pairs, neither of which properly replicate the OG. MATERIALS? Bruh... The ‘00 has proper durabuck that was soft with the white edged rands, the ‘19 has some sort of replica durabuck without the white edges. Neither of the two truly replicate the heel piece.
In my view, it’s extremely close between the 2000 and the 2019. After the notable differences, I give the edge to the 2000 because the Nike Air has the correct font and they had pure clear soles with no blue tint.
No hate for the ‘19, I ended up with 5 pairs
I agree with you, it seems like these narratives start and just keep going.Go for the asymmetrical look and do one each way.
It was the latter runs that had it. Apparently it was to address a durability issue around the stitching in that area.
WHAT?
Better shape? Better MATERIALS?
No doubt the ‘19 pair wins the 3M battle. Shape? How Sway? The shape is basically identical on the two pairs, neither of which properly replicate the OG. MATERIALS? Bruh... The ‘00 has proper durabuck that was soft with the white edged rands, the ‘19 has some sort of replica durabuck without the white edges. Neither of the two truly replicate the heel piece.
In my view, it’s extremely close between the 2000 and the 2019. After the notable differences, I give the edge to the 2000 because the Nike Air has the correct font and they had pure clear soles with no blue tint.
No hate for the ‘19, I ended up with 5 pairs
Just by LOOKING at the 2019 Infrared 6 you can tell the materials are off. The suede is too dark and has a different texture. The OGs were a lighter color and smoother.
The 2000s were way closer to the OGs when you compare the suede. (I know it's not suede, it's durabuck or nubuck, but that's another conversation.)
There's a similar narrative going around about the 2020 Fire Red 5s being just as good as the 2000 version. The leathers aren't even in the same ballpark, the 2020 is like plastic compared to the 2000.
- 554
- 1,363
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2020
- 5,012
- 6,430
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
Basketball boots....hilarious!
- 9,654
- 31,021
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2018
The shiny leather on that heel is Ooh Wee 
- 554
- 1,363
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2020
- 3,595
- 2,836
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
Check out my basketball boots 
- 1,013
- 1,583
- Joined
- May 22, 2014
Hell nah it does say basketball boots 
- 492
- 331
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2012
had it and did itImagine with black leather pants?
- 2,267
- 5,926
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2018
As someone who has owned both the 2000 FR 5 and 2000 Infrareds, as well as the 2019 Infrareds and this year's FR 5's, I think people have a rosy view of the earlier retros. I'd probably choose the 2000 FR 5 over the 2020 just cause the tongue was WAY better, had the course material that was more like the og's. The 2020 is still a great retro.
For the Infareds, I'm sticking with the 2019's all day. Easily. The shape isn't perfect but it's still much better than the 2000. The shade if red is closer to the og, and the lack of 3m on the 2000 just kills it. It's almost as bad as the 2001 bred 11's not having white edges on the patent leather. Plus, the 2000 cracked after about 10 years. The 2019 will unlikely crack , and even if it does it will last way longer.
The newer 11's are better than the 2000's as well.
- 10,422
- 22,541
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
Comparing 2000 to 2019 seems pointless to many knowing there is no chance of wearing the 2000 release anyway. Admittingly never owning the 2000 release, I still like the 2019 more based on looks alone. 3m is a must with these. The only thing I wish these had compared to the 2000 was the obvious heel contrast. This 2019 does have it, but not like the 2000 did.
Again, sizing and feel, I cannot speak on that.
Again, sizing and feel, I cannot speak on that.
- 3,383
- 7,255
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
I never had any og 6s but I had the 2000 pair and it wasn’t as great as people keep saying as far as comfort compared to the ‘19 pair. Still felt like boots. The materials were most definitely better, particularly the contrast heel and the grey edges, but the shape was off. It was kinda squat and leaned forward compared to the og. The ‘19 isn’t perfect as far as shape either but I do think it’s closer than the 2000.
So the way I see it, 2000 pair is better in terms of upper contrast and materials and crystal clear soles but the ‘19 pair has 3M, better shape, and better infrared color.
You could make an argument for either one being the best retro.
- 1,013
- 1,583
- Joined
- May 22, 2014
I also had the 2000 retro and yeah I certainly wouldn’t think to describe wearing them as comfortable. But yeah the absence of 3M is huge for me.
- 4,155
- 6,971
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
The newer 6s are more comfortable than the old ones. But they're all bricks to me. I can't wear any of them for more than a few hours. All Jordan retros really.
- 4,155
- 6,971
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
Its not a rosy-view we're just pointing out facts. The 2019s have their strong-points and are great.
I'm just commenting because I've seen people say things that just aren't true.
- 10,422
- 22,541
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
The J Black Infra 6 started all this for me in 1991 . Really have loved all the reissues I have been able to obtain.
- 2,672
- 8,655
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2014
IG's OG sneaker connoisseur @ogorbust's ULTIMATE comparison vid.
On a side note, those bastards at Nike/JB really ****ed us with the Nike font, on the 2019's. Their inconsistencies REALLY piss me off, sometimes.
gokublack
formerly omartrippymane
- 2,013
- 1,841
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
that toebox shape is godly
These have probably been posted here before, but oh well
