Air Jordan 5 Retro 'Fire Red' 2013 Vol: No 23

I seriously hope that Jordan Brand continues the trend of TRUE OG style apparel for the V's in 2013 like they did for the IV's this year (I'm *praying* for OG style track suits). I can't stand a lot of the decisions they make, but I think they hit the ball out of the park with the IV apparel, and it's one of the handful of times in the past decade that I can say they actually exceeded my expectations.

It seems like this year they didn't make the mistep of releasing the OG style apparel with the spring releases. I ended up getting the 3 track suit in the summer at an outlet during some ridiculous apparel mark down. Less than the price of the pants for both jacket and pants. This year though the nice 4 stuff came out when the weather started getting cooler. I still think I may end up getting the track suit for the 4s too.
 
OK, I couldn't resist. From the back of my closet, this "5 Jumpman" sweatshirt and this OG V track suit both need to make a comeback in 2013. Are you seeing this, Jordan Brand?

By the way, the red on both may look a little faded in the pic, but trust me when I say they are both still a deep, vibrant Fire Red in person. Despite being almost 23 years old.
 
Fire red Vs are one of my grails/top 5... Must have and those pictures are :smokin
 
400

400

400

400

400

400

400
 
That sloped toe cap def makes them look more like the '99 shape. Non boxy

AT,
I know you know your shoes so Im hoping you can help me with this. Something about this shoe just seems the tiniest bit off in terms of shape, and I can quite figure out what is bothering me. I have Laney's and 06 Fire reds and Metallics, and I love the shape on all of them. I just cant figure out why this one looks weird. Maybe Im just paranoid from the IV's. This is my favorite V, I want to love these, but Im not sold yet.
Really wish I could see them in person
 
I told the wife I was going to retire in 2012, but retirement has to wait a little longer.

48 pairs and still want more.:smh:
 
@Zephyr

Besides the rolled toe box, I've noticed that the tongue is higher too, and the ankle is slightly straight up at the heel like the originals. Like the IV's these are a better mold IMO then previous years, but could do without these high tongues.

400

400

400
 
Last edited:
@Zephyr

Besides the rolled toe box, I've noticed that the tongue is higher too, and the ankle is slightly straight up at the heel like the originals. Like the IV's these are a better mold IMO then previous years, but could do without these high tongues.

400

400

400


YES! Thank you! Great breakdown
I can see what is bothering me now, like scratching an itch you couldnt reach
It's the heel and the tongue exactly as you said. Tongue is def long, but I dont keep em popped out so no biggie

To my eyes the heel/ankle of the 2013 is too upright. It doesnt have the slightly rounded forward angle of the OG/Retros.

Is this just a camera angle problem? Were the 2011 Metallic's like this?

edit: Looking at some google pics of the OG's, kinda seems like the OG was more upright as well, like you said better mold
Really wish I could see these in person
 
Last edited:
3M as a brand didn't register with me until maybe about ten years ago, nor did calling the reflective material on the aj5 tongue 3M
1000

^ for this model (AJ5) i call these two colorways (only) the primary colorways
because generally speaking, Nike Air Jordans used to release in just two colorways at first
then more original colorways would follow later that year like 'the grapes' or the 'fire reds'
when the 1990 Air Jordan (5) initially came out, people would say something like 'did you get the white ones or the black ones?'
6 months later someone would say 'i got the new white & red or i got the new fire red air jordans today' 'not 'the white & black ones'
this is why the ones with the 23 on the side & mostly red midsole that retro'd in 2006 are the fire reds to me
and these releasing in january are the white & black ones
Oh wow, so the Jordan 5's retailed for $110 in 1990, if only prices were like that now..
 
3M as a brand didn't register with me until maybe about ten years ago, nor did calling the reflective material on the aj5 tongue 3M
1000

^ for this model (AJ5) i call these two colorways (only) the primary colorways
because generally speaking, Nike Air Jordans used to release in just two colorways at first
then more original colorways would follow later that year like 'the grapes' or the 'fire reds'
when the 1990 Air Jordan (5) initially came out, people would say something like 'did you get the white ones or the black ones?'
6 months later someone would say 'i got the new white & red or i got the new fire red air jordans today' 'not 'the white & black ones'
this is why the ones with the 23 on the side & mostly red midsole that retro'd in 2006 are the fire reds to me
and these releasing in january are the white & black ones
Oh wow, so the Jordan 5's retailed for $110 in 1990, if only prices were like that now..

And the $110 price tag received scrutiny. Jordan wore these throughout the 89-90 season, it wasn't until the 90-91 regular season. Then he broke out with the VI's in the 90-91 playoffs.
 
@Zephyr

Besides the rolled toe box, I've noticed that the tongue is higher too, and the ankle is slightly straight up at the heel like the originals. Like the IV's these are a better mold IMO then previous years, but could do without these high tongues.

400

400

400


YES! Thank you! Great breakdown
I can see what is bothering me now, like scratching an itch you couldnt reach
It's the heel and the tongue exactly as you said. Tongue is def long, but I dont keep em popped out so no biggie

To my eyes the heel/ankle of the 2013 is too upright. It doesnt have the slightly rounded forward angle of the OG/Retros.

Is this just a camera angle problem? Were the 2011 Metallic's like this?

edit: Looking at some google pics of the OG's, kinda seems like the OG was more upright as well, like you said better mold
Really wish I could see these in person

They've changed for the better. No more boxed toe cap, or overly curved heel. I would def be sold on getting a pair if they didnt yellow so horribly.
 
Check the toe box!!!

AWESOME SHAPE!!!

In THIS pair its  rolled, and looks 100% like the OG pairs!!!

I am very happy about this, and the shade of red its OK also!!

I hope my sz8 pair comes with this shape ...
pimp.gif
 
Last edited:
^
the suggested retail price in that 1990 catalog pic is $110...

but I paid more than that ($120 or even $125) in 1990 for my pair of black-metallic 5's
& it was at a Footlocker, Athlete's Foot or some other large chain

...to help clarify
 
Back in 1991 i picked these up right before a summer bball camp I was going to... I was 11 years old, and paid $80 for a Men's size (back when moms still bought my shoes). The shoe guy gave me an additional 20% off b/c there was a slight scuff on the collar. Fond memories of these joints, but I don't think I'll be copping the 2013 version. I'm done with Vs... wayyyy too many stacked in my shoe room. Plus the bigger foot you have, the worse the V looks, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom