FINALLY, A RETRO OF THE NIKE TRAINER SC II 3/4 DONE RIGHT!! THANK YOU NIKE!

[mints]

Does anybody know where I can get the qs for cheap???

You're about a month too late, they ended up on the hash walls at a lot of outlets and slowly but surely got bought up during the various 30% off sales.

 

[youngchristin]

How do these fit?

 

[coordinate]

Fit is TTS. Love these shoes

 

[lil black jean jacket]

^

 

[youngchristin]

i just scooped up both infared and citron from a SC member for 160 shipped. the quality on these are on point. nike need to keep this kind of quality up but we know that wont happen lol.

 

[bip roberts]

I have both QS pairs, but I'm at a bit of a loss when people praise the quality so adamantly.

The quality is okay - I guess better than a good amount of the crap that gets put out, but I didn't find it to be all that noteworthy.

Better than normal? I guess. Amazing? Not by a long shot, IMO.

 

[coordinate]

still needing the Citrons! Chlorines! Purples!!! ill find em for good deals like i did all my others

BIP - obviously its not buttery leather which we enjoy and praise in AF1s... but which shoe that releases now days does? which shoe has "ON POINT" quality? I haven't found any yet

for how cheap, comfortable, great looks, and good color ways these are HIGHLY under rated IMO

 

[ekhunter]

best quality on a shoe in the last 10-12 yrs IMO, i dont look at af1's so i have no idea on the quality on those.

 

[bip roberts]

I'm not saying there are a ton of recent releases that were better quality, just that I didn't think the quality on these was above and beyond some other releases.

Now, you got me trying to jog my memory though.

I think the last release that had quality that really blew me away was probably the Godzilla Barkleys. Jordan-wise, I think crap became the norm after the last go-round of the VIIIs (Aquas and Playoffs). There were some bad releases before that (Military IVs), but that wasn't the norm. For example, the release before last of the Cardinals were fine.

I'm throwing some stuff out there now, from the last 4 or 5 years or so that I thought Nike did well.

• The Huarache low pack with the Mowabb, tan/teal, brown/purple CWs.
• The recent Pillars weren't fantastic, but pretty good - probably around where I'd classify these. Ditto with the Speed Turfs.
• The AF1 denim lows from 2 or so years ago were great - they were a "premium" though, but they weren't like $200.
• Didn't really have any issues with the Penny 3s, Pippens, or Uptempo Maxes (only have the Volts though).

 

[cocotaso1]

I have both QS pairs, but I'm at a bit of a loss when people praise the quality so adamantly.

The quality is okay - I guess better than a good amount of the crap that gets put out, but I didn't find it to be all that noteworthy.

Better than normal? I guess. Amazing? Not by a long shot, IMO.

at this point better than normal is amazing for nike. and word to the huarache runner pack being quality.

 

[bip roberts]

Just because it's good relative to many of their other efforts, that doesn't mean it is that good in an objective sense.

Again, I'm not saying these are terrible, just that after hearing the way people spoke glowingly about them (got my pairs about 2 weeks after release and there were lots of rave reviews), I was expecting more.

 

[titang545]

Had a pair that I RAN into the ground as a kid.

 

[exclusivo]

scratch that.. Meant the Sc Highs..

 

[youngchristin]

I think im throwing in the towel with Nike sc releases

Why??????

 

[coordinate]

^ x2?

I'm still looking for the last of the color ways to complete my set

if you do give up on the SC IIs, what are you gonna go to ? plastic KDs? leatherish rubberish kobes/jordans?

 

[trethousandgt]

Just because it's good relative to many of their other efforts, that doesn't mean it is that good in an objective sense.
Again, I'm not saying these are terrible, just that after hearing the way people spoke glowingly about them (got my pairs about 2 weeks after release and there were lots of rave reviews), I was expecting more.

These definitely deserve rave reviews.


For one, they are pretty true to the original
Second after A LOT of wears there is no paint cracking and little to know creasing on the toe box. I'll be the first to ***** and moan when a retro isn't done properly or even half assed but for the most part they hit a home run with these. Had they left the colored stripes on the the white black and grey, and infrared colorway they would have been flawless IMO.

 

[ekhunter]

yeah i dont know what dude is talkin about, these materials are second to none, not since 00 have materials been this good!

 

[green rhino123]

i agree, quality

the leather feels like the synth stuff nike used back in the late 80's
i even compared it to a pair of air delta force st's from 89, and it is quit similiar to the touch
and when on feet

 

[briannnnn]

The one year Anniversary of this release is coming up hows everyones pairs doing

Mine are looking great. I maybe have worn the infrareds at least 40 times and the citrons at least 25-30...paint hasn't flaked/chipped and the creasing has all been natural and subtle.

What has amazed me the most is the "Nike Air" logos on the insoles haven't peeled off yet! On other Nikes that logo peels and flakes off the insole within two wears.

 

[johngotty]

My Quickstrikes are fine. The way they've held, I'm actually thinking of digging around for a third pair of Inf's or circling around to grab a pair of Citrons to put some wear and tear on.

Ex - you know you're my ace and I'll call Nike on crap. But they did well on these. In fact, I'd at least give them an A, if not an A+. Just good supple, soft leather that does the job that it's supposed to do. I don't mind the creasing here b/c it doesn't look like crumpled paper. It looks natural.

 

[sneakerfan1]

I love my pairs.  I wish they'd use this type of leather on Jordan retros.  Need to add the Infrareds soon. 

 

[exclusivo]

gotty and others- I made a mistake when I meant Sc's I was actually thinking about the Sc Highs. The Quick strikes of these actually came out pretty proper.

 

[bip roberts]

These definitely deserve rave reviews.
For one, they are pretty true to the original
Second after A LOT of wears there is no paint cracking and little to know creasing on the toe box. I'll be the first to ***** and moan when a retro isn't done properly or even half assed but for the most part they hit a home run with these. Had they left the colored stripes on the the white black and grey, and infrared colorway they would have been flawless IMO.

I acknowledge that I'm in the minority. And, I will defer to you guys for 2 reasons.

1. I do acknowledge these are as true to the original as Nike is ever going to get for a shoe with this much detail and from this long ago.

2. I haven't worn mine heavily, so I can't speak to how the paint holds up over heavy use.

Maybe part of it is that the reviews were so over the top, I just set the bar unattainably high. Also, overall, I'm partial to tumbled leather - I know that's a preference that shouldn't be relevant here, but I'm just laying my cards on the table. But, I'm still not sure I'd anoint these '98 - '00 level quality. Still a solid effort though.

My point that you quoted was at least as much as a rejection of the logic as the point that was made though. Being better than crap does not automatically mean something is awesome. Though, I respect the opinions of those who think this drop was a throwback quality-wise.

 

[sneakerfan1]

I too prefer tumbled leather, buttery soft and plush...but comparing this leather to say the leather used on the White Cement IVs for example, this is leather that actually has some give to it and when it does crease it creases naturally.  Of course the toeboxes on these are a completely different animal so that has to be taken into account, but this certainly beats the hell out of some of the materials that we receive from Nike nowadays.  I paid no more than $60 for my pairs too boot, pretty sure many are in the same boat as well.  I think bang for your buck may be another factor causing people to place these on a pedestal.

 

[wallyhopp]

I have both QS pairs, but I'm at a bit of a loss when people praise the quality so adamantly.
The quality is okay - I guess better than a good amount of the crap that gets put out, but I didn't find it to be all that noteworthy.
Better than normal? I guess. Amazing? Not by a long shot, IMO.

I tend to forget what I said in this very thread. But here's how I stand today

I believe these may be noteworthy only in the sense that these B level shoes are the new "A level". Meaning, we all have lowered our standards and are realistic with what Nike has and will likely produce.... Can or will Nike ever go back to the late 90 era retro phase? The 97-01 era of at1s and sc highs is just marvelous on almost all levels..

Even then, the OGs were even better. So what once was true A level in OGs, is then transformed into A- in the late 90 retro phase, and now we reside in the B level territory.. I guess everything is comparative... Comparing the QSs to the GRs is a joke though,. and they were the SAME PRICE! So we all sensed just a bit of a value there... The GRs and mostly all other retros by Nike stand in the C- level. So we have gone down a whole lot. Our bar and expectations have lowered.

With the QSs, we got B level quality for a C- level price. B is the new A..

There was a sense of "what if this is the new norm". B level shoes in an era filled with C- level is/was a breath of fresh air.. I likely will never buy a second set, and just appreciate this pair I have today. So it's all just a bit bitter sweet
-----------

I wear my QS pairs less than I thought I would. I almost like them better with pants so I will commit myself to trashing my pairs into beaters by Christmas.