- 491
- 12
- Joined
- May 2, 2003
Thanks you eastbay for the smashed sneaker box.
At least the shoes weren't damaged...
At least the shoes weren't damaged...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Originally Posted by bigsupa
smh @ these...with that suede that they used...
Originally Posted by BiggiMike
Thanks you eastbay for the smashed sneaker box.
At least the shoes weren't damaged...
Originally Posted by balloonoboy
They look good out the box. A little tight on foot. Cushion and comfort still there. Good retro.
Originally Posted by CharmCityKid
Originally Posted by Sloane Kettering
I'm already plotting on my next pair
this
What's funny is after seeing WallyHoops post, I actually am looking for a size 12 in the Trainer '91 now! I was disappointed the first time they released with nubuck, didn't realize Nike used the soft suede on the re-re-release similar to the OG look and feel. Gettin em!Originally Posted by eyes of hazel
"Wallyhoop,"
You'd be surprised how many people fail to realize that THAT is the way the Trainer 91s should look/be.
Imagine the complaints if the retros (which will have thinner "like o.g." material, Nike is a business first, not an enthusiast) were like that...
That's how I see these.
Can you tell me why after 3 weeks in back-order, Eastbay charged my credit card, then canceled my order? (there was sufficient funds in the credit card)
Thanks
Originally Posted by EastbayRep
Originally Posted by BiggiMike
Thanks you eastbay for the smashed sneaker box.
At least the shoes weren't damaged...
We're sorry to hear that your package arrived this way. If you can send us a PM with some photos, though, we can forward your comments on to the proper personnel as we continue to get more attention for this issue.
EastbayRep - Ryan
Damn, I was hyped for minute...more money saved then! Good looking out.Originally Posted by ed2trey
^^ those are og's in that pic. i got the most recent retro and it has
nubuck, it's still a nice shoe though.
That's where you would ultimately have to pick your poison. If a retro trainer max 91 retro had THINNER Og like material like these huarache trainer toeboxs have, it would not look like the photo I showed up top. It would look similar to some of these 2011 huarache trainer photos where the toebox seems to have no foundation at all. Now imagine an entire upper with the paper thin felt material. Total unevenness all around. Would we rather have that happen and it be closer to the OG than ever before, or stick with the synthetic napless stuff that is currently on trainer max 91 retros? If you are already going to butcher something, I don't neccersarily need to see two varieties of butchering. The first time was enough. But I'll give them more major props for trying to get it right. Maybe the next retro won't have a toebox that collapses on itself.Originally Posted by eyes of hazel
"Wallyhoop,"
You'd be surprised how many people fail to realize that THAT is the way the Trainer 91s should look/be.
Imagine the complaints if the retros (which will have thinner "like o.g." material, Nike is a business first, not an enthusiast) were like that...
That's how I see these.
You are dead on on the waviness of the toebox on the 2011 huaraches of the OG color. Onr pair i have is very wavy in the toebox while the other pair is still straight. It's a minor discrepancy imo, but it is there. It just made it easier for me which pair to rock and which pair to stock. 2 pairs FTWOriginally Posted by WallyHopp
That's where you would ultimately have to pick your poison. If a retro trainer max 91 retro had THINNER Og like material like these huarache trainer toeboxs have, it would not look like the photo I showed up top. It would look similar to some of these 2011 huarache trainer photos where the toebox seems to have no foundation at all. Now imagine an entire upper with the paper thin felt material. Total unevenness all around. Would we rather have that happen and it be closer to the OG than ever before, or stick with the synthetic napless stuff that is currently on trainer max 91 retros? If you are already going to butcher something, I don't neccersarily need to see two varieties of butchering. The first time was enough. But I'll give them more major props for trying to get it right. Maybe the next retro won't have a toebox that collapses on itself.Originally Posted by eyes of hazel
"Wallyhoop,"
You'd be surprised how many people fail to realize that THAT is the way the Trainer 91s should look/be.
Imagine the complaints if the retros (which will have thinner "like o.g." material, Nike is a business first, not an enthusiast) were like that...
That's how I see these.
Ptngina, do you notice when the toeboxs are unstuffed if some of the toeboxs are just off? That left shoe on the left pair looks to have some of that waviness on the toebox. All the other shoes look fine. Maybe it's a quality issue where some suffer from that and some are just fine.
When you have paper thin soft material, you get something like this
Maybe I'm over reaching the severity that is apparent on these huarache trainers but I believe it's there. I can see how some would rather have 2001 quality stiff synthetic material compared to the look of that above.