At this ~$110 USD price tag, you know what you're getting. They're not 'luxury', but they're well-made. It’s that reliable 'Jordan' quality we’ve come to expect from this series over the years. Checking out this "air jordan 1 low" with the “Crater” sole—interesting twist! The upper has recycled materials, which is cool. Aesthetics? It’s a chunky, outdoorsy take on the classic. On feet, they feel slightly different: the sole is a bit more forgiving & has great grip. They’re definitely heavier than a standard Low, though. Visually, they add some cool texture to a fit. Pro: Unique design & more functional sole. Con: The weight & bulkier silhouette might not be for purists. At around $130 USD, it’s a premium. I’d say it’s for someone who wants a durable, statement AJ1 Low. Probably not for fans of the OG slim profile. Now, the potential con – the comfort, or lack thereof, for some. If you're used to modern, engineered knit uppers and super-soft midsoles, the "Air Jordan 1 Low" might feel stiff and unforgiving. It's a flat, firm ride. It's not a performance shoe or a all-day-walking shoe for everyone. You're buying it for the look and legacy, first and foremost. Yo, just got this "Air Jordan 1 Low" in the mail. This one's a newer "craft" version with different material textures. First impression? The quality/details are interesting! On foot, it’s the same familiar fit – snug in a good way. The outsole is thin, so you "will" feel the ground. Styling it on camera, the low-cut really shows off your socks (or no-show look). Versus other Jordans, this is your entry-level, everyday classic. Major pro: its status as a sneaker legend. The drawback? Basic, old-school technology. Perfect for style-focused sneakerheads, not ideal for performance or long-distance comfort seekers.

  • Shown: Pure Money
  • Style: DV3742-021

Available

Product reviews

Rating 4.5 out of 5. 8,008 reviews.

Characteristics assessment

Cost-benefit

Rating 4.5 out of 10 5

Comfortable

Rating 4.3 out of 5

It's light

Rating 4.3 out of 5

Quality of materials

Rating 4.1 of 5

popular

Assessment 4 of 5