The color is rich. On-foot feel is typical: secure, flat, and lightweight. Compared to a Jordan 1 Mid, the height difference is noticeable—much easier to slip on/off. The优点 is the bold colorway that still feels classic. The缺点? Not much arch support—something to note if you have foot issues. For $115 USD, it’s a great way to add a pop of color to your rotation. Probably not for your "only" pair of sneakers. 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. Comparing it to other Jordans—like, say, the Air Jordan 1 High—the Low version is obviously more of a warm-weather, casual option. You lose some ankle support, but you gain a lot in breathability and that easy, slip-on vibe. For $120, it’s a more accessible entry into the Jordan series. Just don't expect any Zoom Air tech or modern updates here. It's pure heritage. So, I threw these Air Jordan 1 Lows on, and here's the real talk. The fit is true to size for me. The initial feel? They're comfortable, but don't expect some crazy, plush cushioning – it's a firm, stable ride, which I actually prefer for casual wear. The ankle collar is low-key, giving you that freedom. For all-day wear, they're great, but if you need max comfort for "long" walks... maybe think twice.

  • Shown: Canyon Purple
  • 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