This 'Light Smoke Grey' colorway is subtle and goes with everything. After breaking them in, they become decently comfortable for short periods. The advantage? That iconic look never goes out of style. The disadvantage? They can feel a bit heavy and clunky compared to a running shoe. For ~$120 USD, it's a style investment. Perfect for casual use, not for your gym session. Unboxing this "Air Jordan 1 Mid SE" was a pleasant surprise. The "Dark Chocolate" colorway looks even better in person. On foot, the comfort is... typical for an AJ1: firm. The padded collar helps, but don't expect Boost-level softness. The "advantage" of the Mid is its flexibility for pants or shorts. A potential downside? For people with wider feet, the break-in might be tough. Overall, if you prioritize style over supreme comfort, this is a win. Final thoughts on the Air Jordan 1 Mid: It's a staple. Unboxing always feels special because of that timeless design. On foot, they make any casual fit look better. The clear advantage is the iconic style and relative affordability versus Highs. The downside? The dated, firm ride. I recommend it to sneakerheads and style-minded folks who appreciate the heritage. I don't recommend it to people who prioritize modern comfort above all else. It's a classic for a reason – but it shows its age in feel. Opening this "Chicago"-inspired "Air Jordan 1 Mid", the colors really pop. The build feels sturdy, a good mix of leather and synthetic. Slipping them on, the ankle collar is definitely lower than the OG Highs – more mobility, but less support. Aesthetically, this shoe kills it with jeans or shorts. The major pro? It’s instantly recognizable as a "Jordan series" icon. The con? That classic, unforgiving break-in period. Worth it for style purists, not for comfort seekers.

  • Shown: Royal Toe
  • Style: 555088-013

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