The build quality is on point; no glue stains or messy stitching on my pair. Once laced up, they offer that familiar, secure feel – nothing revolutionary, but reliably comfortable for walking. Comparing it to other Jordan models, the Mid sits nicely between the bulky AF1 and the more streamlined Dunk. The advantage? Incredible colorway that's easier to cop than many High OG releases. The drawback? That stiff ankle collar might need a short break-in period. My verdict? A must for colorway collectors and fans of grey-toned sneakers. Probably not the best choice if you have very wide feet, as the toe box is standard. Alright, let's get into these Air Jordan 1 Mids. First impression out of the box? The leather on this “Shadow” colorway feels solid - not the "craziest" premium, but honestly, it's good for the $120 USD price point. The classic silhouette is instantly recognizable. Comparing it to the Highs? You're really just missing that extra ankle collar height. For a quick, clean shoe you can just grab and go? This Jordan series staple gets the job done. Now, the not-so-great part. If you're after amazing comfort or modern tech, look elsewhere. The cushioning is basic—it's not a shoe for all-day walking or basketball. Also, the leather quality can vary by colorway; sometimes it's a bit stiff. It's a style-first, comfort-second kind of model. Alright, let's get into these "Air Jordan 1 Mid" 'Triple White's. First off, the all-leather build here – for around $115 USD – is super clean. The white-on-white colorway is "incredibly" versatile. However, the out-of-box feel is pretty stiff, classic "Jordan 1" style. If you're used to modern, plush sneakers, you might find these a bit unforgiving at first. Honestly, I'd recommend these more for style-first collectors than for performance.

  • Shown: Fearless
  • Style: DH7138-006

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