I went TTS with this "Air Jordan 1 Mid", and the width is standard. The break-in is real—the heel area was stiff for the first few wears. The advantage? Once broken in, they mold to your foot nicely. A possible issue? The toe box creasing can be severe for some. If you hate creases, maybe look elsewhere. But for a clean, versatile sneaker under $130 from the Jordan lineup, it's hard to go wrong. What's up, everyone? Just unboxed these "air jordan 1 mid" in the 'Light Smoke Grey' colorway. The materials feel decent for the price point... the leather has a nice grain. Slip them on, and yeah - that iconic silhouette is instantly recognizable. They're not heavy, but you feel grounded. Compared to an AJ1 High, the ankle collar is obviously lower, which I prefer for everyday comfort. Pro? Unbeatable versatility. Con? The insole is basic. Worth it if you want a classic look without the High-top price tag. Alright, let's get these out of the box. First impression? The classic "Air Jordan 1 Mid" silhouette is just… timeless. This 'University Red' colorway pops! The build quality feels solid, no loose stitching I can see. At around "$125 USD", it's a more accessible entry into the "Jordan series" compared to some Highs. The leather is decent, not super premium, but that's expected. For a clean, classic look? It's hard to beat. Honestly, I was curious about the hype. Here's my real take on this "air jordan 1 mid" 'Bred Toe'. Opening the box, the red just pops on camera - it's a killer look. On feet, the break-in period is real; they're a bit stiff at first. The ankle support is less than a High, but that makes them easier to get on and off. For $120 USD, it's a bold statement piece. I'd recommend these if you love the OG colorways but want a slightly different profile. Not for balling, strictly for style.

  • Shown: Red Thunder
  • Style: CT8012-005

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