Opening the box, the texture mix really makes it pop, giving a premium feel over the standard all-leather versions. Sliding my foot in, the fit is consistent: snug in the heel, roomy in the toe box. Wearing them, the SE details get you compliments – it stands out from the basic Mids. A huge pro is the unique look without a crazy price hike (around $125). A potential con? Suede can be harder to maintain than plain leather. In my opinion, if you already have a core "Jordan 1 Mid" colorway and want something with more character, this SE is a great pick. If you're rough on your shoes or live in a rainy area, maybe reconsider. On foot, the air jordan 1 mid — this "Black Toe" colorway ($120 USD) — looks even better in motion! The silhouette is iconic, and on camera, the contrast really stands out. However, the insole isn't the most cushioned, so if you're used to modern sneakers, it might feel a bit basic. Personally, I love it for its versatility. A solid pick for sneakerheads, but maybe not for performance athletes. On foot review time! Wearing these black and white Air Jordan 1 Mids. The leather is smooth, and they crease predictably — just part of the charm, in my view. They feel lighter than they look, which is nice. The major pro? Versatility. You can wear these with almost anything. The con? That flat, non-supportive insole. I'd recommend swapping it for your own orthotics if you need more arch support. Now, the cons (gotta be honest). The cushioning is firm — not for long periods of standing/walking if you need support. Some purists still overlook the Mid vs. the High (but that’s their loss!). Break-in time is real; the ankle might feel stiff at first. If you prioritize ultimate comfort over style, this might not be your #1. It’s a classic, but not a comfort-tech masterpiece.

  • Shown: Fire Red
  • Style: CZ6509-100

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