Compared to the Air Jordan 1 High, the Mid has that slightly shorter collar, which I think makes it a bit more versatile for everyday style. It's a timeless look that works with jeans or shorts. Honestly, the camera loves this shoe's clean lines. First thoughts holding this "Air Jordan 1 Mid" ‘University Blue’: the color is vibrant, and the build looks tidy. Sliding them on, the break-in is quick – a big plus. The silhouette is iconic, and the mid-cut is arguably the most practical for daily life. I own Highs, but I find myself reaching for Mids more often for errands. The clear advantage is the classic look and easy wear. The downside? The materials can sometimes feel a grade below the Highs. Priced at $125, it's a fair deal. It's perfect for a casual wardrobe staple. If you're all about premium materials, maybe save for a High OG release. Hey what's up everyone, just unboxed these Air Jordan Mid 1s in the 'Chicago' colorway. First impression? That classic silhouette is "fire" — the red, white, and black combo is just "timeless". For around $130 USD, the build quality feels solid right out of the box. It's an iconic Jordan series look that never gets old, honestly. On-camera review of this "Air Jordan Mid 1" ‘Black Toe’. Man, this colorway is legendary. In-hand, the leather has a nice grain. Upon wearing, the support is great – true to the shoe's heritage. It looks sharp and timeless on foot. Compared to other Jordan models, this is pure, unfiltered history. The pro is its iconic status and versatile color-blocking. The con is the lack of modern cushioning tech; it's a firm ride. For around $125, you're buying into a piece of sneaker culture. I'd say it's a must for collectors of classic silhouettes. Not for those seeking a cloud-like, modern sneaker experience – and that's okay!

  • Shown: Bred
  • Style: 378037-003

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