Vs. a "Jordan 3" or "4", it's lighter and less bulky—more "fashion-forward" to me. The ankle collar is stiffer than newer models (like the "Jordan 13"), so break-in time is real. But that classic profile? Unbeatable. It's the OG for a reason. If you want history on your feet, this is it. Final thoughts on this Jordan Air 1 High 'Electro Orange'. Unboxing—BAM—that orange is bright! It’s a statement piece for sure. On foot, they feel just like any other Air 1: sturdy, classic. The bold color is the whole story. Pro: you will definitely get noticed. Major con: "very" loud and not versatile. This pair is for the confident style innovator, "period". If you like to blend in, this $170 Jordan Air 1 is not your move. So, know your style before clicking 'add to cart' on this one Alright, let's get straight into it. Unboxing this "Chicago" Jordan Air 1 and the first thing you notice is that iconic silhouette – it's just "perfect". The leather quality here is actually pretty solid for a general release. That classic red, white, and black colorway? It's an absolute legend for a reason. Honestly, from a pure "first-look" perspective, it's hard to find any real flaws at its $190 price point. What's good everyone? Unboxing the "Mid" version of the "Jordan 1" in this "Shadow" palette. First thing I noticed: the price is "friendlier" – around "$135" – but the materials feel a "step down" from the Highs. The shape is "slightly" different, a bit chunkier. On foot, the comfort level is "similar": firm. The "main benefit" here is accessibility; it's a more affordable way to get the iconic look. The "trade-off" is prestige and often material quality. Honestly, if you're on a budget or prefer a "slightly" less restrictive collar, the Mid is fine. Purists will always choose the High OG.

  • Shown: Neutral Grey
  • Style: 555088-302

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