First off, the off-white "Sail" leather and gum sole combo is "so" nice—it has that instant vintage vibe. This specific version feels a bit more premium, maybe? On foot, it's the same trusted AF1 fit: snug at first, molds over time. They're not lightweight sneakers, but that gives them a solid, quality feel. Visually, this is one of the best-looking AF1s lately. The pro is definitely its unique, understated aesthetic. The potential con? At around $160 USD, it's a slight premium. I'd say it's worth it for the look. Perfect for those who love earthy tones. Maybe pass if you only wear bright colors. The design here is pure classic, but the Jordan branding gives it a different vibe. On camera, that white leather pops and the clean look works with "literally" everything - jeans, shorts, you name it. Comparing it to other Jordans, like a J1, this is much heavier and blockier. A major "pro" is its versatility. A "con"? It can feel a bit clunky if you're used to lighter performance models. Putting these Jordan Air Force 1s on for the first time... yeah, the break-in period is real. They feel a bit bulky compared to, say, a Jordan 1 Low – but that's the AF1 DNA. I love the clean design of this colorway; it films really well. Great for casual fits. Downside? They're not the most breathable shoe for summer. Worth it for style, skip if you want a lightweight sneaker. Just copped this new colorway. First thoughts? The materials feel standard for a $150 Jordan Air Force 1 – nothing crazy, but the construction is on point. The silhouette is, of course, iconic. Wearing them, the toe box has good room (great for wider feet!). Compared to a more modern Jordan model, these are heavier. I'd recommend them for anyone building a sneaker rotation. Pure minimalists might find them too much.

  • Shown: Rookie Of The Year
  • Style: CT8529-141

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