If you’re used to ultra-boosts or modern running shoes, the weight of the "Air Force 1" will be noticeable. Also, that classic sole isn't super grippy for wet surfaces. It's a style-first, performance-second shoe. Keep that in mind! Yo, checking out this new 'University Blue' "Air Force 1 Jordan" collab. The color saturation is really nice—vibrant but not crazy. Immediate on-foot feel is a familiar, supportive fit. Visually, they stand out without being too loud. For $140+, it's a premium take on a classic. Compared to standard AF1s, the "Jordan" branding adds that collector appeal. Pro: Unique color blocking for the Series. Con: The suede can be a pain to maintain. I'd cop if you love color, but maybe skip if you're looking for a true beater shoe. I've worn these for a full day. Here's the real deal: The break-in period is real. They can feel stiff at first. But once they mold to you? It's a comfortable, supportive fit. The classic AF1 design isn't trying to be the most innovative Jordan... it's just timeless. At this price point (~$150), you're paying for heritage & style, not tech. And sometimes, that's exactly what you need. Just got the "Jordan Air Force 1" in the 'Sail Gum' colorway. 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.

  • Shown: Space Jam
  • 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