The off-white & gum sole combo is just "so" good. On foot, the fit is true to size with a roomy toe box. Wearing them, they develop a nice patina over time. Compared to a standard white pair, these have more character out the gate. Pro: They look better with age. Con: The light colorway shows dirt quickly. At ~$140 USD, I’d recommend these to lovers of the "worn-in" aesthetic, but maybe not to folks who like their kicks pristine. From a style perspective, these are a camera-ready classic. The white and black contrast pops without being loud. I'd recommend these to anyone building their sneaker rotation—it's a foundational piece. I "wouldn't" recommend them to someone seeking a super lightweight, technical running-shoe feel. They have heft, it's part of the aesthetic. Here’s my on-foot review of the low-top "Jordan Air Force 1". Immediately, you lose that iconic high-top silhouette, but you gain a lot in everyday wearability. They’re easier to slip on and off, and feel a bit less bulky. The cushioning is the same—reliable, but not bouncy. For me, the low is a better summer shoe and works with shorts more easily. It's still a "Jordan" icon, just in a more low-key package. If you love the AF1 style but find the mids too restrictive, the low is your answer. Not the best if you need serious ankle support, obviously. Comparing it to, say, a recent Jordan 1 High? The "Jordan Air Force 1" is a different beast. It's less about court-inspired performance and more about foundational street style. It's bulkier, more substantial. The AJ1 feels more "athletic" in build, while the AF1 is pure streetwear heritage.

  • Shown: White Oreo
  • Style: 555088-700

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