This one's interesting – the mixed materials (suede, mesh) give a cool, deconstructed look right out of the box. On foot, they feel a bit more flexible than an all-leather pair. The aesthetic is very modern and designer-like. Compared to a traditional Jordan 1, it's less retro and more fashion-forward. Pro: Unique, textured design that's different. Con: The lighter materials might not feel as durable long-term. At $190 USD, it's for the style innovator, not someone looking for a bulletproof, timeless leather sneaker. Who should buy this? Streetwear enthusiasts, Jordan fans, & anyone building a classic sneaker rotation. The Air Jordan 1 is a cornerstone. Who should skip it? Performance athletes or folks needing arch support - this isn't that kind of shoe. It's a fashion&culture icon, not a tech marvel. And that's perfectly okay. So I copped this Air Jordan 1 Mid with the altered "Satin" swoosh. The presentation is cool! In hand, the materials are a mix – some standard leather, some interesting accents. On foot, it performs like any other Mid: good for the price (~$120 USD). The unique design elements are what you're paying for here. It's a fun twist for someone who already has a few core AJ1s and wants something different. As a first or only Jordan 1? I'd probably point you towards a more classic color-blocking for maximum versatility. So I’m lacing up this "nike air jordan 1 mid" in the 'Light Smoke Grey'... and my "immediate" thought? These are super easy to wear. The break-in period is real—expect some heel rub initially. Compared to my Jordan 11s, the tech is "ancient", but the silhouette is timeless. "Big plus": the price point, around $115 USD, makes it an accessible entry into the Jordan series. Downside? The materials can feel a bit "basic". Great for beginners, not for comfort snobs.

  • Shown: University Blue
  • Style: DJ5718-300

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