Air Jordan 1 Royal 1985 VS. 2017

Here's a comparison of my 1985 Air Jordan 1 Royals and the recent 2017 retro. Enjoy! Music: bensound.com

[@truesneakerhead6424]

I just copped the 2017 version but i choose the 85 version any day!!

[@oliversplace263]

For sure!

[@thomascalderon598]

Fun Facts: the 85 og swoosh is actually vinyl. The 85 is built a bit narrow so you'll have to go at least half a size up. The insoles of an 85 is actually dual layered, one is the foam that modern jordan 1 uses, and the bottom is polyurthane. The insoles are originally styled like the air force 1s. The lining on the swoosh is i believe canvas, and the originals used a cardboard printout of the foot unlike modern jordans that uses a textured fabric printout.

[@jasonau427]

The OGs are so sexy. The narrow build, the patina on the mid. Just gives it so much character.

[@imasavageidamage2758]

1's looks so good when they're beat.

[@cjzanders5430]

I don't care what kind of retros a person has. When you've worn your shoes everywhere and back, they do not look good. It's like being awestruck of old women in their 60s.

[@DanielGomez-ts6uv]

CJ Zanders To each their own

[@thomaslee2558]

CJ Zanders wow that’s a good point man what do you want a 60 year old or a 20 year old

[@meanjune]

I agree. Unlike most shoes, the 1's have a different charm to them when they're well worn. Gives off that classic Nike sneaker look.

[@legoatx2953]

No just no

[@bobbyp8009]

Props for explaining how to judge leather quality. Too many people automatically assume soft is better, I mean when it comes to Jordan Retro you either get plastic or average leather, there’s really no high quality leather being used in most GR releases.

[@oliversplace263]

Robert Paredes thanks for the comment! I agree totally.

[@TH3_DON_M3G4]

Very good comparison. I have never understood the love for the Royals until I got my first pair ever a few days ago and they are in my top 10

[@oliversplace263]

Such a great shoe! Glad you were able to get a pair. Thanks for watching!

[@shooterboyroy3690]

I just got the 2013 model and I have the red zebras & lemon lime Gatorades the leather on those are way better then shatter backboard by far! And your right just because its softer doesn't mean its better

[@billybassman21]

I have several pairs of the 1s and the leather feels thin and cheap. No way it will hold up better than the OG leather which is more like leather on a pair of white classic baby/toddler shoes from the old days. Like you said, yes it is stiff when it is new, but when it break in it is more contorted with the wearers foot and will last longer. You can tell by the creasing that the leather is high quality. I never owned a pair of OG Jordan's, but had several pairs of high top Nike's from the mid to late 90s. Those things would last all school year and into the summer. I knew kids/teens that wore their Nike's all day, everyday, for months and they never fells apart. Remember in those days kids would play outside all day, often wore shoes in the house, so they took a lot of abuse and were wore for long periods of time daily. You more or less replaced them because they would be so soiled, creased and faded from wear or just wanted the newer release.

[@fififornow8031]

I love banjo music

[@James-xx4kb]

Just discovered your channel. Nice job comparing the two Royal's next to each other. I've always been a Jordan 1 guy, don't like the all day comfort necessarily but they're very easy to wear and have that classic appeal. As for the Royal's I was able to get two pairs, but I really wanted three, so I could gift one to my brother. I'll pay resale soon for a 3rd pair because this colorway is my favorite on any of the Jordan 1's and gift it to him even though he's not into sneakers like that, the Royal's are really nice lol.

[@oliversplace263]

James8107 Thanks for watching! I've for sure come home after a day of wearing a pair of 1s with my feet hurting. They just look so good though!

[@shoeaddiction123]

The 85's seems like they're cut higher

[@oliversplace263]

They may be slightly higher. I did a poor job of actually showing it but the retro is really close.

[@DanielGomez-ts6uv]

Im amazed how well the 85 pair look

[@ChefKelvin404]

I got a pair of 2017s royal blues on my feet right now watching this video 😂😂😂

[@kevinGvue]

great comparison with soft and stiff leather. common projects have by far superior leather compared to the shattered back boards. great video man!

[@oliversplace263]

Kevin Vue thanks! I appreciate it!

[@jimnn]

I'm in the same boat! I would have rather had the smooth leather instead of tumbled but overall i like these retros!

[@oliversplace263]

Agreed. Still a great release. Thanks for watching!

[@rcokchang5106]

I thought the same as you, if the 2017 blue part leather could be the same as the 1985, it would be perfect

[@amosaft7060]

the eyelets on 85 models are supposed to loterally wrap up the front to provide functional support and reduce creasing. all modern versions get this part wrong, they are just regular eyelets, hense, probsbly no stability and sever creasing

[@jamesestrada82]

I think the reason the tongue appears longer on the OG’s, is because the leather it’s attached to has stretched over the last 36 years.

[@Zeal808]

The only thing I wish they would do is make the Nike swoosh the same size as the ‘85

[@wessuyat8854]

I like the 1985 version better to be honest

[@clockwork0306]

You are correct the swoosh is vinyl on the 85

[@ajkicks6187]

great video 👍

[@oliversplace263]

Thanks!

[@toyotacorolla2395]

The best maker ever made 👍🏻

[@Thr33.Sid3z]

That Common Project shoe that you compared leathers with the SBB isnt soft bcuz its not tumbled. The reason that the SBB leather is soft is bcuz its tumbled. Full Grain Leather will always be stiffer than leather that isbeat with rocks...aka tumbled leather

[@oliversplace263]

I agree with you to an extent but again, just because something is tumbled does not in fact make it better leather. Some leathers are "pebbled" using pebbles/rocks but in most cases with cheaper leather it is being either applied or stamped, which is the case with the 2017 royals. My point is that I would have like to have seen them use a full grain/top grain leather without manipulating the leather like the originals. This isn't the opinion of everyone. I totally get that. Its not a bad retro at all! I think its a really good release. I'm just expressing what I would have like to have had.

[@Thr33.Sid3z]

most definitely. i didnt say that tumbled leather is better. Just that its mostly softer because of the tumble process. I would have rather Nike/JB used quality Full Grain leather as well on the Royals. In fact i was a little upset that they didnt stick to true form. The Breds are somewhat exceptable bcuz they were supposed to be more like the "Banned" release which had tumbled leather, but even then, i would prefer a quality Premium Full Grain Leather used for all OG Colorways, especially AJ1 OGs!

[@johnathencuellar5623]

I agree with you on the leather

[@espiemagpantay]

The leather on the common projects are a chrome tan leather and it’s the worst type off ladder and it’s cheaper to make

[@angelramos1987]

Did he just say it felt cheap for being original?? Did he expect the best technology ever on a shoe made in 1985?? 1:50

[@FiveMinuteSneakerTV]

great content. exaclty what I was looking for. I hate that they used tumbled leather on 2017.... and I have a pair of 2001 Royals with nubuck swoosh. I learned thru your video just now that OGs had regular leather swoosh.

[@FiveMinuteSneakerTV]

or I should say...vinyl like leather

[@oliversplace263]

Five Minute Sneaker Talk thanks! I actually sold my 2017 royals because of the leather. It was weird looking down at them. How are the 2001s?

[@FiveMinuteSneakerTV]

I actually don't think 2001 leather is that great either tbh haha and my pair came pre-creased around the toe box area unfortunately... but hey... I only paid $75 for them back in 2001 so no complaints lol

[@oliversplace263]

Five Minute Sneaker Talk that’s not bad at all! Did you ever think about selling when resale went crazy on them?

[@FiveMinuteSneakerTV]

if I were more savvy... I probably should have... haha I am not against reselling or anything like that but I just never sold anything I purchased before. not just shoes but... literally anything.

[@matt72178]

I thought the 2001 retro are the most similar pairs to the OG

[@kingvegeta226]

Nice review

[@oliversplace263]

KngzxlxChainzzz 23 thanks!

[@amosaft7060]

the fact that nike abandoned large swoosh, which looks bold and nicely aligns with eyelets trim, in favor of the wheeny cropped swoochie is beyond comprehension, unforgivable design blooper making all their retros look like cheapo reps

[@llrockwell]

The biggest difference literally is the big Swoosh on the 85s (it's synthetic leather btw)

[@oliversplace263]

It’s not leather. It’s a type of plastic or vinyl. It isn’t anything like leather, synthetic or otherwise.

[@llrockwell]

@@oliversplace263 what do you think synthetic leather is? It’s a plastic. Thank you

[@oliversplace263]

All right. What I’m saying is it’s not trying to be leather at all. At that point you could call it whatever you want: synthetic alien hide. Synthetic kangaroo butthole. It’s not anything like leather. Having it in hand you can clearly see that.

[@llrockwell]

@@oliversplace263 well, I have the OG 85 Banned in hand and it has a pattern on it to mimic the effect of real leather, fact. You argue all you like, but you are wrong. I have been a shoemaker before and trust me, I know when someone is trying to pass off synthetic leather as real. Good luck

[@oliversplace263]

@@llrockwell That's what I'm saying, I don't think they even tried to pass it off as leather in any way. Its a smooth piece of vinyl. Its closer to linoleum flooring than it is to leather.

[@matt72178]

Will you admit the 2017 retro are closest to the 1985 OG in term of the shape and colourway?

[@vietnguyen2293]

color is the closest but as far as shape, no. 2017 and most modern retros have more of a curved back. the OG’s are straight. some people prefer the modern look but i say OG is the way to go

[@alpaphoenix3252]

Nice review!

[@oliversplace263]

Thanks!

[@chrismonaco]

No comparison quality wise. 85s all day

[@oliversplace263]

ALL DAY.

[@Thr33.Sid3z]

You are Crazy!!! The OGs have inferior Royal Leather, not to mention that the collar isnt even made of leather which is why they all crack and fall apart. The 2017 Release is Better in almost every aspect except maybe the black leather is better on the OGs... Other than that, the 2017s have a better shape, and size proportion, better padding and will most likely last longer than the OGs

[@oliversplace263]

I think its hard to say that the shape on a reproduction looks better or has a better shape than the original that came before it... but I could be wrong. And both pairs will last forever if you take care of them the right way. Except that they use cheaper rubber on the soles of the retros now a days. That may break down faster.

[@chrismonaco]

NePdXploit do you seriously think a pair of Jordan's in 2017 can beat out a pair of 1985s bro.. you must not know how cheap JB is. And how can you say the 2017s will last longer? The '85s have been out for over 30 years. When the 2017s do that then you can say it lol not now

[@Thr33.Sid3z]

I dont say it lightly, but yes, the 2017 pair is better, and at the same time, some can be a little worse due to poor quality control on this recent release, but thats mainly just the leather, some pairs are more tumbled than others, and bcuz its so soft, some of it gets handled more than others causing it to look more broke in. BUT... I can definitely say with confidence that the 2017 Royals will last longer than the OGs for a few reasons. 1) they use leather on the collar where the OGs have a weird material that is known for cracking and completely falling off 2) The padding on the 2017s is thicker and made from a better material that wont dry out and crumble into dust like the OGs 3) The glue used in the newer Retros last longer and keeps its adhesive properties as well as stays flexible, unlike the glue used in the 80's that dries out, cracks and in turn causes separation! I have owned many pairs of OG Jordans, mostly 1s, 3s, 4s 5s & 6s. The glue always dries out and the soles always separate, and everything except the leather itself on the 1s falls apart.

[@adriank3629]

How's the quality on the 85 I've heard it's a really good quality

[@oliversplace263]

Adrian McKee it's unreal! They still hold up today.

[@chrismonaco]

Adrian McKee it's awesome, way better than the other royal releases

[@toreydavis9869]

Am I the only one who has a little glitter to theirs

[@ctsneakfreak710]

Nicely done those 85s are in great shape how long have u had them & do u wear them?

[@oliversplace263]

Ebonezer Shoes thanks! I've had them a few years now. I do wear them.

[@jarowskis]

good comparison but the music is horrible

[@oliversplace263]

jarowskis hahahaha! You're not wrong! But it was royalty free so that sounded real good to me!

[@cesarguzman5087]

Wat does it mean when the numbers on the tounge in 2001 pairs don't match

[@oliversplace263]

Cesar Guzma N I know the 2001 pairs were numbered. Or do you mean right from left aren’t matching?

[@cesarguzman5087]

Yea

[@cesarguzman5087]

Left n right got different numbers

[@cesarguzman5087]

Oliver's Place everything looks good on shoes just different number on tounges

[@oliversplace263]

Cesar Guzma N I’m not sure. Maybe they got switched up in production? I’ve never owned a pair of 2001s and I’ve never done the research on authentic pairs.

[@burgessfrederick2]

The 85s look more like the 2002 realease!!

[@lavenderish2276]

How did you get the 85s? At least Nike is progressing quality wise with the leather. I love my royals. Check out my channel and reviews when you get the chance. Thanks!

[@oliversplace263]

I found them on eBay. I did a video on just the 85s a while back. Thanks for watching! And subbed!

[@lavenderish2276]

OliverKix : You too. Subbed back.