or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Sin City, who should not wear Chucks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sin City, who should not wear Chucks - Page 4

post #46 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by weirdnjfan1 View Post
My father is in his 50s and still wears prision issue chucks. That prooves that there is no age limit.
Is he is in prison??
post #47 of 58
I agree I'm 38 & I love it's simplicity with a fresh pair of Dickies & a white pressed T-shirt.
post #48 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayJay View Post
Chucks would definitely be an improvement. I hate the shock absorbers on shoes.
uhhh i have to disagree has anyone (who has to work on their feet for a whole day) worn chucks to work? like me, i'm sure you are aware of the ensuing pain that you will get in your feet and up through your body. don't wear chucks when you stand all day. a shoe with proper support is far better, no matter how shit it looks.
post #49 of 58
Since being bought out by Nike: -Production outsourced to overseas sweatshops -Changed from 2-ply cotton canvas to 1-ply "textile" -Price raised to $40 -Plans to use dead rock stars for branding: "No doubt this would have been a huge hit with Kurt Cobain, John Lennon, Jerry Garcia and Jim Morrison, who are, of course, all widely remembered for their love of synergistic marketing, product endorsements and co-branding opportunities." Fuck you, Nike. You ruined one of my favorite shoes.
post #50 of 58
I wear custom orthotics with my Chucks, so their lack of support is not as drastic for me.
post #51 of 58
The AA, Nudie, Chucks look is plaaaaaayed out. Nothing against chucks but just wearing plain, solid, unworn, pristine Chucks has got to end. They have so many unique looks but people retread the same washed-up look year-after-year.
post #52 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by WayneGibbous View Post
The AA, Nudie, Chucks look is plaaaaaayed out. Nothing against chucks but just wearing plain, solid, unworn, pristine Chucks has got to end. They have so many unique looks but people retread the same washed-up look year-after-year.

Do these appeal to you more?



post #53 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dedalus View Post
Since being bought out by Nike:
-Production outsourced to overseas sweatshops
-Changed from 2-ply cotton canvas to 1-ply "textile"
-Price raised to $40
-Plans to use dead rock stars for branding: "No doubt this would have been a huge hit with Kurt Cobain, John Lennon, Jerry Garcia and Jim Morrison, who are, of course, all widely remembered for their love of synergistic marketing, product endorsements and co-branding opportunities."

Fuck you, Nike. You ruined one of my favorite shoes.

Tell me that's not true.
post #54 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sander View Post
Tell me that's not true.

Wikipedia is a questionable source, so I just did some research and that list isn't 100% accurate. Nike didn't make the outsourcing decision; Converse did when they filed for bankruptcy in 2001. Still, I am not paying $40 for a $3 made-in-China shoe, much less one that plans on whoring out dead rock musicians who would obviously have been opposed to it.
post #55 of 58
There are still deadstock/vintage chucks on ebay that are made in usa. The prices on them have gone up, though.
post #56 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sander View Post
Tell me that's not true.

And if I remember the last time I was in a shoe store, the fact that the soles are now made with a paper-impregnated rubber amalgamation was not mentioned on that list. They're not even a solid rubber sole anymore.
post #57 of 58
omfg... I have to say the new choice of canvas bothers me most...
Fuck, I just bought a new pair...
post #58 of 58
nuts!!!!!!!!!! all of you chuckheads are nuts!!!!!!!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Sin City, who should not wear Chucks