I just received my new pair of Jack Purcells from Piperlime the other day. I ordered them several weeks ago but they were backordered. I didn't care since I got them on sale for $39.99. They cost between $55-60 depending on where you order them from. So, for a good deal I didn't mind the wait.
Upon inspecting them, I see that the quality of the iconic sneaker that has been enjoyed by generations of the sneaker-wearing public has been somewhat compromised. I'm sure there are many purists out there that would argue that the sneaker has been returned to its former simplicity but nevertheless, I am somewhat disappointed but not to the point of not wanting to wear them.
Here are some pics so you can decide for yourself. The old pair are maybe two years old.
Let's start with the laces. The old pair are made of nylon and have metal tips. These have been that replaced with a fabric lace with plastic-coated tips. Not a big deal but one detail that has taken a step down, imo.
As you can see, the tongue no longer has the Jack Purcell logo on it. The tongue on the older pair was padded. On the new pair it is not. 2 demerits. One for style and one for comfort.
Note the two holes that allow air to circulate inside the sneaker. Clearly visible on the old pair.
On the new pair, they are buried below the insert. This is unforgiveable, imo. Poor design. What were they thinking?
The heel had blue-trim sewn into it. This has gone by the wayside. Small detail but nevertheless.
The ankle was padded and now it is not. 2-point deduction for doing away with a comfort-feature.
Also note the airholes in this picture. You can see on the new pair how they are covered up.
THE SMILE
It is the smile on this iconic sneaker that makes it instantly recognizable and don't worry, it is still there. On the old model it was somewhat recessed while on the new pair it is not. However, I do recall, on pairs that I had owned in the past, the smile was not recessed.
So, am I a little disappointed that Converse decided to cheapen a product that I have worn for years? Of course. Has it been so drastic that I would not buy them again? Well, let's just say I'm glad I didn't pay 60 bucks for them.
Upon inspecting them, I see that the quality of the iconic sneaker that has been enjoyed by generations of the sneaker-wearing public has been somewhat compromised. I'm sure there are many purists out there that would argue that the sneaker has been returned to its former simplicity but nevertheless, I am somewhat disappointed but not to the point of not wanting to wear them.
Here are some pics so you can decide for yourself. The old pair are maybe two years old.
Let's start with the laces. The old pair are made of nylon and have metal tips. These have been that replaced with a fabric lace with plastic-coated tips. Not a big deal but one detail that has taken a step down, imo.
As you can see, the tongue no longer has the Jack Purcell logo on it. The tongue on the older pair was padded. On the new pair it is not. 2 demerits. One for style and one for comfort.
Note the two holes that allow air to circulate inside the sneaker. Clearly visible on the old pair.
On the new pair, they are buried below the insert. This is unforgiveable, imo. Poor design. What were they thinking?
The heel had blue-trim sewn into it. This has gone by the wayside. Small detail but nevertheless.
The ankle was padded and now it is not. 2-point deduction for doing away with a comfort-feature.
Also note the airholes in this picture. You can see on the new pair how they are covered up.
THE SMILE
It is the smile on this iconic sneaker that makes it instantly recognizable and don't worry, it is still there. On the old model it was somewhat recessed while on the new pair it is not. However, I do recall, on pairs that I had owned in the past, the smile was not recessed.
So, am I a little disappointed that Converse decided to cheapen a product that I have worn for years? Of course. Has it been so drastic that I would not buy them again? Well, let's just say I'm glad I didn't pay 60 bucks for them.
Last edited by a moderator: