I got them from amazon (dot) ca
Advertisement
I think today’s champion is much better than those of the 90s. The shoe doesn’t require any break in period any longer. My complaint of the mens version was that the canvas was so dang stiff and that it always caused blisters on the heel and no matter what they never seemed to soften up.
Todays keds feel broken in from the first step.
I could care less about the color of the eyelet or what the label looks like. My only two complaints is that the laces are getting too thin and that the shoe could use some more footbed cushioning.
Like anything in this world, it goes thru fads and right now these are not a fad. They won’t go away and the fad will return one day.
Todays keds feel broken in from the first step.
I could care less about the color of the eyelet or what the label looks like. My only two complaints is that the laces are getting too thin and that the shoe could use some more footbed cushioning.
Like anything in this world, it goes thru fads and right now these are not a fad. They won’t go away and the fad will return one day.
It is cool to see how different people's opinions are on how they rank different decades, and even if we agree, we disagree on subtle things like tags or eyelets.
1. I rank early 90's 1st because they were durable enough to be washable, and that was the most nostalgic time period when I grew up and when I saw the most girls wearing them. The 80's fit into that 90's category simply because there were enough from that decade still lying around in the 90's.
2. I rank late-Wolverine Champs 2nd, though I do dislike how many tags there are and the white lettering, which I think is too bold and almost tacky and prefer the lone, blue tag speaking for itself. I don't care if the eyelets are white or silver. I see those as minor aesthetic complaints, though. As for quality, they are best since the 90's and I have not experienced the glue bleeding after washing them that others have complained about. All Keds Champs shrank and lost their shape after the 90's after washing them, but a plus to that is I think it helps break them in.
3. Late 2000's-mid 2010's I rank 3rd. Those were the worst quality in my opinion. With these, the glue actually did bleed for me after washing ones from mid 2010's. The terry cloth lining was unnecessary and made my feet hot and sweaty. The bottom sole would come unglued, rendering the shoe useless. This was a bigger issue during when they got rid of the pebble sole for a short period, which was thin and hard like plastic. If the canvas rips or the foxing comes a bit undone, I'm fine with that. The shoe is still usable, and dare I say gives it a worn personality. But, the bottom sole falling off like this era tended to do is unacceptable. I also hated the seam around the bottom foot bed, which rubbed and irritated my toes.
4. I rank early 2000's as the least favorite due the the flared heel which I felt was uncomfortable as if I was going to land wrong and twist my ankle, and I didn't like the dull, light color of the pebble sole. The quality was still better than the mid-2010's Champs, but since I didn't like how they felt, they rank last.
N/A: I have not tried the Designer Brands version of the women's Champs yet. I've tried the gender neutrals, but I don't consider them to be "original" Champs, so no comment on those, except the appearance is better without the white lettering.
1. I rank early 90's 1st because they were durable enough to be washable, and that was the most nostalgic time period when I grew up and when I saw the most girls wearing them. The 80's fit into that 90's category simply because there were enough from that decade still lying around in the 90's.
2. I rank late-Wolverine Champs 2nd, though I do dislike how many tags there are and the white lettering, which I think is too bold and almost tacky and prefer the lone, blue tag speaking for itself. I don't care if the eyelets are white or silver. I see those as minor aesthetic complaints, though. As for quality, they are best since the 90's and I have not experienced the glue bleeding after washing them that others have complained about. All Keds Champs shrank and lost their shape after the 90's after washing them, but a plus to that is I think it helps break them in.
3. Late 2000's-mid 2010's I rank 3rd. Those were the worst quality in my opinion. With these, the glue actually did bleed for me after washing ones from mid 2010's. The terry cloth lining was unnecessary and made my feet hot and sweaty. The bottom sole would come unglued, rendering the shoe useless. This was a bigger issue during when they got rid of the pebble sole for a short period, which was thin and hard like plastic. If the canvas rips or the foxing comes a bit undone, I'm fine with that. The shoe is still usable, and dare I say gives it a worn personality. But, the bottom sole falling off like this era tended to do is unacceptable. I also hated the seam around the bottom foot bed, which rubbed and irritated my toes.
4. I rank early 2000's as the least favorite due the the flared heel which I felt was uncomfortable as if I was going to land wrong and twist my ankle, and I didn't like the dull, light color of the pebble sole. The quality was still better than the mid-2010's Champs, but since I didn't like how they felt, they rank last.
N/A: I have not tried the Designer Brands version of the women's Champs yet. I've tried the gender neutrals, but I don't consider them to be "original" Champs, so no comment on those, except the appearance is better without the white lettering.
Kind of a subject change. I saw one of you say the gender neutral is being discontinued. Have any of you heard about the pursuit style being discontinued? I have been trying to get the blue pursuit flecked Chambery slip on in a womens 9.5 wide/mens 7.5 wide for a few weeks now. They do not seem like they are going to get more. I asked customer service at keds and they were not able to answer the question.